need advise on 7.1 sound card

[MrRiplEy[H]]

It still doesn't change the fact that on-board sound will always be sub-par compared to a dedicated sound card.  Just because you don't see any difference doesn't mean one doesn't exist.

ack-ack

That's not true, nothing stops a mobo maker from implementing a similar sound circuitry that you would have on a dedicated card.

Here's the new Gigabyte Z97X-Gaming G1 for a mere $379 (it would be likely $100 cheaper without all that gold).

- Onboard Creative Sound Core3D™ quad-core audio processor
- AMP-UP Audio technology with exclusive Upgradable OP-AMP
- Audio Noise Guard with LED path lighting
- Dual DAC-UP USB ports
- Gold plated display and audio ports
- High end Nichicon audio capacitors

So no, you don't necessarily need a separate sound card.

[guncrasher]

That's not true, nothing stops a mobo maker from implementing a similar sound circuitry that you would have on a dedicated card.

So no, you don't necessarily need a separate sound card.

well my mobo cost me 180 plus 50 bucks for the sound card (which I hope it works).  a lot less than 379 for that mobo you posted.  actually I could have gotten my mobo, the same sound card i have now and the kave headset for the same price as that mobo.

main thing is how much you are willing to spend.  you pay for it one way or another.


semp

[MrRiplEy[H]]

well my mobo cost me 180 plus 50 bucks for the sound card (which I hope it works).  a lot less than 379 for that mobo you posted.  actually I could have gotten my mobo, the same sound card i have now and the kave headset for the same price as that mobo.

main thing is how much you are willing to spend.  you pay for it one way or another.


semp

This was just one example, I just pointed out that both Chalenge and Ack-Ack didn't really know what they were posting about. There are high quality built in sound implementations available from many manufacturers. They are not all sub-par high latency crapware as the previous posters were suggesting. Actually Gigabyte, Asus etc. have invested in improving onboard audio quality considerably in many models. It goes without saying that if you buy the cheapest motherboard you can find it's going to have the cheapest components also.

[Chalenge]

Wrong again, Ripley. If you remember correctly I was the one that pointed out the existence of this approach to onboard sound. I did not adopt it because it is still less efficient than a separate sound card. Worse, the functionality of the chip is reduced, and noise is increased. It is better than other onboard solutions, but no where near ideal.

Outside of that this particular board was less than ideal for other reasons, but might suit your needs just fine.

[Skuzzy]

That's not true, nothing stops a mobo maker from implementing a similar sound circuitry that you would have on a dedicated card.
<snip>

That is not true either.  Everything on a sound card can operate completely asynchronously to the main CPU and not interrupt anything on the motherboard, until it is completed processing and needs to notify the CPU it is done.

If the sound chip in on the motherboard, it interrupts and or suspends the CPU(all cores) each time it needs to access memory.

As a matter of fact, only one device on the memory or I/O buses, of the motherboard, can be active at a time.  Add in cards, with their own CPU, RAM, and so on, can run in parallel with everything else in the system.

[Masherbrum]

This was just one example, I just pointed out that both Chalenge and Ack-Ack didn't really know what they were posting about.

You should take your own advice.   I have a Gigabyte GA-Z87-U4DH board and the onboard sucks.   The 5.1 Creative Blaster Z card is superior in sound quality to the onboard 7.1 and it isn't even close.  

[MrRiplEy[H]]

That is not true either.  Everything on a sound card can operate completely asynchronously to the main CPU and not interrupt anything on the motherboard, until it is completed processing and needs to notify the CPU it is done.

If the sound chip in on the motherboard, it interrupts and or suspends the CPU(all cores) each time it needs to access memory.

As a matter of fact, only one device on the memory or I/O buses, of the motherboard, can be active at a time.  Add in cards, with their own CPU, RAM, and so on, can run in parallel with everything else in the system.

If what you say would be true there would be absolutely no point to make a 4 core audio chip embedded. Nothing stops the motherboard maker from utilizing a PCI-E line in the embedded solution just as it would be an addon card. In fact a reviewer noticed an additional PCI-E bridge chip that he found now obvious reason for, which would indicate my theory might be correct.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

You should take your own advice.   I have a Gigabyte GA-Z87-U4DH board and the onboard sucks.   The 5.1 Creative Blaster Z card is superior in sound quality to the onboard 7.1 and it isn't even close.  

