Onboard Audio vs dedicated sound card

[kedawa]

A good friend of mine used to drive four big speaker cabinets from his soundblaster. I don't know how his computer didn't melt.

[BetaWolf47]

Is this a serious question?

These aren't high school kids building their first rig, I'm talking about people who do this professionally. Sure, they'll stick in a sound card if you tell them you want one (more money for them)...but when you seek their knowledge and expertise, they all say the same thing. High-end motherboards have high-end sound built in. It costs motherboard manufacturers practically nothing to add these features. A stand-alone sound card is redundant in these setups.

Does this mean sound cards are always equal (or inferior) to on-board sound? Of course not. I'm sure there are plenty of kick-ass sound cards out there. Nice motherboards just have them now too.

Yes, that was a serious question. There is no way for integrated audio to eliminate the problem with crosstalk. On top of that, I've never seen an integrated sound card that supports OpenAL and positional audio. I've got a Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium Professional on my system. The positional audio it supports allows you to hear things in every direction with just headphones. I don't know how many times that being able to hear an enemy sneak up behind me has saved my butt. Having experienced this type of audio, I'd sooner own a high-end sound card and a $150 or $200 GPU than merely a $300 GPU. If the person in question is a music enthusiast, and not a gamer, then the difference is even more apparent.

Honestly, I view people who think onboard audio can come anywhere near a dedicated card the same way as I view people who use something like a Radeon HD 6310, play at 800x600, and say that it is "good enough".

[kedawa]

Yes, that was a serious question. There is no way for integrated audio to eliminate the problem with crosstalk. On top of that, I've never seen an integrated sound card that supports OpenAL and positional audio. I've got a Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium Professional on my system. The positional audio it supports allows you to hear things in every direction with just headphones. I don't know how many times that being able to hear an enemy sneak up behind me has saved my butt. Having experienced this type of audio, I'd sooner own a high-end sound card and a $150 or $200 GPU than merely a $300 GPU. If the person in question is a music enthusiast, and not a gamer, then the difference is even more apparent.

Honestly, I view people who think onboard audio can come anywhere near a dedicated card the same way as I view people who use something like a Radeon HD 6310, play at 800x600, and say that it is "good enough".

Aside from the quality of the components and the board layout, why would onboard audio have any more crosstalk than a dedicated soundcard?
Properly implemented onboard audio is every bit as good as a dedicated card when it comes to spitting out 2 channel music.
Buying a fancy soundcard to listen to MP3s is like having a McDonalds happy meal delivered on a silver platter.

[Gamevet]

My onboard audio has 7.1 surround available through SPDIF or Optical S/SPDIF out. Why use analog when you have digital ports, especially when you can hook it up to a real surround sound system. I rarely use headphones.

[Cloud121]

Well I got my GTX 570 today, and re-installed Arkham City, set everything to max and.... Very minor performance boost versus the 3-way SLI I had previously. I put in one of my 250s for PhysX and that BARELY increases the FPS count.

Part of me feels like I wasted my money, but at the same time, this graphics card will last me several years, and I knew I had to upgrade regardless. It's my processor that's bogging the game I believe. I can play the game with everything set to max except PhysX and easly get 60 FPS, but PhysX is why I bought the PC version over the console version in the first place. Even in DirectX 9 mode my processor chokes, barely hitting 40 FPS in the benchmark, and bottoming out at 5 FPS with PhysX set to maximum.

Though I can report that the Blu-Ray rips of my Gundam play perfectly now. I don't know if it's the fact I have a new GPU, or a dedicated sound card now, but they used to be out of sync by as much as five seconds. Not anymore.

[BetaWolf47]

Aside from the quality of the components and the board layout, why would onboard audio have any more crosstalk than a dedicated soundcard?
Properly implemented onboard audio is every bit as good as a dedicated card when it comes to spitting out 2 channel music.
Buying a fancy soundcard to listen to MP3s is like having a McDonalds happy meal delivered on a silver platter.

