Just interested.
If you vote sound card please post what card it is / model / what you use it for / if you're happy with it etc.
Full Version: Sound poll
SOUNDCARD DAWG.
Onboard sound just doesn't cut it for me. USB sound card I got with my Icemat Siberias bundled together. Bought it because it was only 10$ more than the headphones alone, and all I had was onboard sound, so I thought I might as well.
I've had it for about 2 years now and I still <3 it.
Onboard sound just doesn't cut it for me. USB sound card I got with my Icemat Siberias bundled together. Bought it because it was only 10$ more than the headphones alone, and all I had was onboard sound, so I thought I might as well.
I've had it for about 2 years now and I still <3 it.
Creative Audigy 2ZS
I use it because most onboard sound systems are absoloute pants, and its worked well for the past 4 years or so ive had it. Used it mostly for games + music.
I use it because most onboard sound systems are absoloute pants, and its worked well for the past 4 years or so ive had it. Used it mostly for games + music.
Whoops. Redid the poll to accommodate USBfags seeming they're not really in the same category as full sound cards.
<3
On board for me 
. realtek alc850 codec .IT SUCKS!
I'm using standard 2 channel monitor speaker ,would it make a big difference if I bought a sound card ,or would I have to get one of those 5.1 speakers to feel the difference?
. realtek alc850 codec .IT SUCKS!I'm using standard 2 channel monitor speaker ,would it make a big difference if I bought a sound card ,or would I have to get one of those 5.1 speakers to feel the difference?
No, it's only worth it if you have decent speakers (not necessarily 5.1 though)/headphones. Or, if you're REALLY desperate for a few extra FPS.
I'm using some £10 speakers and a £2.49 headset at the moment, so no point in getting myself a soundcard.
My 5.1 headset broke
My 5.1 headset broke
I can't remember what soundcard it is, but it came with my Mobo. Not that it matters all to much, it is nice because it gives me plenty of outputs.
Wolf and I are USBfags
I might want to invest in a USB card because right now my speaker setup is really goofy.
Sound card
Sound Cards.
X-Fi Xtreme Gamer; used it for all sound when I was properly using it, it's in my spare pc at the moment so not doing anything much but overall I'm pretty pleased with it.
At the moment I have an ASUS Xonar D2X that I also use for anything sound related at the moment, has some good features like the EAX emulation and accepts SPDIF which is a bonus for me, also supports several types of decoding and true 96KHz 24bit audio output, a bit more than the X-Fi but overall the sound quality is just so much better on it.
Though my experience with on-board has generally been a good one, had a few problems with noise and such but the sound quality was pretty good, though consider that this is on-board from the last few years which is considerably better than old on-board. I find that a lot of hatred towards it comes from nothing more than the stigma against it.
X-Fi Xtreme Gamer; used it for all sound when I was properly using it, it's in my spare pc at the moment so not doing anything much but overall I'm pretty pleased with it.
At the moment I have an ASUS Xonar D2X that I also use for anything sound related at the moment, has some good features like the EAX emulation and accepts SPDIF which is a bonus for me, also supports several types of decoding and true 96KHz 24bit audio output, a bit more than the X-Fi but overall the sound quality is just so much better on it.
Though my experience with on-board has generally been a good one, had a few problems with noise and such but the sound quality was pretty good, though consider that this is on-board from the last few years which is considerably better than old on-board. I find that a lot of hatred towards it comes from nothing more than the stigma against it.
It's mainly the lack of EAX and hardware acceleration. Same issues as with that card you mentioned, though that actually suffers worse than onboard in some cases.
How so?
Onboard generally has no EAX, the Xonar EAX implementation is essentially just an emulation with a maximum of 32 simultaneous voices at EAX2, and the X-Fis EAX implementation is hardware-accelerated 128 simultaneous voices with full EAX5.
