Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › ALC889 vs ASUS Xonar Essence STX ( is it worth it to upgrade?)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

ALC889 vs ASUS Xonar Essence STX ( is it worth it to upgrade?) - Page 2

post #16 of 38
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by aznx2high View Post




wait wait hold up what i meant what if it can support that DX 10 or 11 then you can run most games on high settings because since most PC games are still in DX 10 and 9, so if you have support for DX 11, which is tesstallation making a big improvement in game design, and 3D effects. so if it has support for DX 11 then you can exspect that you can run just about any game from any games in the past till about maybe 2016 or longer. but also in the consideration of your CPU and RAM since as time goes on you will need more RAM for your apps, and your CPU to run them. 

 

this is why i didnt why i wantto get into detail because i get worked up about this.

 

and yes there is a big difference from a dependent video card and independent video card, like i said if you free up what the dependent card is using then you have a better improvement in your gaming/preforming experience. why ? because DEPENDENT VIDEO CARDS uses one of your CPU and some amount of RAM, for example  if you have a dual core and like 4GB of drr2 ram then it would show like 4GB of ram but 3.5 of USABLE ram if you right click my computer and click properties. but for the cpu you can't tell but i know it uses the CPU because there's nothing else that can do the calculations. so as you can see if you have a dual core and you are running a game then it kind of becomes a single core. and also FOR INTEL USERS, if you do not already know intel uses hyper-threading which means each core has two threads where you and input and output data, so in a simple term if you have 1 PHYSICAL core, you get VIRTUALLY 2 cores. so do the math n*2=?. also its improves CPU perfomance from 20%-30%.

 

but nonetheless you COULD free up those if you add a dedicated video card.

 

sorry for the late reply, i have a lot of things going on this summer.

 

and to the rest of you guys thanks for the replies very helpful.

 

i learned a lot from you guys and saved me from making a mistake.

 

thanks to all of you.

 

 




yeah sorry guys i just edited this down here, i got a bit mad when I'm looked down on.

 

 

 

 

wait wait hold up what i meant what if it can support that DX 10 or 11 then you can run most games on high settings because since most PC games are still in DX 10 and 9, so if you have support for DX 11, which is tessellation making a big improvement in game design, and 3D effects. so if it has support for DX 11 then you can expect that you can run just about any game from any games in the past till about maybe 2016 or longer. but also in the consideration of your CPU and RAM since as time goes on you will need more RAM for your apps, and your CPU to run them. 

 

this is why i didn't why i want to get into detail because i get worked up about this.

 

and yes there is a big difference from a dependent video card and independent video card, like i said if you free up what the dependent card is using then you have a better improvement in your gaming/preforming experience. why ? because DEPENDENT VIDEO CARDS uses one of your CPU and some amount of RAM, for example  if you have a dual core and like 4GB of drr2 ram then it would show like 4GB of ram but 3.5 of USABLE ram if you right click my computer and click properties. but for the cpu you can't tell but i know it uses the CPU because there's nothing else that can do the calculations. so as you can see if you have a dual core and you are running a game then it kind of becomes a single core. and also FOR INTEL USERS, if you do not already know intel uses hyper-threading which means each core has two threads where you and input and output data, so in a simple term if you have 1 PHYSICAL core, you get VIRTUALLY 2 cores. so do the math n*2=?. also its improves CPU performance from 20%-30%.

 

also it  depends on the game itself but in general yes you would see a difference in both performance, games, and a little on videos if you know about deinterlace 

 

but nonetheless you COULD free up those if you add a dedicated video card.

 

sorry for the late reply, i have a lot of things going on this summer.

post #17 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by aznx2high View Post






yeah sorry guys i just edited this down here, i got a bit mad when I'm looked down on.

 

 

 

 

wait wait hold up what i meant what if it can support that DX 10 or 11 then you can run most games on high settings because since most PC games are still in DX 10 and 9, so if you have support for DX 11, which is tessellation making a big improvement in game design, and 3D effects. so if it has support for DX 11 then you can expect that you can run just about any game from any games in the past till about maybe 2016 or longer. but also in the consideration of your CPU and RAM since as time goes on you will need more RAM for your apps, and your CPU to run them. 

 

this is why i didn't why i want to get into detail because i get worked up about this.

 

and yes there is a big difference from a dependent video card and independent video card, like i said if you free up what the dependent card is using then you have a better improvement in your gaming/preforming experience. why ? because DEPENDENT VIDEO CARDS uses one of your CPU and some amount of RAM, for example  if you have a dual core and like 4GB of drr2 ram then it would show like 4GB of ram but 3.5 of USABLE ram if you right click my computer and click properties. but for the cpu you can't tell but i know it uses the CPU because there's nothing else that can do the calculations. so as you can see if you have a dual core and you are running a game then it kind of becomes a single core. and also FOR INTEL USERS, if you do not already know intel uses hyper-threading which means each core has two threads where you and input and output data, so in a simple term if you have 1 PHYSICAL core, you get VIRTUALLY 2 cores. so do the math n*2=?. also its improves CPU performance from 20%-30%.

