BF2S Forums Which should i use for sound?

the xfi probably. creative usually has the best products, and since xfi has been around and is tested, id go with the creative. the Supreme card looks a little shoddy to me.

Yep, I've seen the Supreme shipped with quite a few Asus boards now! I'd recommend the X-Fi over it though

The difference in audio quality will be virtually nonexistent. The Supreme may actually sound slightly better due to the higher quality interface.

The problem with the Supreme is that it uses a software audio codec which will add load to your CPU, unlike the X-Fi which will do the audio processing itself. This will translate to a very minor impact on performance (although if you have a quad core CPU you are highly unlikely to notice any impact whatsoever).

Bertster7 wrote:

The difference in audio quality will be virtually nonexistent. The Supreme may actually sound slightly better due to the higher quality interface.

The problem with the Supreme is that it uses a software audio codec which will add load to your CPU, unlike the X-Fi which will do the audio processing itself. This will translate to a very minor impact on performance (although if you have a quad core CPU you are highly unlikely to notice any impact whatsoever).

Any sotware-based sound card has got signifigantly lower sound quality than a hardware-based. I've got experience with tons of different integrated sound cards, ranging from VIA through SiS to Intel, and I can say that my SoundBlaster Live! cards from the early 2000's beat them up by a long shot. Tons of noise compared, very unclear treble and the bass is virtually non-existant in comparasion. And the differance between something that's basically free, compared to something you pay >50 dollars for kinda speaks for itself.

Bertster7 wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

The difference in audio quality will be virtually nonexistent. The Supreme may actually sound slightly better due to the higher quality interface.

The problem with the Supreme is that it uses a software audio codec which will add load to your CPU, unlike the X-Fi which will do the audio processing itself. This will translate to a very minor impact on performance (although if you have a quad core CPU you are highly unlikely to notice any impact whatsoever).

Any sotware-based sound card has got signifigantly lower sound quality than a hardware-based. I've got experience with tons of different integrated sound cards, ranging from VIA through SiS to Intel, and I can say that my SoundBlaster Live! cards from the early 2000's beat them up by a long shot. Tons of noise compared, very unclear treble and the bass is virtually non-existant in comparasion. And the differance between something that's basically free, compared to something you pay >50 dollars for kinda speaks for itself.

Not true.

The quality of onboard sound is now almost identical to add on sound cards. The only issue is the performance degradation. HD audio codecs tend to be very good. Unless of course you are using shitty analog connections, which will rely on the much lower quality DAC on the board.

X-fi is still a lot better than integrated sound chips. You might even get some extra fps in game but with onboard audio your proc needs to work more and even the mobo is stressed. And everything overheats more with integrated card. Its a no go!

Bertster7 wrote:

.Sup wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Not true.

The quality of onboard sound is now almost identical to add on sound cards. The only issue is the performance degradation. HD audio codecs tend to be very good. Unless of course you are using shitty analog connections, which will rely on the much lower quality DAC on the board.

X-fi is still a lot better than integrated sound chips. You might even get some extra fps in game but with onboard audio your proc needs to work more and even the mobo is stressed. And everything overheats more with integrated card. Its a no go!

The only instance when an X-Fi will provide sound of any better quality than an HD audio codec is when the source quality is poor and the X-Fi sharpens it up a bit (with the crystaliser thingy). The extra funky features of the X-Fi the HD codec will not have (Crystaliser, CMSS-3D etc.), but normal high quality audio will sound the same on either system - provided you use digital interconnects.

The motherboard is not stressed when handling onboard audio, the additional load on the CPU is minimal, certainly not enough to have any significant impact on temperatures, even when processing EAX content (poss 1-2C increase - maybe 1C increase across Southbridge too).

why are you always talking about software (codecs)? X-fi's sound chip is far superior to any other soundcard. Hardware of x-fi is better than the hardware of other cards.

.Sup wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

.Sup wrote:

X-fi is still a lot better than integrated sound chips. You might even get some extra fps in game but with onboard audio your proc needs to work more and even the mobo is stressed. And everything overheats more with integrated card. Its a no go!

The only instance when an X-Fi will provide sound of any better quality than an HD audio codec is when the source quality is poor and the X-Fi sharpens it up a bit (with the crystaliser thingy). The extra funky features of the X-Fi the HD codec will not have (Crystaliser, CMSS-3D etc.), but normal high quality audio will sound the same on either system - provided you use digital interconnects.

The motherboard is not stressed when handling onboard audio, the additional load on the CPU is minimal, certainly not enough to have any significant impact on temperatures, even when processing EAX content (poss 1-2C increase - maybe 1C increase across Southbridge too).

why are you always talking about software (codecs)? X-fi's sound chip is far superior to any other soundcard. Hardware of x-fi is better than the hardware of other cards.

You don't seem to understand how onboard audio works. The sound is processed in SOFTWARE, using SOFTWARE codecs. The hardware on the board is primarily there to give an interface. That is why onboard audio puts more load on the CPU, because it has to process the audio itself - whereas with  the X-Fi almost all the load is taken off the CPU.

That is why, using modern HD audio codecs, very high sound quality can be achieved - particularly if you use digital outputs, which means the DAC on the audio board doesn't have to be used.

.Sup wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

.Sup wrote:

why are you always talking about software (codecs)? X-fi's sound chip is far superior to any other soundcard. Hardware of x-fi is better than the hardware of other cards.