Because the Xonar does attempt to process EAX (unlike onboard, which ignores it entirely) but doesn't have the actual acceleration capabilities, more often than not when attempting EAX in games ~20% CPU usage gets drafted in to help it out.
Because the Xonar does attempt to process EAX (unlike onboard, which ignores it entirely) but doesn't have the actual acceleration capabilities, more often than not when attempting EAX in games ~20% CPU usage gets drafted in to help it out.
The Xonar does EAX 5 emulation now and has done for a while. I made a post before about it and how the CPU usage was negligible, and with a Core 2 didn't make much difference.
It doesn't do EAX5, it's as simple as that, only Creative chips can process EAX properly. It can however emulate EAX 1-2. But that's it, everything above that as far as I'm concerned isn't EAX, as all it does is trick programs into believing it's an EAX 3-4-5 card and then downtranslates the signals into its own bastardised Christ knows what format that has similar audio characteristics to the 9-year-old emulated EAX2, which obviously features none of the proper advanced EAX 3-4-5 effects/features.
If you don't see a difference in CPU utilisation it's because you're on Vista with it's mauled sound system where even true EAX cards have to run emulations, producing similarly poor results. But even on XP where those of us who care about sound still remain, not everyone has the luxury of multiple cores, nor is everyone so willing to turn a blind eye to the possible FPS gains of using a good gaming-optimised sound setup.
Not saying it's a bad card, it's definitely ontop of the X-Fi outside of games, but unfortunately it's not in them.
If you don't see a difference in CPU utilisation it's because you're on Vista with it's mauled sound system where even true EAX cards have to run emulations, producing similarly poor results. But even on XP where those of us who care about sound still remain, not everyone has the luxury of multiple cores, nor is everyone so willing to turn a blind eye to the possible FPS gains of using a good gaming-optimised sound setup.
Not saying it's a bad card, it's definitely ontop of the X-Fi outside of games, but unfortunately it's not in them.
*He blinks a few times at the above posts before moving on*
Right so anyway...
My setup sucks tbh. I like using headphones when playing, actually I have to use headphone ^^
But I plug them into the headphone socket at the front, which leads directly to the onboard. But I fitted a new aoundcard which goes to ms speakers doe music etc. I want my headphones to go to the cars really :/ So I'm both
Right so anyway...
My setup sucks tbh. I like using headphones when playing, actually I have to use headphone ^^
But I plug them into the headphone socket at the front, which leads directly to the onboard. But I fitted a new aoundcard which goes to ms speakers doe music etc. I want my headphones to go to the cars really :/ So I'm both
What a long post for a point I wasn't even arguing. Just said it was a decent card that I thought was a great purchase, it hardly uses any CPU to be honest and the EAX is pretty much identical in sound to what it should be, It's not like EAX suddenly turns crap into gold. I know it uses emulation; which I also explained before the forum had a fit, I don't want to argue about it.
It's not an argument, I'm correcting you.
- It doesn't sound a thing like it's meant to. Like I said, it's the equivalent of the 9-year old EAX2.
- 15% CPU usage, and that's on a Core2, is a lot.
- It doesn't sound a thing like it's meant to. Like I said, it's the equivalent of the 9-year old EAX2.
- 15% CPU usage, and that's on a Core2, is a lot.
QUOTE (Elanzer @ Aug 26 2008, 01:43 AM) 
It's not an argument, I'm correcting you.
No you're correcting things that no one argued or mentioned, I don't care for it and neither do most people.
QUOTE (Elanzer @ Aug 26 2008, 01:43 AM)
- It doesn't sound a thing like it's meant to. Like I said, it's the equivalent of the 9-year old EAX2.
Go actually listen to it before spouting your uninformed bullshit.
-
QUOTE (Elanzer @ Aug 26 2008, 01:43 AM)
15% CPU usage, and that's on a Core2, is a lot.
Doesn't happen in most cases, oh the humanity.
fuckin tech geeks, i have no idea what all that shit means, so outta touch with all the technological advances in pc hardware.