That's sort of true about MP3's. However, some dedicated sound cards have features that restore sounds lost during MP3 conversion. Upper-end Creative sound cards have a Crystalizer that makes them sound better. It's also a well-known fact within computer audio enthusiasts that onboard audio has more noise than dedicated audio. Dedicated ones have a higher signal-to-noise ratio, allowing you to turn up the volume louder before it starts to distort and get staticky. Better quality lossy formats, and also lossless formats, will sound better.

[Gamevet]

Well I got my GTX 570 today, and re-installed Arkham City, set everything to max and.... Very minor performance boost versus the 3-way SLI I had previously. I put in one of my 250s for PhysX and that BARELY increases the FPS count.

Part of me feels like I wasted my money, but at the same time, this graphics card will last me several years, and I knew I had to upgrade regardless. It's my processor that's bogging the game I believe. I can play the game with everything set to max except PhysX and easly get 60 FPS, but PhysX is why I bought the PC version over the console version in the first place. Even in DirectX 9 mode my processor chokes, barely hitting 40 FPS in the benchmark, and bottoming out at 5 FPS with PhysX set to maximum.

Though I can report that the Blu-Ray rips of my Gundam play perfectly now. I don't know if it's the fact I have a new GPU, or a dedicated sound card now, but they used to be out of sync by as much as five seconds. Not anymore.

You can monitor your CPU performance by opening up task manager and clicking on performance. Spread the box out so it'll show a longer amount of time. You can also download MSI afterburner for free. Even if you don't overclock your 570, you can use the tool to monitor GPU usage and temps.

That's sort of true about MP3's. However, some dedicated sound cards have features that restore sounds lost during MP3 conversion. Upper-end Creative sound cards have a Crystalizer that makes them sound better. It's also a well-known fact within computer audio enthusiasts that onboard audio has more noise than dedicated audio. Dedicated ones have a higher signal-to-noise ratio, allowing you to turn up the volume louder before it starts to distort and get staticky. Better quality lossy formats, and also lossless formats, will sound better.

If you're not noticing the noise, why bother? It's like buying a $500 videocard ($150 for a solid soundcard) when your current card is already running games at 55 fps.

[Polygon]

That's my desktop. It's still better than a crappy Logitec 2.1 surround speaker system, and yes I have that setup (X-230) connected to my 32" CRT that I use for console gaming. The speakers on that RCA system are injection-molded polypropylene and yes, the sub is inside of the box; I've seen it when I opened up the case to repair the CD drive. You obviously didn't bother to look at the attached picture, because what you have described was nothing like that. And yes, I have heard poor quality analog sound, when I had a crappy 2002 HP computer connected to it.

In my livingroom, I have over $1,000 in speakers, that I paid for in the 90's. My center channel has JBL 2600 bookshelf speakers, my front channel has Technics (Pioneer) SB-CR77 speakers with a 12" subs and my rear channel has (cheap quality if you ask me) Advent Prodigy Towers. Yes, I have hooked up my gaming PC (not the crappy HP) via the fiber to my reciever in the livingroom and I hear every step behind, to the left and in front of me. Does that mean I would need an unnecessary sound card to improve my sound?

NO!

Because you're running fiber to the receiver and the receivers DACs are doing the processing. For the hundredth damn time.

Exactly! And if you're going to build a gaming PC, don't you think your audio equipment should be up to par as well?

Yes, I do. That's why I have great analog speakers on my computer with a dedicated sound card and a good receiver and speakers on my HTPC with no dedicated sound card.

I doubt your expertise on PC building is greater than that of a professional magazine staff that has access to the greatest hardware available.

I wouldn't make that assumption. I've taken apart an Alienware straight from the factory with two amateur build errors. So, it seems I know better than Alienware who you would think know better than PC Magazine. Also, I never made that assumtion myself. I'm damn good at building computers and I would put my skills up against them any day. However, my point was that they aren't experts on audio quality. So, I'm not going to give a crap about their opinion concerning such things.

Yeah, analog hookups aren't that great, but if it sounds clean, why would you add a sound card for slightly better analog sound?

