Why are Sound Cards not as Competitive as are Video Cards?

[DemonDragonJ]

Recently, computer video cards have been receiving far greater attention than have computer sound cards, and the competition between the different brands of video cards is far more intense than is the competition between the different brands of sound cards. Plus, users seem to care about video cards than they do about sound cards, as video cards are usually provided among the specifications of a computer, but sound cards are not.

I wonder why this is, so I have inquired from other users, and the most common answer that I have received is that most users are more concerned about their computer's video than they are about is sound, and that most users are content with a motherboard's integrated audio features, as they are not significantly different from a dedicated sound card. I myself disagree with that belief, as I have found, from my own first-hand experiences, that a dedicated sound card is far superior to integrated audio on a motherboard, just as a dedicated video card is far superior to onboard video.

What does everyone else say on this subject? Why do video cards receive far more attention, and experience far fiercer competition, than do sound cards? I await your responses.

[Stonerboy779]

Its largely because of how much integrated audio has improved.
it is also partly because integrated audio no longer bogs a system down.
Finally its also about price. Why would you pay money to get the same performance as you would with your onboard.


Only people who really buy aftermarket soundcards are those who's onboard has issues with hissing or clicking. Those who are easily sold over by sales pitches or those that have plenty of money.

Then we come to the last group of people and that is those that are more serious about their audio quality. They mast have headphones which require amping or may want bitperfect noise free playback.

I personally use an external USB dac and headphone amp (audioengine d1) with me AKG Q701s.

[Airbozo]

I blame it on MP3 players. When you are content to listen to crappy audio on a tiny portable device, the sound quality of your computer just does not matter anymore unless you are hooked up to a high performance audio system.

Sound logic has come a long way in the last 10-20 years as well. What Creative used to market as the latest and greatest is now included on many boards. Just like high end audio systems, there is not much _new_ innovation in sound components, just new features and possibly less noise. This is the same for sound cards in a computer. There is only so much you can get out of an audio card that is smack dab in the middle of an electronically noisy device. Even if you shield it (Xonar anyone), that signal still passes through some pretty noisy traces and you still have to use some of the logic on the card to "clean" the signal either before or after processing takes place and sometimes both.

When I bought my ASUS Striker extreme, the on board audio could not keep up well and basically sounded like crap. Once they updated the drivers, you could not tell the difference between on board and an add in card. (with the right processor)

Video cards have not reached that point where good enough is good enough. That time will come when we start seeing life like visuals on our computers. Once that point is reached, then the game will be about speed, resolution and features with very little visual improvement.

[TheGreatSatan]

I don't see a difference in onboard audio vs dedicated card

[Airbozo]

I don't see a difference in onboard audio vs dedicated card

Yes, but can you hear the difference?


:whistler:

[Luke122]

Does onboard audio do the job? Absolutely.

Does dedicated audio provide higher quality? Absolutely.

Will everyone notice the difference, and be willing to pay for it? Not so much.

And so that's why graphics cards are so much more competitive. People arent rushing out to buy 14" monitors anymore, when they can get 24" ones for under $200, and sometimes even 27-30" ones for $500ish. It's a HUGE noticeable difference, and anyone who can see... will see.


I don't see a difference in onboard audio vs dedicated card

I think Airbozo was on the right track with this. It's all about source material, and output devices. Garbage in = garbage out. The average person who is content with an iPod or other MP3 player is less likely to be critical of onboard audio devices, as the quality is roughly the same for output (depending on source material). But hook that same mp3 player into a specialized hifi rig, and prepare to be disgusted by your mp3 collection. I know I am. It's not that the fancy rig is the problem, it just reveals much more of the content material.

Speakers tend to be thought of as a more immediate and noticeable upgrade, as they are sort of the "last mile" in the audio chain. Sure, better speakers will give you better sound... to a point. Add some super high quality, very sensitive and accurate speakers, and suddenly you might start to notice electrical noise from the onboard audio. Your old speakers might not have let you hear it, but trust me.. it was there before.

I found that adding a higher quality output stage (amp/speakers) really made the inadequacy of my onboard audio show up. Once I went to a dedicated external audio device the sound really "came alive". Things were clearer, cleaner, easier to understand, and stereo stuff really did have a distinct "left" and "right" (aka Imaging).

