Quote:
Sorry but I could not stand this comment.
First we should start with some basic anti-creative literature |
Yes, we all know that the Audigy 1 didn't live up to its claims. But its not like other companies haven't done this either. Look at the Revolution and its DVD-Audio support. Or Intel and the (lack of) Pentium 3/4 performance when the processors were first released. Or nvidia and ATi's "budget" videocards. Or Apple's G4 performance claims. Or the first Athlon64s and how it was basically an excuse for AMD to sell a processor at the same price Intel did. Or Linux supposedly being a viable alternative to Windows.
Everyone, and every company eventually misleads consumers at one point. Then theres a backlash, and the product that was SUPPOSED to be released eventually is. Eventually the Athlon 64s will be worth the money, eventually The P3/4 become fast, etc.
Quote:
| OK. Now I HATE it that every Creative-defender across the net thinks that the CPU usage is a selling point anymore. |
CPU usage IS a selling point. Listening to music in Winamp on an Audigy/Live puts the CPU usage at a flat 0%. I can even fire up Windows Media Player 10 and start a WMA9.1 encoded file and the CPU usage STAYS at 1%. Why should I sacrifice CPU time and shorten the life of my CPU by making it work when it doesn't have to?
And if one wants to game.. well, there are literally hundreds of benchmark results that prove that the Audigy 2 ZS is so far ahead in gaming performance that other cards shouldn't even be a consideration.
Quote:
Last time I checked, the current bottleneck in gaming performance was not the CPU. In the age of Athlon 64/FX processors we are worried about a maximum of 10fps loss?
And at higher resolution (maybe some AA/AF as well) when the CPU plays nearly NO PART AT ALL, its absolutely zero difference between CPU audio and hardware assisted.
You will see 0fps improvement. Unless you are on a Pentium2 still.
It should go without saying all serious gamers use good processors and high resolution graphics (1280x1024 or 1600x1200), which is the point where you will see very little FPS increase. It can vary depending on the game engine, but as you increase resolution the GPU becomes the bottleneck, not the 'strenuous sound processing'.. /sarcasm
And in cases where the CPU IS the limiting factor (some modern games and very low resolution; 640x480,800x600), you get beyond 100+FPS anyway.
Whether you get 110 with an Audigy or 100 with a M-Audio makes no difference. |
Its not so much about high frame-rate as it is CONSISTANCY. Nothing is more distracting than small hiccups here and there. When I played games, nothing was more annoying than an occasional dropped frame. Sure, frame-rates may be high, but even a single dropped frame is noticable and distracting. Thats far more important than how high it is. If the frame-rate is even 30fps, it doesn't matter. As long as its consistant. A "serious" gamer will want a consistantly SMOOTH experience. Not a varying frame-rate caused by the soundcard eating up CPU cycles. You may only get 10 more frames per second than an M-Audio, but that variation could mean a lot to a "serious gamer".
Quote:
| The bottom line is: if you feel yourself to be a hardcore gamer, and your gaming rig is brought to its knees from your game sound processing.. your rig probably isnt as hardcore as you think it is. |
If you're a "hardcore gamer" then you need to get out of the house and live life.
Quote:
| In fact, you will benefit more in going to a better QUALITY sound card. |
You'll benefit from a card that provides a consistantly smooth experience. Not from a placebo induced "it must be better because they said so" card.
Gaming stresses every component in your system. Anyone who claims to be "hardcore" or "serious" knows this, and they need top performance. They also need to put down the mouse and go outside and get some fresh air.
Quote:
Now A3D, THAT was a great positional audio algorithm.
Positioning these days is entirely done by DirectSound3D. |
Now that statement proves that you're just another anti-Creative fanboy. Every anti-Creative fanboy makes reference to A3D. Sure it was okay. But it's been dead and gone for what? 6 years now? Its time to let it go and stop making reference to it. It died before EAX2.0 came out. It was dead before there was even a revision to the Live! line of cards. Just let it go.
Quote:
| To sum it all up: graphic acceleration is still THE bottleneck, CPUs are not, audio acceleration is not. |
A system has to be well balanced for gaming, or any demanding application. The CPU and GPU are important in poorly optimized games, like Doom 3. So in that case, a good soundcard is important. Also, games like Alice, Grand Theft Auto 3/VC use the "Miles Sound System" which is heavily CPU dependent and benefits greatly from a good soundcard.
Everything you've said, combined with the Aureal3D comment just leads one to believe that you're another anti-Creative fanboy that likes to do the trendy thing and bash a company. Its pretty sad when someone bashes a COMPANY.
Quote:
| Why would I have lost the argument? The rest of the head-fiers here don't even use a Creative for music. Of course, that doesn't get through your thick skull I guess. |
Do you read this forum at all? Or have you only read this thread? Since registered just so you could reply in this thread, and make your other fanboyish thread. Plenty of people here use their Audigy 2 for music, and I even saw one or two that use an Audigy 2 NX. Use the "Search" button. Its your friend.