QUOTE (Rifleman @ Aug 26 2008, 01:50 AM)
No you're correcting things that no one argued or mentioned
Ah, so you never said to the Xonar is capable of EAX5? Or that its emulated fake sounds like it? I beg to differ.
QUOTE (Rifleman @ Aug 26 2008, 01:50 AM)
Go actually listen to it before spouting your uninformed bullshit.
There's no need to be namecalling, but if you really want to take it that low then I have to say the only person who's uninformed here is you, or you wouldn't be spouting your uninformed bullshit such as saying a card with no full EAX support, supports full EAX. I don't need to listen to it to say that it doesn't sound like proper EAX any more than you need to go and play Crysis on a Geforce2 to tell me it can't produce the DX10 visuals, let alone at a nice framerate. It's in the specifications, it's in my experience, and it's obvious.
QUOTE (Rifleman @ Aug 26 2008, 01:50 AM)
Doesn't happen in most cases, oh the humanity.
If you try and emulate an X-Fi with it, it will, and exactly that's the point - If you buy a sound card for gaming it should (among other things) take the ease off the CPU, not increase it, and certainly not increase it with the intention of assisting knock-off audio processing.
QUOTE (Elanzer @ Aug 26 2008, 02:20 AM)
Ah, so you never said to the Xonar is capable of EAX5? Or that its emulated fake sounds like it? I beg to differ.
I said it used emulation in my very first post.
QUOTE (Elanzer @ Aug 26 2008, 02:20 AM)
If you try and emulate an X-Fi with it, it will, and exactly that's the point - If you buy a sound card for gaming it should (among other things) take the ease off the CPU, not increase it, and certainly not increase it with the intention of assisting knock-off audio processing.
Well I don't play many games that use or are even necessarily sound better with EAX so it wasn't a problem for me, the option is there if I do need it however and I could always install the X-Fi again if I wanted but I can't be bothered with the problems that I got with it at this point. I don't want to start a debate about which card is better or how the EAX sounds really, I own and have used both so I don't have much reason to. You just can't go saying it sounds nothing like it when you haven't listenedd, it may not be identical but it does sound similar.
Ok, well let's settle this.
- Guy who's new to sound cards says he can barely tell the difference between EAX5 and emulated EAX5 based on EAX2.
- Guy who's been using EAX for over 10 years says he can.
Both are content with their opinions.
/thread.
- Guy who's new to sound cards says he can barely tell the difference between EAX5 and emulated EAX5 based on EAX2.
- Guy who's been using EAX for over 10 years says he can.
Both are content with their opinions.
/thread.
QUOTE (Elanzer @ Aug 26 2008, 11:58 AM)
Ok, well let's settle this.
- Guy who's new to sound cards says he can barely tell the difference between EAX5 and emulated EAX5 based on EAX2.
- Guy who's been using EAX for over 10 years says he can.
Both are content with their opinions.
/thread.
It would have been ended if you had said facts - Guy who's new to sound cards says he can barely tell the difference between EAX5 and emulated EAX5 based on EAX2.
- Guy who's been using EAX for over 10 years says he can.
Both are content with their opinions.
/thread.
It's not based on EAX 2 at all that just happened to be the version included for EAX when the card shipped and this is software, and not just me but plenty of other people have said the difference isn't very big and they're not new to sound cards as you say.
You've never even heard this EAX you're saying you can hear this massive difference in so your opinion on how it sounds isn't very credible.
Now we are both content in our opinions but you can't say things as fact when you didn't even know until yesterday about it being capable of EAX 5 emulation and not even knowing how it works or even listened to it.