TL;DR
Dedicated audio devices provide much better performance and quality, but at added expense that most people cant justify. "Good enough" mentality.

[slaveofconvention]

It's a matter of scale, as others have mentioned - there's an obvious and huge difference in the image quality whereas the sound quality - the differences are much more subtle.

[mDust]

In addition to what has already been said, game graphical processing is a lot more intense than game audio processing. This is why games have a minimum requirement for gfx cards but generally don't care what your sound card is, or if you even have one. Gfx cards are generally required, so people shop around for them, whereas sound cards are a luxury option. If you get a top end gaming mobo, they generally come with onboard sound that amounts to a dedicated card anyway. Plus, top-end processors in that mobo don't care about the miniscule amount of extra processing.

I forget what sound card I had (5+ years ago), but it cost over $200. It died a week out of warranty and I never bought another. I never got around to buying good speakers to go with it...so it was a complete waste of money for me. It really doesn't make any sense to have a good sound card and then plug cheap speakers into it. Quality output is only as good as the weakest link in the chain.

[TheGreatSatan]

I'd only get a sound card if I knew that taking the job of providing sound would help out my motherboard and processor. (ie doing less work) Although, I would never buy one of the Killer NIC cards, even though the processor load is lightened because of it

[DemonDragonJ]

It seems to me that the general consensus on this subject is that sound cards are less competitive than are video cards because most users are more concerned with their computers' video than they are with their computers' audio, and the integrated audio of most motherboards is acceptable to most users.

I can accept those explanations, but I have heard, with my own ears, a considerable difference between onboard sound and the sound of a dedicated sound card, so I shall always use a dedicated sound card in any computer that I have, even if I must spend additional money to obtain that superior sound.

[artoodeeto]

I have an older Creative X-Fi card in my system, and it's really only there for one reason: so I can record audio from, say a film clip into an audio file. You can only do that if you have two sound cards, or in my case built-in audio and a sound card, since it uses one for output and the other to record that output. I don't do it much, but it's nice once in awhile to have the capability. That being said, the main reason I'm not especially interested in a separate sound card is simply that I'm not willing to spend the money on amazing speakers.

The speakers I have sound the same on the built-in vs. the Creative (they're 400W logitech THX something-or-other, the ones with the giant subwoofer & 4 satellites). That being said, I *do* have them plugged into the Creative card. :D I wouldn't turn down awesome speakers if they fell in my lap, but what I have sounds good enough and for me it's not worth the extra money to upgrade. I'm also not overly picky about audio quality - now that hard drive space isn't an issue anymore, my mp3's overall are larger files than they used to be, and I don't notice the quality loss compared to uncompressed.

[mDust]

It seems to me that the general consensus on this subject is that sound cards are less competitive than are video cards because most users are more concerned with their computers' video than they are with their computers' audio, and the integrated audio of most motherboards is acceptable to most users.

I can accept those explanations, but I have heard, with my own ears, a considerable difference between onboard sound and the sound of a dedicated sound card, so I shall always use a dedicated sound card in any computer that I have, even if I must spend additional money to obtain that superior sound.

Yes, there very well may have been a large quality difference. But what hardware were you comparing? If you compare the on board sound of a $70 mobo to that of a $200-300 sound card, then it isn't a fair comparison. You also have to consider audio settings such as resolution and equalizer...and also speaker response and range. And room acoustics! And personal taste since "superior" is a subjective judgement and not a concrete setting. There is no "better button" for a reason.

If you buy a high end mobo, you typically get good sound as part of the package. But you also get better performance out of the rest of the board as well. So instead of buying that dedicated sound card, put that money towards a better mobo!

[DemonDragonJ]

Yes, there very well may have been a large quality difference. But what hardware were you comparing? If you compare the on board sound of a $70 mobo to that of a $200-300 sound card, then it isn't a fair comparison. You also have to consider audio settings such as resolution and equalizer...and also speaker response and range. And room acoustics! And personal taste since "superior" is a subjective judgement and not a concrete setting. There is no "better button" for a reason.

If you buy a high end mobo, you typically get good sound as part of the package. But you also get better performance out of the rest of the board as well. So instead of buying that dedicated sound card, put that money towards a better mobo!

