Is Buying a Sound Card Worth The Money? An Enthusiast's Perspective

[wiyosaya]

People who claim that "MOBO sound is just fine," have more than likely never used a sound card and are just guessing. I have a ASUS Xonar Essence STX installed and whenever any of my computer geek friends visit, they're all amazed at the sound. Of course, you need to match it up with a decent set of speakers and headphone or you'll get nothing out of a sound card. The best Hi-Fi setup advice I got was when an audiophile friend told me, "your system is only as good as the weakest component." You buy a $200 sound card and pair it with $35 speakers, you're going to get $35 sound.

For Franco: Maybe you should move all of these two year old posts somewhere so the most current ones hit the top of the page.

Having used sound cards for a long, long time, Aria, SB 16, Gravis, etc., I agree that a dedicated sound card is the way to go.

However, I am somewhat leery of posts like this. Paying more money for speakers and such does not necessarily equate to better sound. If at all possible, what I recommend doing is listening to speakers/headphones before you buy. As I see it, there is nothing like a side-by-side comparison when buying speakers or headphones if you are looking for the best possible sound for your money. Unfortunately, buying through the internet does not give the best chance of doing a side-by-side comparison these days. Local audio/video shops, or perhaps places like BestBuy may give that choice.

 

[Mugsy]

The reason why "Should you buy a separate sound card?" is such a difficult question is because we are asking the wrong question.

There is not enough difference in sound quality between on-board vs dedicated sound for the typical user, making a question of "sound quality" incredibly subjective and a poor basis for making an $80 gamble.

What we SHOULD be looking for is a sound card that IMPROVES THE PERFORMANCE of our PC's... a FAR less subjective metric.

On-board audio actually uses a *tiny* bit of CPU power that has a tiny impact on performance depending on the bitrate, number of channels, and complexity of sounds produced. Arguably, a sound card could be produced that IMPROVES cpu performance while allowing you to tax the audio capabilities of your PC.

"Sound quality" is too subjective. We need to ask a different question.

 

[alucard1911]

Would be more happy to see a blind test
this way its just like every other subjective test:
if you think it's better it will sound better, if you pay more it has to be better...

 

[gamerk2]

I'm actually a bit surprised you heard a difference in bass when using at ATH-M50s (My current set of cans), considering their bass response is muted compred to other headsets (notably the more bass heavy ATH-AD700s).

Most Xonar cards have several built in EQ settings; the FPS one, for instance, really makes bullet sounds come out, at the expense of everything else. I avoid them, since you really should tailor the EQ per headset, but to each his own.

Computer performance wise, given how the audio stack in Windows was moved entirely to software starting in Vista, the only performance benefit you can get is due to differences in driver overhead, which is going to be minimal. If you get more then a 1FPS difference, I'd be shocked.

Yes, onboard has come a long way, but compared to a dedicated soundcard, it's still lacking in clarity and oomph. HDMI to a dedicated AMP is still the best option all around, but a dedicated card gets you close to that level of audio clarity.

The best options are probably:
ASUS Xonar DG (~$20; a steal for the price)
Creative Soundblaster Z (~$99; it's hard to justify the relatively aged DX anymore. The Soundblaster Z is simply a better card at a similar price)
ASUS Essence STX/Creative Sounblaster ZxR (~$199; only for dedicated headphone users)

 

[wondering]

Long and short, good external sound card have a very good signal to noise ratio,, in and around 110 to 124db. most boards can't even break 95db for those want to under stand better check the explanation out on Wikipedia. Lower noise from audio equipment the better the audio experience..

 

[cliffordcooley]

From my perspective the only time we have though about getting a sound card, was when we had issues with the onboard sound not working correctly. It wasn't the concept of which worked better but which one worked at all.

 

[Viraf P Chinoy]

Sorry but no, digital Toslinks are nothing new, and the SB Z is NOT the first card to have digital output. It came out in early 2013, I've personally been using my Razer AC-1 since 2007 with a digital Toslink connecting it to my home theater, and there are more that predate it as well. Buying that sound card was probably the best investment I ever made, it's just unfortunate it's a legacy product using PCI... But I love the quality of the sound and the ease of use when I need to change from digital to analog.

One thing that you guys must know is I'm from India & everything is not available easily. Even though we've better choice today than say 8-10 years ago it not as easy as say Singapore / USA. So getting a SB Z Card & importing the toslink cable from USA does seem like an achievement. Maybe sound cards were there in the past with digital option in the USA but we in India live in a primitive environment even today so listening to digital music is Really Great. Even today many guys in India do not know what is a Sound card As Guys are still stick to onboard audio & also want to save on Cost.

I'm not blowing my trumpets but am just stating blatant facts to inform you that even in this world we in India are living in such Primitive Surroundings. As a matter of fact I've subscribed to 2 Computer Mags & in both of them too there have been very few mentions of Sound Card Reviews. I Hope that after reading this you'll realize the sad facts / truth of IT Hardware in india.

 

[Revolution 11]

The one flaw of this article is the lack of ABX testing. I understand it is a casual look but confirmation bias and the placebo effect can be and often is stronger than any actual difference in modern integrated and discrete sound options.

You should have had a friend switch for you and record how accurate you were on different sound clips. Would be a good part 2 to this article.

 

[MarkT]

Lots of more, and less, informed comments here. In the end it all depends on what you are using the sound for. I have a home studio so I need to process sound at high quality and listen to the results in high quality. Therefore I have monitor speakers pointing at my head from about 1 meter away. I also have an Echo Mia Midi sound card which a 24 bit DSP and allows sampling level from 8 to 96 kHz. Wow! But I have had the same card for years and have no need to upgrade it. All my LPs (yeah that old), I have ripped to mp3, and I can't hear the difference. When I finish a song I publish it as an mp3. I record with headphones Sennheiser HD595s, but mix with monitors from SLX. None of it is top range, just as good as I can justify. That should be your criterion for choice. How good do I need it to be?