 

also it  depends on the game itself but in general yes you would see a difference in both performance, games, and a little on videos if you know about deinterlace 

 

but nonetheless you COULD free up those if you add a dedicated video card.

 

sorry for the late reply, i have a lot of things going on this summer.



OMG, I thought you would've come to your senses before sending all that nonsense.

 

I kinda stopped reading after that first paragraph. But out of consideration, I went on.

 

First of all, it's been almost a decade since there are different architectures, improves ones who totally void your argument on allocated memory.

Second, multithreading is a specific situation, and IS NOT A RULE for a specific CPU manufacturer. Also, performance differences are far from linear, as you seem to wish for.

 

Seriously, I'll most respectfully reiterate my LOL.

post #18 of 38
Thread Starter 

sorry i know this is not about audio please over look this and sorry for wasting your time.

post #19 of 38

aznx2high   : I kind feel I'm being trolled but here goes.   You are not fully understanding the tech that you're giving advice on.   If English isn't your first language that maybe the issue here. Please study PC hardware a little more before posting we are all noobs at some point in our lives the trick is not be one forever.   The DX 11 will allow you to run games till 2016 part was my fav biggrin.gif

 

I have a Quad dualhyperlaced dustybridge FX overclocked inDirect X 11 hybrid with solidstate megahurts so I know what I'm talking about .....    just kidding,  if you would like ask PC hardware / tech questions please send a PM

 

 

 

To the OP: I would start with a Xonar DX as this will be a cheaper entry point in to dedicated sound cards but is still well featured.  I had a DX  for several years before I upgraded to the STX and I was more than happy.

The DX has analog 7.1 so will be suitable for 5.1 speakers or headphones and IMO is a marked sound improvement from onboard. 

 

All of my experience with onboard sound vs sound cards have shown that dedicated is the way to go.  Anyone who claims otherwise has not either being hampered by there other equipment or media or even incorrect configuration. 

 

I would invite anyone to do the pepsi challenge with my STX vs against onboard any day of the week. Onboard may be fine if you not that fussed about audio if so your in the wrong place :)

 

The important thing is that you get the right hardware to compliment your headphones in the role they are supposed to be doing be it gaming, music , movies  etc.

 

 

happy shopping


Edited by BlutoSlice - 6/21/11 at 4:53am
post #20 of 38

"fussed about audio if so your in the wrong place"

 

Sure is pretentious in here.

post #21 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLACKENEDPLAGUE View Post

"fussed about audio if so your in the wrong place"

 

Sure is pretentious in here.



Says a man who listens to mere mp3s! angry_face.gif

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(i do as well)

post #22 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLACKENEDPLAGUE View Post

"fussed about audio if so your in the wrong place"

 

Sure is pretentious in here.



What? Why would people be on Head-Fi if they're not fussed about audio? :s

 

And this thread is just filled with terrible information >_>

 

If you can't notice the difference between on-board sound and a Xonar Essence, there's either something wrong with your gear (either defects or your headphones/speakers are very low end), you haven't configured everything correctly, or you have VERY bad hearing. I don't mean to be a jerk either - but if you can't tell the difference between the Essence and on-board, your hearing may actually be very poor D:

post #23 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arnotts View Post





What? Why would people be on Head-Fi if they're not fussed about audio? :s

 

And this thread is just filled with terrible information >_>

 

If you can't notice the difference between on-board sound and a Xonar Essence, there's either something wrong with your gear (either defects or your headphones/speakers are very low end), you haven't configured everything correctly, or you have VERY bad hearing. I don't mean to be a jerk either - but if you can't tell the difference between the Essence and on-board, your hearing may actually be very poor D:


+1

 

post #24 of 38

Well I too admit that between my realtek and my x-fi titanium > ld mk3 into my dt880/600 there is (almost?) no difference. I've switched many times, listening to songs and listening again to make sure but I really don't hear anything different. Sometimes I think I do but when I listen a few times more I really doubt it, if there is a difference it's very small. My hearing was checked just a few weeks back and for my age they're very good so that's ruled out as a factor...