QUOTE
We passed Creative's response over to Asus, which responded in detail explaining how the Xonar deals with DirectSound 3D audio and EAX. Both are handled by a new version 2.0 of Asus' DirectSound 3D Game Extensions (DS3D GX) primed to support 128 voices with enhanced reverb effects for "most" DirectSound 3D games, including those that take advantage of EAX 5.0. DS3D GX works by intercepting DirectSound 3D and EAX calls generated by games and redirecting them to Asus' own audio processing engine, which then attempts to mimic the intended effects.
/thread.
I have stated facts, you just clearly don't want to hear them.
- It is based on EAX2 because that's the maximum EAX level it can accurately reproduce and it uses that chip as a base to attempt other emulations.
- I don't care what your weasel-worded 'plenty of other people' claim. I know what is fact, and what is fact I believe.
- I've already told you if you read my posts I don't need to hear it, I can see it lacks key vital EAX functions and therefore CANNOT reproduce EAX. I no more have to listen to it to say it doesn't sound like proper EAX than I need to smell my own shit to tell you it doesn't smell of roses.
Now clearly as usual you're not going to listen to anything I say, so I'm just going to go ahead and leave this here for you to read.
Now, a friendly warning, you better watch it, you're starting to really test my patience. I've made a fair attempt to end this discussion and you refused it. This is my second attempt, don't do it again.
- It is based on EAX2 because that's the maximum EAX level it can accurately reproduce and it uses that chip as a base to attempt other emulations.
- I don't care what your weasel-worded 'plenty of other people' claim. I know what is fact, and what is fact I believe.
- I've already told you if you read my posts I don't need to hear it, I can see it lacks key vital EAX functions and therefore CANNOT reproduce EAX. I no more have to listen to it to say it doesn't sound like proper EAX than I need to smell my own shit to tell you it doesn't smell of roses.
Now clearly as usual you're not going to listen to anything I say, so I'm just going to go ahead and leave this here for you to read.
QUOTE
Given the exclusive status of higher EAX versions, we were surprised to see Asus' recently announced Xonar DX sound card claim to support "EAX 5.0 sound effects." That card uses a version of the Oxygen HD audio chip made by C-Media, so it definitely doesn't have a Creative audio processor onboard. We weren't surprised, then, when Creative VP of Corporate Communications Phil O'Shaughnessy contacted us disputing Asus' claims. According to O'Shaughnessy, the Xonars do not support EAX versions 5, 4, or even 3. The cards, he says, are "falsely reporting EAX 5 capabilities" and failing to deliver a "genuine EAX Advanced HD experience." Touché.
We passed Creative's response over to Asus, which responded in detail explaining how the Xonar deals with DirectSound 3D audio and EAX. Both are handled by a new version 2.0 of Asus' DirectSound 3D Game Extensions (DS3D GX) primed to support 128 voices with enhanced reverb effects for "most" DirectSound 3D games, including those that take advantage of EAX 5.0. DS3D GX works by intercepting DirectSound 3D and EAX calls generated by games and redirecting them to Asus' own audio processing engine, which then attempts to mimic the intended effects.
With the Xonar D2X, Asus has done an end run to get a level of advanced EAX support in the card—but it’s not without controversy. The D2X instructs games that it has EAX 5, and the card’s drivers then shunt the EAX calls into its own effects engine. The results are far from perfect. Using EAX compliance tools, we found that the drivers didn’t support many EAX functions, such as reverb and filtering. Asus even admits to this.
So what would we buy? It depends. The advanced EAX in the Xonar is flawed, but it sorta works. If you want a full EAX 5 card, you have to go X-Fi.
We passed Creative's response over to Asus, which responded in detail explaining how the Xonar deals with DirectSound 3D audio and EAX. Both are handled by a new version 2.0 of Asus' DirectSound 3D Game Extensions (DS3D GX) primed to support 128 voices with enhanced reverb effects for "most" DirectSound 3D games, including those that take advantage of EAX 5.0. DS3D GX works by intercepting DirectSound 3D and EAX calls generated by games and redirecting them to Asus' own audio processing engine, which then attempts to mimic the intended effects.