 

[Adhmuz]

There is not enough difference in sound quality between on-board vs dedicated sound for the typical user, making a question of "sound quality" incredibly subjective and a poor basis for making an $80 gamble.

Just because the typical user (possibly yourself included) can't tell the difference between on board audio and a dedicated sound card doesn't render the exercise null, let alone a gamble.

What we SHOULD be looking for is a sound card that IMPROVES THE PERFORMANCE of our PC's... a FAR less subjective metric.

Actually a far more POINTLESS subjective comparison considering how little it affects modern CPUs, with or without my sound card I notice zero difference in CPU usage. You go on to say this yourself in the next paragraph even...

On-board audio actually uses a *tiny* bit of CPU power that has a tiny impact on performance depending on the bitrate, number of channels, and complexity of sounds produced. Arguably, a sound card could be produced that IMPROVES cpu performance while allowing you to tax the audio capabilities of your PC.

Unfortunately the task or reproducing acceptable audio had long been the task of on board solution which have very little impact on CPU usage in most scenarios. By having a dedicated sound card your taking so little away from the CPU that performance gains are so negligible you can't use that as an argument anymore. If you have a suggestion on how a sound card can "IMPROVE" CPU performance I'm all ears, the second half of your sentence stops making sense however "while allowing you to tax the audio capabilities of your PC" please elaborate what you mean by this.

"Sound quality" is too subjective. We need to ask a different question.

Anything related to a human sense perception is going to be "subjective" bases on the individual, we all hear things a little differently and are willing to make different sacrifices when it comes to audio quality. For example I refuse to listen to music through the built in speaker on my phone because the sound reproduction is too crap and bothers me, others seem perfectly fine with it, thus the subjective nature of audio.

After using a dedicated sound card for the better part of the last decade I'm a strong supporter of the idea, but also feel it something that won't necessarily benefit everyone, the best example will of course have to do with cars. Not everyone changes their factory head unit/speakers/adds an amplifier, even less so these days with the entertainment system coming from the factory that boast relatively good specs (Much like modern motherboards). But I wanted more, the same way I wanted more in my PC, so I changed my head-unit, all my speakers, added a subwoofer, dedicated amplifier. None of this would be terribly important to the "typical user" but for me, and many enthusiast like me, we do see a reason, and also understand it's not for everyone.

So instead of asking a different question, understand the reason to the question being asked.

 

[oravendi]

I don't understand why sound card reviews are so lame. There are more audio applications than ever before and still we get the question "Why does anyone need a sound card?". If you want to mix audio streams, generate audio with a software synth, or record from good microphones, you will have a hard time doing these things with most cheap sound cards or motherboard chips. Audio on motherboards could be improved a lot, its just that most motherboard manufacturers don't want the additional cost and most chip manufacturers are ignoring audio.

 

[Mike89]

I've been a sound card user for many years and could never settle for onboard sound. Onboard sound has gotten better over the years but still just isn't as crisp and clean as what a sound card produces. Personally I don't use headphones, I'm a speaker guy all the way and I know what good sound is. You get mediocre sound with onboard sound and that's it. It always amuses me how many out there spend mega bucks on motherboard, dual video cards (or even triple), SSDs, memory, and then don't put a sound card in their case. If you've always settled for onboard sound, you surely don't know what you are missing.

 

[DDG4005]

I've been happy with my SoundBlaster Z cards and I'm using analog connections for output.

 

[Emexrulsier]

I use a dedicated sound card and it's only a very cheap 25 quid card. My motherboard has onboard sound using a daughter board (not a cheap motherboard either, almost £300) but still this isn't as good audio as the dedicated card. I find with dedicated there is less electrical noise and a better deeper amplified sound with more definable treble and bass.

 

[Viraf P Chinoy]

This is a statement of fact. When using the sound card we'll always enjoy better sound deep bass, etc. which is not possible in onboard audio.It is my personal experience.

 

[newbieaudio]

I gotta say, I'm new to computer audiophile stuff and NOT new to audio, having been a hard core audiophile (but limited with funds) back in the 1970's. I am absolutely appalled at the nasty comments towards the author. He said upfront he was not a professional and that this was going to be an "average Joe" kind of comparison, nothing sophisticated or scientific. ALL OF YOU BASHING HIM WASTED YOUR TIME!

It all comes down to, are you an ordinary person with ordinary audio tastes or not ? If you are, forget about the added sound card. It's probably overkill in that case (unless your computer is really ancient, and in that case maybe you need to upgrade your entire computer). If you have more refined/discriminating/demanding taste and/or better/younger ears, then YES, get the best sound card you can afford. Everything else is added verbiage.

 

[newbieaudio]

Addendum to my post above: Apparently a good DAC or amplifier can substitute for the sound card.

 

[Lou3]

This is one of the best articles I've read on the onboard vs sound card question. The author said up front that it wasn't meant to be technical, but a subjective listening test from the perspective of somebody who cares about sound quality but hasn't gone down the audiophile rabbit hole. He nailed it.

I built my first computer in 2001, have built around six others since then, and have always used a mid-level sound card. Back in 2001, it was more necessary if you wanted what most people would consider acceptable sound quality for music. Today, the sound quality from even basic onboard sound is good enough that most people would enjoy it. But if you're discriminating about sound quality, a sound card or external DAC is still the way to go. With a quality source and good speakers or headphones, you'll hear more detail.