 

 

post #25 of 38

Some people just can't notice a significant audible difference, it's just how some people are, nothing wrong with them, which actually might be very good for them biggrin.gif

 

I personally clearly notice differences from any onboard audio chip and dedicated DACs, a clearer and wider sound, one that doesn't faulter once more complex audio is processed, etc. But that's me.

post #26 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arnotts View Post



What? Why would people be on Head-Fi if they're not fussed about audio? :s

 

And this thread is just filled with terrible information >_>

 

If you can't notice the difference between on-board sound and a Xonar Essence, there's either something wrong with your gear (either defects or your headphones/speakers are very low end), you haven't configured everything correctly, or you have VERY bad hearing. I don't mean to be a jerk either - but if you can't tell the difference between the Essence and on-board, your hearing may actually be very poor D:

That's a very accurate picture of this thread at the moment like seriously, DX11 is for video not audio...
 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roller View Post

Some people just can't notice a significant audible difference, it's just how some people are, nothing wrong with them, which actually might be very good for them biggrin.gif

 

pft... they are missing out on the good stuff and they should actually compare the two themselves before saying stuff T_T
 

 

post #27 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roller View Post

Some people just can't notice a significant audible difference, it's just how some people are, nothing wrong with them, which actually might be very good for them biggrin.gif

 

I personally clearly notice differences from any onboard audio chip and dedicated DACs, a clearer and wider sound, one that doesn't faulter once more complex audio is processed, etc. But that's me.



The myth of the "golden ears". People with healthy hearing have the same ability to discern sound (only the higher frequencies wane with age). If there's something wrong with the signal, most everyone will be able to tell. The trick is that it takes training to know exactly what's wrong (off pitch, loose bass, etc.).

 

As for onboard augio, I've had bad experiences with poorly implemented codecs. Still it's possible to get good sound out of Realtek, there are even discrete audio cards that use them.

 

One fascinating phenomenon in human perception is expectation bias. I expected differences with a balanced rig, but after repeated tests, some blind, there was no difference to be heard.

post #28 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by anetode View Post



The myth of the "golden ears". People with healthy hearing have the same ability to discern sound (only the higher frequencies wane with age). If there's something wrong with the signal, most everyone will be able to tell. The trick is that it takes training to know exactly what's wrong (off pitch, loose bass, etc.).

 

As for onboard augio, I've had bad experiences with poorly implemented codecs. Still it's possible to get good sound out of Realtek, there are even discrete audio cards that use them.

 

One fascinating phenomenon in human perception is expectation bias. I expected differences with a balanced rig, but after repeated tests, some blind, there was no difference to be heard.



It must feel good to defend onboard audio chips, otherwise you wouldn't be doing it, other than for trolling. Even the discreet audio (pseudo) cards you mention have very similar measurable performance to the measly onboard audio chips, even if I don't like to bring RMAA to the table due to some controversy around it.

 

I'm sure what you actually meant was that it's possible to get less dirt cheap sound from onboard audio, but that's alright.

 

Unfortunately, we will agree to disagree, and that's that.

 

EDIT: But I'll agree with you on the user being required to train his ears, as unlike image, the differences aren't so obvious, yet they're all there, whether you want to believe it or not.


Edited by Roller - 6/23/11 at 1:37am
post #29 of 38

I guess we should kidnap at least ten to fifteen percent of head-fi members, lock them up in a room and do a blind test on all of them. Anyway, I'm saving up for a good dac and I'm going to look around to actually test a few before I buy one to see if I really hear a clear difference that's worth the upgrade. But really it's not that I don't hear a difference between say my portable sources the nokia xm5800, optimus 2x and the realtek and X-fi on the other, because I do, most notably in the bass that's less clear/stable. Pretty sure I also decharged myself before I touched my x fi so it shouldn't be affected and such from invisible static destruction forces.

 

Now I think of it, most of my testing is solely with metal tracks, perhaps I should try and find a difference in classical music, would that be audible more clearly? If yes what's a very good track to test it?

 

 

post #30 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by imdaffy View Post

I guess we should kidnap at least ten to fifteen percent of head-fi members, lock them up in a room and do a blind test on all of them. Anyway, I'm saving up for a good dac and I'm going to look around to actually test a few before I buy one to see if I really hear a clear difference that's worth the upgrade. But really it's not that I don't hear a difference between say my portable sources the nokia xm5800, optimus 2x and the realtek and X-fi on the other, because I do, most notably in the bass that's less clear/stable. Pretty sure I also decharged myself before I touched my x fi so it shouldn't be affected and such from invisible static destruction forces.

 

Now I think of it, most of my testing is solely with metal tracks, perhaps I should try and find a difference in classical music, would that be audible more clearly? If yes what's a very good track to test it?

 

 


 

Honestly, I find that a good way to discern different audio gear is to have a mix of some tracks you love and know best, as you'll be familiar with each and every little detail present (or lacking, if it is the case of some gear).

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Computer Audio
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Computer Audio › ALC889 vs ASUS Xonar Essence STX ( is it worth it to upgrade?)