With the Xonar D2X, Asus has done an end run to get a level of advanced EAX support in the card—but it’s not without controversy. The D2X instructs games that it has EAX 5, and the card’s drivers then shunt the EAX calls into its own effects engine. The results are far from perfect. Using EAX compliance tools, we found that the drivers didn’t support many EAX functions, such as reverb and filtering. Asus even admits to this.
So what would we buy? It depends. The advanced EAX in the Xonar is flawed, but it sorta works. If you want a full EAX 5 card, you have to go X-Fi.
Now, a friendly warning, you better watch it, you're starting to really test my patience. I've made a fair attempt to end this discussion and you refused it. This is my second attempt, don't do it again.
QUOTE (Elanzer @ Aug 26 2008, 12:34 PM)
I have stated facts.
Not all facts though.
QUOTE (Elanzer @ Aug 26 2008, 12:34 PM)
- It is based on EAX2 because that's the maximum EAX level it can accurately reproduce and it uses that chip as a base to attempt other emulations.
No, it's entirely in software and takes it straight from the game to an unrelated audio chip.
QUOTE (Elanzer @ Aug 26 2008, 12:34 PM)
- I don't care what your weasel-worded 'plenty of other people' claim. I know what is fact, and what is fact I believe.
Obviously you don't, I know you didn't understand this yesterday but anything you own is crap compared to what it should be, I've never heard or seen this but I know it's fact somehow.
QUOTE (Elanzer @ Aug 26 2008, 12:34 PM)
- I've already told you if you read my posts I don't need to hear it, I can see it lacks key vital EAX functions and therefore CANNOT reproduce EAX. I no more have to listen to it to say it doesn't sound like proper EAX than I need to smell my own shit to tell you it doesn't smell of roses.
Apples and oranges, it's more like Valve SM2 HDR and SM3 based HDR in other games, now I'm sure anyone could tell you that the SM2 HDR isn't the same as the SM3 HDR, but you would still need to see both before commenting on how much like the SM3 HDR the SM2 HDR looks. In both of these cases no-one said it would be the same but they did say it does a good job and is comparable.
QUOTE (Elanzer @ Aug 26 2008, 12:34 PM)
Now, a friendly warning, you better watch it, you're starting to really test my patience. I've made a fair attempt to end this discussion and you refused it. This is my second attempt, don't do it again.
Well really what you want me to do is accept what you say and not comment on it, this would work except for the fact that a lot of what you're saying is subjective, false or just unknowable by you, I know how you like to abuse your power when people don't agree with you, I don't exactly need threatening; at the moment this is a discussion, if and when I start belittling you then go ahead and tell me, but at least stop doing it to me first.
I'm happy to end the discussion but when it can be ended, I couldn't just start a debate with you on whether one car was better than another and then end it and expect no further responses by saying something untrue about the other car to make it seem like you do not know what you're talking about; you'd certainly respond and correct my mistakes so why would it be different the other way around?
QUOTE (Rifleman @ Aug 26 2008, 12:44 PM)
Not all facts though.
It cannot reproduce proper EAX5, only a half-arsed emulation. Only fact that needs to be said, prove it wrong if it's not a fact.QUOTE (Rifleman @ Aug 26 2008, 12:44 PM)
No, it's entirely in software and takes it straight from the game to an unrelated audio chip.
Well done, you totally missed the point. Again.QUOTE (Rifleman @ Aug 26 2008, 12:44 PM)
Obviously you don't, I know you didn't understand this yesterday but anything you own is crap compared to what it should be, I've never heard or seen this but I know it's fact somehow.
I understood it, and it's nothing more than a lame attempt to try and invalidate my point. It's a shameful, childish, "you've never heard it so you can't say that for sure". See the top of this post, prove it wrong.QUOTE (Rifleman @ Aug 26 2008, 12:44 PM)
I don't know what you eat but given the right stuff it could smell like roses, you do actually need to listen to it, shit doesn't have software to change its smell does it now?