If that were that case, I wouldn't. But if you have good speakers the difference isn't slight.

Yeah, but you're saying you won't hear those sounds using cheap speakers. So, why would he need to use the additional uDAC, when his current setup really isn't going to expose those flaws?

*Edit* While loading Crysis Warhead on my gaming PC, I did hear a faint noise caused by the DVD drive, coming through my speakers. The sound did stop after about 3 seconds, but it was very faint. I had the volume turned up pretty high though.

No, you won't. Which is why I was saying you should get dedicated card if you had good speakers. I have said this entire time that you shouldn't bother if your speakers aren't up to par with a dedicated card. It's really frustrating because I don't think you've read half of what I've posted in this thread.

My onboard audio has 7.1 surround available through SPDIF or Optical S/SPDIF out. Why use analog when you have digital ports, especially when you can hook it up to a real surround sound system. I rarely use headphones.

Which is the way to go IF you have a good receiver with good speakers available.

[Gamevet]

NO!

Because you're running fiber to the receiver and the receivers DACs are doing the processing. For the hundredth damn time.

Dude, I already know that. If you're going to spend the cash to build a gaming PC, hooking it up through an analog connection should be you last option.

If your reciever doesn't have digital inputs, it's time to upgrade.

If that were that case, I wouldn't. But if you have good speakers the difference isn't slight.

Like I've said, I have good speakers. I've seen/heard the best speakers that are out there, so I know the difference between crap, decent, good and high quality. And, I pointed out that I'd heard a very slight sound (cross-talk) coming from the motor of my DVD drive when it was spinning at full-speed.

I wouldn't make that assumption. I've taken apart an Alienware straight from the factory with two amateur build errors. So, it seems I know better than Alienware who you would think know better than PC Magazine. Also, I never made that assumtion myself. I'm damn good at building computers and I would put my skills up against them any day. However, my point was that they aren't experts on audio quality. So, I'm not going to give a crap about their opinion concerning such things.

I didn't say a computer manufacturer, because those guys aren't out to give you the best bang for your buck. That's like showing up in a Corvette at a custom car show.

Maximum PC has far more resources than you. They get the best of the best hardware available. If you had looked at the link I posted above, you can clearly see that the $12,500 computer they've built, didn't have a sound-card included.

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/fea...d_best_pc_ever

Alienware is crap, btw. Dell crap to be exact! It's also an assembly line product.

[Polygon]

Dude, I already know that. If you're going to spend the cash to build a gaming PC, hooking it up through an analog connection is a joke. If your reciever doesn't have digital inputs, it's time to upgrade.

1. Not everyone has the money to hook their computer up to a receiver and a nice set of speakers.

2. A good dedicated card and analog speaker setup is a lot less expensive and as long as you get good quality stuff, the sound quality just as good unless we start comparing DACs.

3. Analog isn't crap. Many true audiophiles would slap you upside your head for making that kind of statement. It's not about the output, because, in the end it's all analog. It's about the DACs.

Maximum PC has far more resourses than you. They get the best of the best hardware available. If you had looked at the link I posted above, you can clearly see that the $14,000 computer they've built, didn't have a sound-card included.

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/fea...d_best_pc_ever

Alienware is crap, btw. Dell crap to be exact! It's also an assembly line product.

1. I never argued that.

2. If someone is building a $14,000 computer, I think they're going to spring for a receiver rather than computer speakers.

3. Just because they built a $14,000 computer doesn't make it the best. It simply makes it the most expensive. Normal people don't build $14,000 computers.

4. Alienware is crap since they were bought by Dell. The computer I'm speaking of came out of Alienware before that.

5. Just because you have a lot of resources and money to build computers for a magazine does not mean you have a lot of knowledge. Like I said, I would put my skill up against theirs any day.

[Polygon]

I'm done with this argument. I thought I said it as simply as I could with my first post, but I'll post it again so PLEASE read it.