You don't seem to understand how onboard audio works. The sound is processed in SOFTWARE, using SOFTWARE codecs. The hardware on the board is primarily there to give an interface. That is why onboard audio puts more load on the CPU, because it has to process the audio itself - whereas with  the X-Fi almost all the load is taken off the CPU.

That is why, using modern HD audio codecs, very high sound quality can be achieved - particularly if you use digital outputs, which means the DAC on the audio board doesn't have to be used.

And xfi is being processed by its processor! onboard audio uses system processor to calculate. Hardware acceleration>>>>software acceleration! Btw i perfectly understand how onboard audio works.

Then you should realise that all the work for onboard audio is done using software codecs.

There is no inherent difference in quality between hardware and software audio processing (it's not acceleration). The difference comes from additional audio filtering circuits (mostly RC/RL band pass filtering circuitry) and most importantly the quality of the conversion. When the audio is being processed purely digitally there is NO difference between hardware and software audio processing, provided the software codecs are written to a sufficiently high standard. There is no filtering to be done (since there is no analog signal) and there is no digital to analog conversion to be done - those are the only areas where hardware soundcards represent any advantage in quality whatsoever. If you use digital interconnects, then that ceases to be a factor.

There will be additional processing load on the CPU though, which is the real benefit of the X-Fi.

.Sup wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

.Sup wrote:

And xfi is being processed by its processor! onboard audio uses system processor to calculate. Hardware acceleration>>>>software acceleration! Btw i perfectly understand how onboard audio works.

Then you should realise that all the work for onboard audio is done using software codecs.

There is no inherent difference in quality between hardware and software audio processing (it's not acceleration). The difference comes from additional audio filtering circuits (mostly RC/RL band pass filtering circuitry) and most importantly the quality of the conversion. When the audio is being processed purely digitally there is NO difference between hardware and software audio processing, provided the software codecs are written to a sufficiently high standard. There is no filtering to be done (since there is no analog signal) and there is no digital to analog conversion to be done - those are the only areas where hardware soundcards represent any advantage in quality whatsoever. If you use digital interconnects, then that ceases to be a factor.

There will be additional processing load on the CPU though, which is the real benefit of the X-Fi.

so you are saying hardware acceleration=software acceleration? why is creative alchemy made then? becouse the sound processing is better with hardware acceleration. thats why Vista aint good for audio. maybe we should hear a second opinion. Btw are you some kind of audio expert or you are just copying from wiki?

I'm a hardware engineer and home cinema enthusiast, who has done a heck of a lot of electronics and a fair bit of signal processing (which is foul horrible stuff) in my time.

Basically yes, hardware processing is the same as software processing - but only when using digital. As soon as the signal is converted into an analog format then the benefits of quality hardware become very apparent. The post processing done on the analog signal and the conversion quality itself will be FAR better on the X-Fi - BUT a digital signal will sound the same through either (provided the source is high quality) and there is no point in using an analog signal because the longer you can keep your signal in a digital format the better, as soon as it becomes analog the signal begins to become degraded. A digital output from onboard audio will sound far better than an analog signal from an X-Fi.

If you capture the bitstreams that either an X-Fi or any onboard sound output they are exactly the same - meaning the audio quality is identical.

Lucien wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

I'm a hardware engineer and home cinema enthusiast, who has done a heck of a lot of electronics and a fair bit of signal processing (which is foul horrible stuff) in my time.

Basically yes, hardware processing is the same as software processing - but only when using digital. As soon as the signal is converted into an analog format then the benefits of quality hardware become very apparent. The post processing done on the analog signal and the conversion quality itself will be FAR better on the X-Fi - BUT a digital signal will sound the same through either (provided the source is high quality) and there is no point in using an analog signal because the longer you can keep your signal in a digital format the better, as soon as it becomes analog the signal begins to become degraded. A digital output from onboard audio will sound far better than an analog signal from an X-Fi.

If you capture the bitstreams that either an X-Fi or any onboard sound output they are exactly the same - meaning the audio quality is identical.

Ok bertster, what do I need to buy to get a genuinely good sound setup? soundcard, speakers, and a set of headphones. Which models?

Buy good speakers. The speakers are by far the most important part. I know next to nothing about headphones - because I just use speakers, I don't like to have headphones on and so have no interest in them.

The Logitech Z-5500s are very nice (I use the Z-5400s on my PC (who needs 500W? 330W is plenty), but you never see them these days). The X-Fi is the best general purpose soundcard around - but unless you are using it primarily for gaming then it isn't really worth buying (provided you have digital speakers and good onboard sound). If you are using it mostly for gaming then the X-Fi would be a good choice since it'll be a cost effective way to get a little boost in FPS - whilst also providing a few nice features for cleaning up lower quality audio.

Last edited by Bertster7 (2007-12-17 13:53:28)

max wrote:

let me just add that I have the Z-5500. It sounds great (especially when connected digitally). So far I haven't been able to notice any real difference between my xtrememusic and the asus onboard on my P5N32-E sli (asus premium supreme FX thingy?).

Obviously bigger speakers will give you better quality at high volumes, but for their size they are great

Does the onboard on that have DTS connect? If so, how does stuff sound through that?

I've been wanting to have a play with that but haven't had an opportunity yet. I love DTS.

I have supreme FX2 and Audigy. Audigy sounds a lot better. And with all the equalizers/stuff it is even better. I have Icemat Siberia headset...