Shit cannot smell like roses no matter what you eat, and similarly the Xonar will never get an update to reproduce EAX. Why? Mainly because it would be illegal, and a massive drain on system resources for a comparatively minimal gain.QUOTE (Rifleman @ Aug 26 2008, 12:44 PM)
Well really what you want me to do is accept what you say and not comment on it, this would work except for the fact that a lot of what you're saying is subjective, false or just unknowable by you, I know how you like to abuse your power when people don't agree with you, I don't exactly need threatening; at the moment this is a discussion, if and when I start belittling you then go ahead and tell me, but at least stop doing it to me first.
This is no longer a discussion, this is Rifleman trying to defend his futile point. I left it quite clearly at we can both have our different opinions, but you rejected it, so as far as I'm concerned you are now just a nuisance. You don't have to accept what I say, you just have to shut the fuck up and stop making a disturbance on my forum, because the longer this goes on the worse it's going to get.
QUOTE (Elanzer @ Aug 26 2008, 01:10 PM)
It cannot reproduce proper EAX5, only a half-arsed emulation. Only fact that needs to be said, prove it wrong if it's not a fact.
Yes it's emulation, which I have never disputed so why are you arguing?
QUOTE (Elanzer @ Aug 26 2008, 01:10 PM)
Well done, you totally missed the point. Again.
No I didn't.
QUOTE (Elanzer @ Aug 26 2008, 01:10 PM)
I understood it, and it's nothing more than a lame attempt to try and invalidate my point. It's a shameful, childish, "you've never heard it so you can't say that for sure". See the top of this post, prove it wrong.
It's the exact same thing you did so that makes you shameful and childish, I don't exactly need to prove anything.
QUOTE (Elanzer @ Aug 26 2008, 01:10 PM)
Shit cannot smell like roses no matter what you eat, and similarly the Xonar will never get an update to reproduce EAX. Why? Mainly because it would be illegal, and a massive drain on system resources for a comparatively minimal gain.
Never disputed it's emulation, I know it's not perfect and I said this from the very start.
QUOTE (Elanzer @ Aug 26 2008, 01:10 PM)
This is no longer a discussion, this is Rifleman trying to defend his futile point. I left it quite clearly at we can both have our different opinions, but you rejected it, so as far as I'm concerned you are now just a nuisance. You don't have to accept what I say, you just have to shut the fuck up and stop making a disturbance on my forum, because the longer this goes on the worse it's going to get.
I'm not defending any points other than you can't say it sounds nothing like it without having heard it, you were the one to start a dispute by attacking my card from the very first post after mine. I accepted we have different opinions what I didn't accept was calling things what they aren't.
You don't have to accept what I say either, doesn't need you need to get angry and negative about it though. Healthy discussion is always good but that'll never happen when one side refuses to discuss or attempts to end it on a provocative statement.
So I'll not be responding to your response on this post, assuming you do respond of course because believe it or not I don't like arguing; can do that all I want in real life and I just can't be bothered on the internet.
So yes I'll accept your opinion as long as you accept mine and don't try and impose yours on me or others, can we just let it die?
Just found an old USB soundcard I bought to get 5.1 on my laptop, not sure if I ever got it to work though and it's quite scratched at the moment, also has SPDIF in and out but I never got that to function either. The sound quality is OK enough for portable audio as well but it's a little big really.
QUOTE (Rifleman @ Aug 26 2008, 01:34 PM)
Yes it's emulation, which I have never disputed so why are you arguing?
We are arguing because you make out it's identical, or even comparable, to the real thing.QUOTE (Rifleman @ Aug 26 2008, 01:34 PM)
I know it's not perfect and I said this from the very start.