My current motherboard is an ASUS brand MB, whose exact name and model number I cannot recall at this moment, that uses the AMD 790FX chipset, and my current sound card is the now-discontinued Creative Labs Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium Fatal1ty, and the difference in sound quality between the motherboard and the sound card is as great as the difference between night and day, to my ears. The most useful feature of the sound card is the 10-band equalizer that is contained in its software, which allows me to adjust the sound to exactly the level that I find to be best. My current speakers are only 2.1 speakers, but I plan to upgrade to 5.1 speakers when I can afford to do so, plus, I plan to eventually purchase the ASUS Crosshair Formula V motherboard, with AMD 990FX chipset, and although I am not certain if the motherboard shall have any effect on the sound card (as I certainly shall not discard such an advanced sound card as the one that I currently own), it shall certainly be very useful for all of its other numerous features.

[mDust]

Are you sure you have all available sound drivers and optional software installed for the on-board audio? Even my $300 netbook comes with a 10-band equalizer and other goodies to fine tune the output. I've never adjusted anything on it, since it's a netbook, but it's there. Asus is pretty good about that for all their boards as well. Check their downloads page to make sure you aren't missing out. Make sure windows is configured for full range stereo desktop speakers and not mono laptop speakers or something as well! On-board sound isn't the best, but it's not usually so far off as to make a noticeable difference.

[DemonDragonJ]

Are you sure you have all available sound drivers and optional software installed for the on-board audio? Even my $300 netbook comes with a 10-band equalizer and other goodies to fine tune the output. I've never adjusted anything on it, since it's a netbook, but it's there. Asus is pretty good about that for all their boards as well. Check their downloads page to make sure you aren't missing out. Make sure windows is configured for full range stereo desktop speakers and not mono laptop speakers or something as well! On-board sound isn't the best, but it's not usually so far off as to make a noticeable difference.

I am not certain if I have the newest drivers for my motherboard, as I purchased the sound card at the same time as the MB, and thus have never needed to update its drivers. I have configured my sound card to a point where it produces sound that I find to be exceptional, so I have no need to worry about the motherboard's sound settings. I appreciate your advice, but I intend to continue using a dedicated sound card, even after I upgrade to a motherboard that is better than the one that I currently have.

[mDust]

I intend to continue using a dedicated sound card, even after I upgrade to a motherboard that is better than the one that I currently have.

Unforgivable.:)

[Cale_Hagan]

i still swear by my dedicated ASUS Zonar D2X...

[AmEv]

If A: I had a free PCI slot, B: I remember where I set my SBLive5.1's backplate, I'd be using it.

[DemonDragonJ]

Unforgivable.:)

How is that "unforgivable?" I am allowed to use the component that I wish to use, am I not?


i still swear by my dedicated ASUS Zonar D2X...

What do you "swear by your Asus Zonar D2X?" What promise have you made upon that card?

[mDust]

I am allowed to use the component that I wish to use, am I not?

And what is this? A free country? I called the police. They seemed pretty upset the 6th time I called. You're in for it now.

[DemonDragonJ]

If A: I had a free PCI slot, B: I remember where I set my SBLive5.1's backplate, I'd be using it.

When you mention PCI slots, are you referring to conventional PCI or PCI express? Conventional PCI is being displaced by PCI express, so I would not recommend using a conventional PCI sound card; a PCI express sound card is likely to perform better, and purchasing such a device shall help to support that interface standard (my current sound card uses PCIe, and most manufacturers have now switched to using that interfaces exclusively).


And what is this? A free country? I called the police. They seemed pretty upset the 6th time I called. You're in for it now.

Are you joking, I hope? Because this hardly seems to be the type of issue for which a person would contact the police.

[AmEv]

When you mention PCI slots, are you referring to conventional PCI or PCI express? Conventional PCI is being displaced by PCI express, so I would not recommend using a conventional PCI sound card; a PCI express sound card is likely to perform better, and purchasing such a device shall help to support that interface standard (my current sound card uses PCIe, and most manufacturers have now switched to using that interfaces exclusively).



Are you joking, I hope? Because this hardly seems to be the type of issue for which a person would contact the police.

Yes, I mean old-school PCI slot, and his post is laced with sarcasm.