Quote:
| Buggy drivers? You're talking about Creative, known to have damn buggy, bloated drivers. |
Bloated? Never had a problem with bloat. They do install a lot of software. But anyone who knows how to click "Custom" knows that you can install only what you want and need. I've been using Creative as far back as the Sound Blaster 16 (which lasted for many many years). Then I switched to an ESS based Aureal3D card. I forget the name. Then I tried a MUSE, then a Fortissimo 2, then the Live. I've also played around with all of the Audigy cards and the USB Live! 24-bit. I've never had a problem with their drivers. Not a single one. You can also use the kX drivers.
Quote:
| I invite everyone here to see 3dss Audigy forums. |
Funny you should mention the 3dss forums. Remember how you said that the Audigy 4 Pro review would point out all of the flaws in the Audigy line?
Quote:
| This card isn't like the comparison with the A2 vs the Revo 7.1, where the A2 had some better vocals on some songs, but the Revo is overall better, tho each has some flaws that some prefer to others. The A4 just brute forced outclassed it, period. It's like comparing the Revo to the 1820M. |
http://www.3dss-forums.com/cgi-bin/w...5&o=14&fpart=8
Seems like she liked it. She also points out that the Revo AND Audigy 2 have their flaws, and some people prefer one cards flaws to another. hmm.... interesting, isn't it?
Quote:
| In fact, Victoria concludes that the Audigy 4 is the card that finally delivers on the promise and hype of prior Audigy editions and in the process becomes the first sound card to earn the 3DsoundSurge Gold Medal of Excellence! |
http://www.3dss.com/#1105082951
http://www.3dsoundsurge.com/reviews/...udigy4pro.html
Even though she makes obvious comments to please the anti-Creative fanboys.. for example, the comment about the Santa Cruz being better than the Audigy (please, that card was only an equal to the Live!), she makes up for it and proves that Creative DOES make good products.
Quote:
| Now enter the Audigy 4 Pro. The user can now have superb, lossless multichannel audio on their home theatre rigs. Finally, we have a card that can produce the analog quality that is offered by external decoding these users have grown accustomed, matched with the defacto gaming support that Creative has come to be known for. More objective details on the audio quality later on in the review. |
What? What happened to "pointing out all of the bad things in the Audigy?"
Quote:
| When I first connected the Audigy 4 to my receiver, and played my music from Foobar2000, I was prepared for the worst. However, when I started listening, my first thought was that I was still playing music that was converted to analog on the Pioneer via SPDIF, and checked all my settings. I then learned that I had indeed had it all setup correctly, and that the audio was being produced from the Audigy 4 analog outputs. What a pleasant surprise, needless to say. The audio was clear, clean, instruments were distinct, and the background was not meshed into the foreground, and vice versa. |
Ahem. I still don't see where she is point out the flaws in the Audigy line.
Quote:
| In summary, the cards competes very well with my Pioneer, and it AK4586 DAC. The Revolution 7.1 was outclassed, pure and simple. The Audigy 4 had all the tonal strengths of the Revolution 7.1, and then some. The performance was literally like listening to a hi-grade component player, which was once only achievable by using professional studio cards. It's about time the Audigy lived up to its marketing name. |
Such a BAD line of cards.
Quote:
Music lovers will be able to have the quality they desire for whatever rigs they use, be it multimedia systems, HT systems, or quality headphones and dedicated headphone amplifiers.
All in all a package of features, price and performance that add up to the very first sound card to earn the 3DSoundSurge Surge of Approval and Gold Medal of Excellence! |
I thought that review was supposed to say how bad the Audigys were? Hmm. I guess that just goes to show that anti-fanboys of anything (cars, computers, music) will fabricate any lie to backup their argument.
Quote:
| You can't even get the A2/A2ZS to playback 24bit properly without jumping through many configuration hoops either. And you think the AV-710 configuration is hard? |
Configuration hoops? uh... You're talkin about something that was written about the Audigy 2 (not ZS) 2 years ago. You're proving yourself to be the ultimate anti-Creative fanboy by looking up old "facts" that are no longer true and completely outdated. Thats like looking back to a 1950s era Corvette and saying "all Corvettes are weak". Get with the times.
Quote:
| I present to all, the Creative version of it. |
Typical anti-Creative fanboy that has lost all credibility in this debate.
Quote:
But what kind of speaker/phone equipment do you need to make waste of an Audigy? I mean, in the next couple of years i might be buying a 300-400 buck speaker system from logitech or something, will an emu 0404 sound better than an audigy2 zs on that one? And i mean definitely sound better..
If it will, i think i'll try to find an emu0404 here (because they are very rare where i live). |
You want 5.1 sound, right? Then the Audigy is your only option between the two. Espicially if you plan on playing games or watching movies at all. The EMU 0404 is designed for music creation. The Audigy 2 ZS is designed for 5.1 sound in games, movies, etc. The ZS is basically designed to do everything a receiver does.
Quote:
| i have tried both the audigy 2 zs and the 1212m. I PREFER the audigy 2 zs sound. Does that make my ears FLAWED? |
According to SoundStorm, you will be the root of all evil and the cause of all bad things in this world.