Mmm. Sure. Following quote begs to differ:QUOTE (Rifleman @ Aug 26 2008, 01:28 AM)
the EAX is pretty much identical in sound to what it should be
QUOTE (Rifleman @ Aug 26 2008, 01:34 PM)
It's the exact same thing you did so that makes you shameful and childish
If that's what you interpret me simply explaining/correcting you as... I don't know what to say. Stop being so defensive and misinterpreting things I guess.QUOTE (Rifleman @ Aug 26 2008, 01:28 AM)
I'm not defending any points other than you can't say it sounds nothing like it without having heard it
For the (hopefully) final time, I do not need to hear it, and if I did I would come to the same conclusion. I've heard enough sound cards in my time, I've seen the specifications, I've seen the features it lacks, I've seen Asus' own explanation to the process, and I come the conclusion it is not comparable to real EAX. No matter how many times you say "NO BUT U HAVNT HEARD IT" over and over it's not going to change the raw facts. One person's testimony is not enough for me to start doubting official findings.QUOTE (Rifleman @ Aug 26 2008, 01:28 AM)
you were the one to start a dispute by attacking my card from the very first post after mine.
[...]
doesn't need you need to get angry and negative about it
Another misinterpretation I think. Explaining the stigma against onboard and non-EAX cards after which you asked me to continue and I complimented the card for its merits is not an 'attack'. [...]
doesn't need you need to get angry and negative about it
And I believe you were the first person to make it hostile by accusing me of "spewing uninformed bullshit", actually.
QUOTE (Rifleman @ Aug 26 2008, 01:28 AM)
So I'll not be responding to your response on this post
Good. It would be a great relief if you didn't.
I can't agree that it sounds similar enough to be considered comparable, you think I'm wrong to have come to that conclusion.
There's nothing more to be said.
Man.....don't you two have anything better to do ? Get a life or something . On another note ,I saw a creative 5.1 sound system yesterday which costs 55 $ , do you think it is good , as I think the price is a bit low ? Also I want to add a good yet a bit cheap card to the mix , something to support EAX fully .what price do you think something like that might be ?
If our discussion was such a bother to you don't bring it up again after it'd been over for almost a week.
To answer the question, £50 give or take, unless you want something older.
To answer the question, £50 give or take, unless you want something older.
EAX, take your pick, pretty much any card will do that. For 5 though you'll need to get an X-Fi Xtreme Music or Gamer; the Xtreme Audio is pants and only supports 2. It's your only real option if you want 100% true EAX.
Also at that price you'd be better off getting a better 2.0 system, 5.1 for $55 probably isn't worth your time.
Also at that price you'd be better off getting a better 2.0 system, 5.1 for $55 probably isn't worth your time.
Your discussion gave me a solid 30 minuts read , so I had to say something sarcastic . Also about the 2 channel system , there was a creative system that costs 22 $ or so . Still low price I think ? Anyway I probably wont be doing any upgrades to my Pc for some time , but I was just curious .thanks
You must be a slow reader, anyway you may as well get a $55 5.1 over a $20 2.0, just a 55$ 2.0\1 would sound better than a $55 5.1 system.
QUOTE (Rifleman @ Aug 31 2008, 11:35 PM)
You must be a slow reader, anyway you may as well get a $55 5.1 over a $20 2.0, just a 55$ 2.0\1 would sound better than a $55 5.1 system.
nah....I was just reading it on my cell phone browser , so reading is a bit harder ,add to that a slow connection that takes long time to open , then yeah it did take about 30 min . Now considering the prices of the systems , in Iraq PC equipments sell for substantialy higher price than their actuall price , take for example my inno3d 9600 GSO 768 mb , I bought it over a month ago for 170 $ , while on the internet the price was less than 120 $ . Having that said , feel free to imagine how much that 5.1 actually costs .
Huh?
Like always it's probably best if you show us what you're thinking of getting and then we give our opinion.
I would if I knew ,I only saw it in a shop front , next time I'll try to see the exact model type ,but right now all I know is that it's creative.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.