[DemonDragonJ]

Yes, I mean old-school PCI slot, and his post is laced with sarcasm.

I was uncertain if MDust was being sarcastic or not because a post on an online forum cannot convey tone of voice; if I have been communicating verbally with MDust, I likely could have inferred his sarcasm from the tone of his voice.

And why would you use conventional PCI, when it is inferior to PCI express? It is an outdated interface, as are IDE, parallel, serial (DB-9), PS/2, and VGA interfaces. It is being gradually phased out by manufacturers, so there is no need to continue to support it, in my mind.

[AmEv]

Yeah, that's why I said "if". For what I've got, onboard is enough. Maybe later....

[SXRguyinMA]

Actually a lot of new motherboards are coming with DB9 (serial) headers on them along next to the USB 2.0 ones. My new Biostar TZ77XE4 has one on it. And PS/2 has tons of reasons why EVERY motherboard still has at least one port - Google it.

And the reason for plain PCI for a sound card is that it will never use the number of lanes or even come close to the bandwidth for standard PCI let alone PCI-E. A PCI-E sound card is quit pointless, as is PCI-E Gen 3 right now too. Is it faster than Gen 2? Yes. Are there any graphics cards on the market that can even saturate a PCI-E 2 slot? No.

[mDust]

I was uncertain if MDust was being sarcastic or not because a post on an online forum cannot convey tone of voice; if I have been communicating verbally with MDust, I likely could have inferred his sarcasm from the tone of his voice.

Nope, I'm an expert in the sarcasm department. In person nobody is sure when I'm being sarcastic or not. Usually, the things that fall out of my mouth aren't as outlandish...but since we're on the net, and there are crazy people out here, outlandish scenarios alone usually aren't enough to conclude one way or the other. Don't worry though; my sarcasm is non-hostile and isn't directed 'at' you. It's purely for my own, innocent amusement.


And the reason for plain PCI for a sound card is that it will never use the number of lanes or even come close to the bandwidth for standard PCI let alone PCI-E. A PCI-E sound card is quit pointless, as is PCI-E Gen 3 right now too. Is it faster than Gen 2? Yes. Are there any graphics cards on the market that can even saturate a PCI-E 2 slot? No.
Data throughput technologies are always going to be 'overkill.' If new devices need more bandwidth than the current tech allows, then someone wasn't doing their job. We couldn't play our shiny, modern games with DDR, IDE and PCI.
It just doesn't make sense to provide backward compatibility for obsolete tech forever. I haven't installed a floppy drive in close to a decade and I haven't had a PCI slot on my mobo in probably 5 years. Is PCIE x1 overkill for sound? Yes, but it's that or on-board.

[DemonDragonJ]

And the reason for plain PCI for a sound card is that it will never use the number of lanes or even come close to the bandwidth for standard PCI let alone PCI-E. A PCI-E sound card is quit pointless, as is PCI-E Gen 3 right now too. Is it faster than Gen 2? Yes. Are there any graphics cards on the market that can even saturate a PCI-E 2 slot? No.

This shall be changing the subject, slightly, but, while no video card can use the full bandwidth of PCI-express 3.0, or even 2.0, are there other devices that can do so, such as a PCI-express-based solid-state drive?

[Kayin]

Yes. I've got a raid card that can max out a PCI-E x4 slot, and they make them that can do the same with an x16.

[Airbozo]

This shall be changing the subject, slightly, but, while no video card can use the full bandwidth of PCI-express 3.0, or even 2.0, are there other devices that can do so, such as a PCI-express-based solid-state drive?

Yes. The Texas Memory systems units can saturate a 2.0 slot for sure. At over $60k I would hope they could saturate a 3.0 as well.


Yes. I've got a raid card that can max out a PCI-E x4 slot, and they make them that can do the same with an x16.

We use several flavors of raid cards and the adaptec high end cards are _supposed_ to work in an x4 slot, but in reality, they will fail in an x4 slot under sustained transfers. We now only put them in an x8 slot minimum.

[mDust]

Other than enterprise gear, there isn't much that a home user is going to do under normal circumstances to saturate those technologies. ...RAIDing 16+ 500MB/s SSDs on an x4 slot is not normal let alone achieving peak transfer rates on said array.