1. If you have good dedicated computer speakers, get a dedicated sound card.

2. If you don't stick with onboard.

3. If you have the money, or one already available use a digital output to a receiver.

[Gamevet]

4. If you're going to spend the cash on a soundcard, make sure it's actually better (should cost you more than $100) than what you already have.

1. Not everyone has the money to hook their computer up to a receiver and a nice set of speakers.

2. A good dedicated card and analog speaker setup is a lot less expensive and as long as you get good quality stuff, the sound quality just as good unless we start comparing DACs.

3. Analog isn't crap. Many true audiophiles would slap you upside your head for making that kind of statement. It's not about the output, because, in the end it's all analog. It's about the DACs.

And I'd slap them back upside the head with my copy (used during my courses in Electronics) of Grob Basic Electronics (the book opened up to hi and low pass filtering) and then a backslap with Introduction to Digital Electronics (with the pages upened up to DACs).

Digitial Surround > Analog surround.

There's a big difference between sound used for gaming, HTPC and some fat dude sitting around listening to music.

1. I never argued that.

2. If someone is building a $14,000 computer, I think they're going to spring for a receiver rather than computer speakers.

It was an example. Just about every budget build they've published did not have a sound card. They had one issue that had 6 different levels of gaming PC, from a $600 rig to a $4,000 rig and none of them had soundcards added.

3. Just because they built a $14,000 computer doesn't make it the best. It simply makes it the most expensive. Normal people don't build $14,000 computers.

Why wouldn't they put that sound card in though? They've already spent $12,500.

4. Alienware is crap since they were bought by Dell. The computer I'm speaking of came out of Alienware before that.

Alienware has been crap for a looooong time. So, unless that computer you took apart was from 2002, you're looking at a corporate built Alienware product that had Dell's influences dating back to 2002.

5. Just because you have a lot of resources and money to build computers for a magazine does not mean you have a lot of knowledge. Like I said, I would put my skill up against theirs any day.

Don't fool yourself. Companies like Intel, AMD and NVidia, not only send publications/sites like Maximum PC their hardware before the public gets ahold of it, they get every detail about the internal designs of those products as well. They put up the silicone map of the CPU and GPU they are reviewing, every time a new product comes out. And if it's a new generation chipset, they go into great detail about what has changed from the previous generation.


If there is anybody that is qualified on building an enthusiast PC, it's Maximum PC.

[BetaWolf47]

Not everyone is able to get surround sound though. I've got my PC in the corner of a family room, where other people sit, relax, and watch TV. A great sound card and a great set of headphones is a great option to have. You can't get comparable audio out of anything integrated.
I didn't say a computer manufacturer, because those guys aren't out to give you the best bang for your buck. That's like showing up in a Corvette at a custom car show.

Maximum PC has far more resources than you. They get the best of the best hardware available. If you had looked at the link I posted above, you can clearly see that the $12,500 computer they've built, didn't have a sound-card included.

http://www.maximumpc.com/article/fea...d_best_pc_ever
Looking at the comments of that article, the reason they didn't include a sound card is because they didn't have room in the case for one after putting in 3 GTX 580's. Damn shame too, because they only chose 2.1 audio for that setup.

[Gamevet]

Not everyone is able to get surround sound though. I've got my PC in the corner of a family room, where other people sit, relax, and watch TV. A great sound card and a great set of headphones is a great option to have. You can't get comparable audio out of anything integrated.

That's cool dude. We all have different setups and different sound needs. For me, analog is what I use when the surround system in the livingroom isn't available. I usually keep my (2) PCs in my office/gameroom, and when I get a game that I would much rather play in surround (the 52" LCD doesn't hurt either) I'll move it into the living room.

Not everyone is going to experience cross-talk from their onboard sound. I've witnessed it once on my current gaming PC, but the sound was so faint (I had the sound cranked up as well) that I had to really concentrate on the sound to hear it. I haven't heard it since though. As far as hiss or any of the other sounds that can be caused by outside interference, I'm not hearing it. I think it's just silly for someone to say you're not hearing it, because your speakers suck, or you don't know what good sound is; it just comes off as being pretentious.

