X86Dude said:
He (?) said---->
The title of the thread is----> "Has onboard sound gotten any better?"
Blanket enough for you?
I removed the link for clarity and because I also understood what he motherboard he was talking about.
I wouldnt consider the thread title the question unless his post was completely blank, especially when he asked about that motherboard. At any rate, please explain this response:
Had the author of this thread asked for information about a specific product I would have been more then happy to offer a detailed reply"
Really? So you dont consider the MSI board a SPECIFIC product? Did you even bother to read his post, or just the title?
If I say?
Excuse me?
If I say all onboard audio sucks, because it does, does that make it so?
Absofreakinglutly not.
You are offering little more then a subjective opinion and as such you are not even close to creating a foundation from which you can make that type of a statement.
Please show me your opinions are correct and leave the argumentative crap out of your replies. There is no need to turn every reply you post into a flame war because of the way your type them.
My "opinion" as you call it is correct because there is no possible way you have analyzed every onboard sound card that has been produced. If you have, then I admit I'm wrong. Therefore you have no way to judge EVERY soundcard with a blanket statement by saying onboard sound is crap. Saying it depends isnt a blanket statement. I havent heard every onboard soundcard, I cant account for all the variables. It is VAGUE, yes, but it certainly isnt a blanket statement. Unless you can say for sure that there is no possible way that any factor associated with any onboard sound is better than aftermarket then it is a FACT that onboard sound is better in some way. Therefore it does depend, and all onboard sound does not suck, as it beats something on aftermarket. Since he didnt specify, we will never know.
Umm ...... how is this analogy relevant here?
It does nothing but serve as a way for you to try to make a point ... that point is understood. I do not have reading comprehension problems so lets keep the self serving, rhetorical, analogies out of this discussion. OK?
I used it because it illustrates my point. You wouldnt call me out if I said that in response to someone's post saying my response was a blanket statement, now would you? If you want to get philisophical, then perhaps you could say "it depends" is an opinion when talking about something GENERAL. I'll admit I can't "prove" it for sure. I can't believe anyone would literally take it as such though.
Six of one a half a dozen of another.
The Realtek solution is nothing more then an AC97 interface.
To answer your question. No.
Perhaps I should have been more clear on what I called a generic ac97 device, huh?
I do for a number of reasons.
The first is personal experience with the buggy drivers. And the second is the poor sound quality (compared to an Audigy2).
Good reasons. What do you think about it's digital output section? Does it sound bad too?
Feel free to take anything I do not offer proof of as an opinion.
How is one supposed to know if something is indeed a fact or opinion unless you qualify it as such? Simply not showing any proof along with a statement doesnt mean it isnt a fact.
Other then the fact that the Audigy does indeed feature a coaxial SPDIF port on the back plate I have no problem with you offering your opinion as to how or why the onboard audio included in the Dragon was better then the Audigy.
Let me just say that I personally see more value in a product that does not depend on the host system to process audio data.
1. An adaptor isnt required to use the SPDIF port on the Dragon
2. Dragon sound was esentially free since it came with the motherboard (I would have bought it with or without the audio onboard and paid the same price)
3. Optical audio output for more flexibility
4. Does not feature the sampling problems associated with running the Audigy with a 44.1khz output
5. Digital audio inputs (im not sure if the audigy has this though)
6. Software isnt bloated
7. Dont really care about cpu cycles used (its low enough for me). Even a framerate hit of 10 percent in a game would be barely perceptable to me.
Nope.
It still sucks when compared to a sound card that features hardware acceleration of 3D audio.
Isn't the whole point here improving performance?
The Audigy2 doesn't like the higher FSB speeds this person gets when he overclocks his system Vs an integrated solution that relies on the hosts system for processing data?
Catch 22 if I ever saw one..... do I reduce the FSB or switch to a CPU dependent solution that has the same negative effect on performance?
So all onboard sound does not feature 3d acceleration? Audio obviously isnt all about performance. How is it a catch22? You already said all onboard sound sucks. Therefore, the audigy is obviously the winner unless it sucks as well. Remember a blanket statement is all encompassing. There is no way onboard sound can win as per your statement.
I always had it.....
Do you got it now?
lol
Apparantly I dont?
