Do I need a soundcard? (My specs are included)

[enaberif]

Originally Posted by draemn

Then don't wast your money on a sound card unless you get into the higher end audio solutions (i.e. over $400). That sound-card is pretty damn good. Very good SNR, a nice array of Dolby features (at least my UD5 has a good set of software features) and good sound quality with almost zero noise.

I am sorry to say you don't need to spend that much. Even $100 speakers can benefit from a good soundcard card.

[terrybear]

Originally Posted by draemn

Then don't wast your money on a sound card unless you get into the higher end audio solutions (i.e. over $400). That sound-card is pretty damn good. Very good SNR, a nice array of Dolby features (at least my UD5 has a good set of software features) and good sound quality with almost zero noise.

As for the post above me, my ears don't hear much of a difference (with my Sennheisers HD515) between the onboard ALC889 chip and my Xonar Essence STX. Until I put on my HD650s, I would have said my sound-card was a waste of money.

Yes maybe if you dont have that great of a ear as well, but you forget about the other biggest thing of all .... cpu usage/resources can be up to 10% when using a onboard sound solution ..

[draemn]

Originally Posted by enaberif

I am sorry to say you don't need to spend that much. Even $100 speakers can benefit from a good soundcard card.

An onboard audio can be a good soundcard. So in his case, he has a good soundcard. Seriously, you're argument is so weak that it's just annoying...

Originally Posted by terrybear

Yes maybe if you dont have that great of a ear as well, but you forget about the other biggest thing of all .... cpu usage/resources can be up to 10% when using a onboard sound solution ..

What day and age are you in? TOPS it will see 2-3% CPU usage, but more like 0.5% usage. Oh and so you don't just attack me for being "wrong" without providing your own proof, I set SC 2 to 128 sound channels on high and used a massive army on two sides in battle (used a pre-made custom map to keep it same between tests) and also tested playing a variety of audio files at the same time on my computer for a second test, and between my soundcard and the onboard audio and my CPU usage was within 1.5% for all tests, did that 3 times for each benchmark for each audio solution.

[Phill]

Personally I would suggest getting a sound card even if it is cheap (for example: Xonar DGX or DG). I use Sennheiser 595 or my 2.1 Edifier S730 and by comparison the $40 spent on a card is hardly a stretch. However, audio is a subjective matter. IMO if I was in your position I would buy a Xonar DGX and find out for yourself. It is really hard for others to give you a definitive answer.

[Lpfan4ever]

Originally Posted by draemn

As for the post above me, my ears don't hear much of a difference (with my Sennheisers HD515) between the onboard ALC889 chip and my Xonar Essence STX. Until I put on my HD650s, I would have said my sound-card was a waste of money.

That would be because your 515's are 50ohm, whereas the PC350's are 150ohm. I was without my Auzentech Forte for a couple weeks while it was being RMA'd, and there is a HUGE difference. Especially when the source cannot properly drive the headphones.


You can't put a $$ amount as to when it's worth buying a sound card. If your headphones require proper amplification, then you will probably benefit greatly from one that has the built in amp. However, some lower powered speakers/headphones can sound better with a sound card.

But to me it's entirely up to the person to decide if it's worth it (unless the card requires a good amp, which something that can properly drive it is a necessity). So many people think that these "Beats" headphones are the best thing ever to exist and drop hundreds of dollars on them. Honestly, I think they sound like utter shit compared to my PC350's and my MEEelec A151/A161P.

[Rockfella]

Originally Posted by Phill

However, audio is a subjective matter. IMO if I was in your position I would buy a Xonar DGX and find out for yourself. It is really hard for others to give you a definitive answer.

This or a DX

[draemn]

Originally Posted by Lpfan4ever

That would be because your 515's are 50ohm, whereas the PC350's are 150ohm.

But to me it's entirely up to the person to decide if it's worth it (unless the card requires a good amp, which something that can properly drive it is a necessity). So many people think that these "Beats" headphones are the best thing ever to exist and drop hundreds of dollars on them. Honestly, I think they sound like utter shit compared to my PC350's and my MEEelec A151/A161P.

I did mention earlier that a reason for buying a soundcard would be if you need an amp for your headphones.

I totally don't understand why people like the beats headphones either... at least they aren't over $300 anymore. It was stupid how expensive they were for more or less crappy headphones when they first came out.

[terrybear]

Originally Posted by draemn

What day and age are you in? TOPS it will see 2-3% CPU usage, but more like 0.5% usage. Oh and so you don't just attack me for being "wrong" without providing your own proof, I set SC 2 to 128 sound channels on high and used a massive army on two sides in battle (used a pre-made custom map to keep it same between tests) and also tested playing a variety of audio files at the same time on my computer for a second test, and between my soundcard and the onboard audio and my CPU usage was within 1.5% for all tests, did that 3 times for each benchmark for each audio solution.

Im not goign to "attack you" as your so quick to accusate .... i was just pointing out that sufice your OWN tests .... there are various onboard & offboard sound chips that do use alot of cpu usage BUT in most instances a offboard solution will not rob you of resources & as well as others have point out other reasons WHY its ususaly a must.

Like to me im not shure if the latest catalyst drivers have made my fps go down in times or also a conbimantion of it + going to onboard sound. I can only conclude that some of it IS cause of having to use onboard sound.

[tethlah]

Well, for my headphones I only have a Logitech H150 (mainly because speakers feedback into the mic, so I have to have headphones for games where I'm using voice with other people). Otherwise I use Insignia NS-PCS21 speakers for now. Maybe in the future I'll get something better, but for now that's really about it. How much difference does having an amp for the headphones make vs not having an amp for the headphones?

[terrybear]

Originally Posted by tethlah

Well, for my headphones I only have a Logitech H150 (mainly because speakers feedback into the mic, so I have to have headphones for games where I'm using voice with other people). Otherwise I use Insignia NS-PCS21 speakers for now. Maybe in the future I'll get something better, but for now that's really about it. How much difference does having an amp for the headphones make vs not having an amp for the headphones?

Well again output thru your headphones .... like i notice now with the onboard if I crank it to 50% its barely ledgable any audio being played thru it ... vs with my x-fi if i did so I could go to my bathroom almost 12' away & hear it clearly. Beyond that ... if you value being able to lisen to bass ... this also will benefit from the higher output amp on a soundcard.

IF your not concerned about 7.1 or the latest surround sound ... ncix's sale has the GX which is the predecessor to the DX line of cards that have at least 5.1 surround on them. That is IF your in canada .. :)