Stop embarrassing yourself please. Your motherboard has a regular el-cheapo Realtek chip it can't be compared to the example.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

Wrong again, Ripley. If you remember correctly I was the one that pointed out the existence of this approach to onboard sound. I did not adopt it because it is still less efficient than a separate sound card. Worse, the functionality of the chip is reduced, and noise is increased. It is better than other onboard solutions, but no where near ideal.

Outside of that this particular board was less than ideal for other reasons, but might suit your needs just fine.

The Gigabyte example got excellent results in both sound quality and signal to noise tests even when using the default chips on the upgradeable slots. That kinda defeats your theory there.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Gigabyte/Z97X-GAMING_G1_WIFI-BK/

By the way, what setup do you use for your audio? Do you happen to have a high-end audio setup with electrostatic panel speakers like I do? The whole reproduction chain must be up to the task, the source is only a fraction of the whole system.

[Chalenge]

Different reviewers give good reviews for different reasons unrelated to the actual performance. It doesn't matter what your speakers are, either, especially if you do the comparison on the same system. You can use any speaker and listen to music and the audio will be fine on either the onboard chip, or a sound card. I was very interested in the concept of changing out an op-amp and changing the dynamic of the board's audio. However, in practice it is not as capable as the same concept on a separate audio card (the Xonar in particular has a more effective approach with eight upgradable op-amps). In particular, when it comes to noise the ZxR is far superior with a mere 124dB SNR. To be fair, the onboard SNR matches the Z, and Zx.

However, when you take a complex video game like AH and compare it on both devices the sound card will be superior (given that the onboard chip and card both use the Core 3D chip). The reason is simple as outlined by Skuzzy. To prove it all you have to do is test it, as I have. So, you can stop calling it 'theory.'

[Masherbrum]

Stop embarrassing yourself please. Your motherboard has a regular el-cheapo Realtek chip it can't be compared to the example.

You're embarrassed yourself for more than 6 years in the section.   Your example is inferior to a standalone card, end of discussion.

[guncrasher]

well i got my new sound card.  thanks challenge for the list of sound cards.  I am happy, the sound card is not as good as my sb z but it's way better than my mobo's 7.1, and my mobo's sound is good.

once my foot heals and I start working ot, then I'll get one of the top rated but for now.  this will do.  I have to turn the volume way down as the headset is loud.  also it blocks all "outside" noise pretty good, to the point I wear them when I need to concentrate on some paperwork.

thanks to all for your input.


semp

[Skuzzy]

If what you say would be true there would be absolutely no point to make a 4 core audio chip embedded. Nothing stops the motherboard maker from utilizing a PCI-E line in the embedded solution just as it would be an addon card. In fact a reviewer noticed an additional PCI-E bridge chip that he found now obvious reason for, which would indicate my theory might be correct.

There is no way for multiple devices to access memory at a time  (i.e. simultaneously).  There is only one physical path to memory in desktops (and other lower forms of computers). There is no physical way multiple devices can access ANY given bus, at the same time (i.e. simultaneously) as each bus has one physical path.  Have you ever looked at the actual design of a computer?  Bridge chips share a common path to and from the CPU.  Only one bridge chip and be accessed by any given CPU.  This mitigates running anything simultaneously.

Now, there are server motherboards and chipsets which allow for two physical paths to memory which allow two cores to access different regions of memory, at the same time.  None of this technology exists for a desktop.

However, I/O devices all have to share a path and access is only allowed one at a time. For any device to run completely parallel to the CPU, it has to have its own RAM, CPU, and any other hardware required to support the type of I/O.

Those are facts.  Not opinion, not theory.

[zack1234]

How are the 7.1 headphones?.

[guncrasher]

How are the 7.1 headphones?.

awesome.  not that the kave are crap either.  but I like the tianman better even though their twice the money.  only problem is finding a sound card that has true 7.1.  I bought and returned 3 that said were 7.1 but were made for speaker systems rather than 7.1 headsets.


semp