Not everyone's situation, or needs, is going to be the same. If your sound isn't up to par and analog is the best option for you, yeah a soundcard just might be the solution you're looking for. I just wouldn't suggest someone run out and get a cheap $40 card and expect it to be a huge improvement.

Looking at the comments of that article, the reason they didn't include a sound card is because they didn't have room in the case for one after putting in 3 GTX 580's. Damn shame too, because they only chose 2.1 audio for that setup.

Yeah, they'll look at the graphics and system performance first. Still, once in a great while they'll throw in a sound card, but it's pretty rare. They build it for gaming and performance, and it seems that they feel the onboard sound is good enough. I tend to agree with them.

If I ever get a sound card, it's going to be expensive. I'm usually not the guy that settles for just good enough when purchasing something; it's more like bang for the buck.

[Cloud121]

You can monitor your CPU performance by opening up task manager and clicking on performance. Spread the box out so it'll show a longer amount of time. You can also download MSI afterburner for free. Even if you don't overclock your 570, you can use the tool to monitor GPU usage and temps..

I looked at the monitor after benchmarking Arkham City several times. My 250 is typically showing up as about 40% usage versus 99% of my 570 (obviously). Granted, the 250 is being used solely for PhysX, but I want to say it's being bottlenecked?

[Gamevet]

I looked at the monitor after benchmarking Arkham City several times. My 250 is typically showing up as about 40% usage versus 99% of my 570 (obviously). Granted, the 250 is being used solely for PhysX, but I want to say it's being bottlenecked?

Yeah, but did your CPU max out?


If you really want to see your PhysX card being pushed, download the Mafia II demo. It comes with a system benchmark tool.

http://store.steampowered.com/agecheck/app/50130/

[gepeto]

Need some advice

A month ago I was looking for a hdmi card for my pc and picked up a asus gtx 550 ti for about 100.00. I since built me a new semi power rig system and I am reading everyones post about this card and that one. It has been a minute since I was heavy into pc games. So the question is should I just upgrade to a 560 ti or just pick up a gtx 550 ti and sli em since I already have one.

How bad is a single 550 ti card when running games. This thread reminds me of the old voodoo ge force battles.

[Gamevet]

Need some advice

A month ago I was looking for a hdmi card for my pc and picked up a asus gtx 550 ti for about 100.00. I since built me a new semi power rig system and I am reading everyones post about this card and that one. It has been a minute since I was heavy into pc games. So the question is should I just upgrade to a 560 ti or just pick up a gtx 550 ti and sli em since I already have one.

How bad is a single 550 ti card when running games. This thread reminds me of the old voodoo ge force battles.

The 560 ti will outperform (2) 550 ti cards in sli. It's a close matchup with a couple of games, but the 560 ti will over-clock higher and perform better in most cases. I'd pick up the 560 ti and use your 550 ti for Physx.


http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/..._card_review/3

[gepeto]

The 560 ti will outperform (2) 550 ti cards in sli. It's a close matchup with a couple of games, but the 560 ti will over-clock higher and perform better in most cases. I'd pick up the 560 ti and use your 550 ti for Physx.


http://www.hardocp.com/article/2011/..._card_review/3

a guy on craigslist has a evga nvidia 560 2gb not the ti is non ti 560's okay?

[Gamevet]

a guy on craigslist has a evga nvidia 560 2gb not the ti is non ti 560's okay?

Not really. You're looking at a GTX 460 with higher over-clocks.

Unless you are running 2 monitors, or have a single monitor capable of running at a resolution of 2560 x 1600, you'll never use that extra 1 gig of video memory.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/...-top,2944.html

You can purchase the EVGA GTX 560 Ti SC for $230. It's a real bargain at that price.

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applicati...FQNeTAodZm-R5A

If you had asked this question about 6 months ago, I would have suggested (2) 1024 MB GTX 460s in sli (that's what I run), but the prices have jumped back up, since it has been discontinued. It pretty much offered a better performance than a single GTX 480.