Also, you are allowed to derail your own thread at any point. If you don't do it, someone else will. I do it all the time and regret nothing. :twisted:

[Konrad]

I'm guessing that sound hardware already exceeds the fidelity most people can discern unless they spend substantial $$$ on speakers and amps and stuff. But advances in video are instantly obvious to everyone, even with a low-cost display (which doesn't add cost because every computer already has one). Even a toddler will complain about a sucky graphics card, yet be perfectly content with the most awful headphones playing simple 8-bit pong noises if the graphics look awesome.

The way I see it, only people with serious audio hardware are much concerned with the nerdspecs on audio cards, anything which seems to meet/exceed the system reqs for the latest software title is good enough for most.

Fanatic audiophiles already disdain CD audio, it just ain't "audiophile" quality. Most seem to be musicians of some sort, and most claim to strongly prefer analog audio technologies even though the reality is they'll just buy the baddest sound card they can afford and do their day to day audio work with digital formats. Maybe they spend big bucks on fancy audiophile-quality recording software, I dunno.

[Stonerboy779]

I'm guessing that sound hardware already exceeds the fidelity most people can discern unless they spend substantial $$$ on speakers and amps and stuff. But advances in video are instantly obvious to everyone, even with a low-cost display (which doesn't add cost because every computer already has one). Even a toddler will complain about a sucky graphics card, yet be perfectly content with the most awful headphones playing simple 8-bit pong noises if the graphics look awesome.

The way I see it, only people with serious audio hardware are much concerned with the nerdspecs on audio cards, anything which seems to meet/exceed the system reqs for the latest software title is good enough for most.

Fanatic audiophiles already disdain CD audio, it just ain't "audiophile" quality. Most seem to be musicians of some sort, and most claim to strongly prefer analog audio technologies even though the reality is they'll just buy the baddest sound card they can afford and do their day to day audio work with digital formats. Maybe they spend big bucks on fancy audiophile-quality recording software, I dunno.

Nothing wrong with CDs and not sure where you got the idea that audiophiles would look at it with disdain. 44kHz, 16bit wav is a pretty much standard of digital file type as that what is ripped from a CD. There are other things like digital studio files and bluray audio disks etc but in reality the CD is pretty much the highest in digital.

My quest for better audio gear comes from the audio gear I have. Ihave very efficient and sensitive gear that picks up the smallest bits of background noise. Especially so in the case of my canalphones. They just **** all over whatever audio source I provide them :(

My onboard "beats" audio on my lappy sounds like the bloody ocean. Even my audioengine d1 USB dac and my UD100 USB DAC have background noise that isn't noticeable on my AKG Q701s but my AF56m canalphones bring out those small bits of noise.

[Twigsoffury]

Fanatic audiophiles already disdain CD audio, it just ain't "audiophile" quality. Most seem to be musicians of some sort, and most claim to strongly prefer analog audio technologies

I always love when someone tells me that, Then you notice they're playing that record player through a solid state / digital amplifier

[billygoat333]

^ this. lol Nothing like a good ole' fashioned tube amp to bring some warmth to music. I miss my parents' old tube amp running a turntable and some hefty speakers (don't remember the brand, I was young ok? lol)

[Twigsoffury]

^ this. lol Nothing like a good ole' fashioned tube amp to bring some warmth to music. I miss my parents' old tube amp running a turntable and some hefty speakers (don't remember the brand, I was young ok? lol)

Oh they still make them, I know Marantz Electronics makes tube type amplifiers. I remember the feet would be blue when you first turned the amplifier on, and would gradually turn to a red'ish orange and click over whenever the tubes warmed up.

That day was also the loudest I've ever heard a movie in my whole life.


and as far as the OP, I think a lot of people aren't consumer educated about the differences between standard, and premium audio.

if you play BF4 on my boards realtek.. i mean it "sounds" the same but you're missing more of the sounds happening in game.. such as planes flying over or tanks.. people shooting and birds chirping (in nerd speak i think its called maximum hardware voice number).. its like you hear gaps in audio or missing audio from things you see happening. on the screen

but if its on my Azuentec, well i still hear the footsteps of shooting soldiers while a dog barks across the street and an explosion goes off in the distance from a plane flying over head which causes some bricks to fall as i clank a new magazine into my gun....all at the same time.