Audio Performance

We limited audio testing to the Rightmark 3D Sound version 2.1 CPU utilization test and tested with sound enabled to show the performance effects on several games. The Rightmark 3D Sound benchmark measures the overhead or CPU utilization required by a codec or hardware audio chip.

Audio Performance - Empty CPU - 32 Buffers

Audio Performance - 2d Audio - 32 Buffers

Audio Performance - DirectSound 3D HW - 32 Buffers

Audio Performance - DirectSound 3D EAX2 - 32 Buffers

As you can see, none of the onboard audio solutions were quite as low overall in CPU utilization as the Creative Audigy 2ZS solution. The Asus P5N32-SLI Deluxe uses the Realtek ALC850 AC97 codec while the Intel based systems utilize the Realtek High Definition Audio ALC880 and ALC882m codec's. The current Realtek HD R1.26 driver release limits the 3D sound buffers to a maximum of 32. The revised R1.26 driver release reduced CPU utilization by up to 38% compared to the R1.20 release that was originally tested utilizing the ALC882m on the Gigabyte GA-8I955x Royal.

Audio Performance - DirectSound 3D EAX - BattleField 2

Audio Performance - DirectSound 3D EAX - Splinter Cell Chaos Theory

Audio Performance - Wolfenstein - Enemy Territory - Radar Demo

Audio Performance - DirectSound 3D EAX - UT2004 - UTBench Demo

Audio Performance - DirectSound 3D EAX - F.E.A.R. - Performance Test

The Battlefield 2 numbers are very interesting as the Realtek ALC850 audio solution creates a 12% loss in frame rates. Compare this a to 67% loss when utilizing the Realtek ALC88x audio solution in this highly popular on-line game in which sound is as critical as frame rates. We tested the results several times and came to the same conclusion each time after the benchmarks were completed. We have added 640x480 scores to reduce CPU and GPU utilization with the numbers still reflecting a 55% decrease in frame rates. We will be further investigating this issue in the near future as the results are not as dramatic in other games. Splinter Cell Chaos Theory has an average loss of 10%, Wolfenstein Enemy Territory at 10%, UT2004 at 29%, and F.E.A.R. at 8%. Obviously, if you are a serious gamer, then a dedicated sound card is a requirement to ensure frame rate averages across a wide variety of games. We will be reviewing additional sound card results in our next article.

While the Realtek ALC850 codec offers acceptable CPU usage and sound for most office applications or Internet based flash games, it is not competitive in audio quality with the ALC88x on-board audio solutions. In fact, the ALC88x audio solution displayed excellent sound characteristics in music, video, and games throughout our testing and should seriously be considered as the main audio component in a value based system if gaming is not your top priority. Specifications for the Realtek ALC88x audio family can be located here .

Ethernet Performance Final Words
Comments Locked

26 Comments

View All Comments

  • MadAd - Tuesday, November 15, 2005 - link

    Overall another good review Gary, thanks a lot, just one thing

    Quote:
    "We will be reviewing additional sound card results in our next article."

    Could you please include at least one external USB sound card/processor? They are getting more and more available and my thinking is based on the observation that more and more mobo designs are making it hard to plug in PCI cards when you have double width x16 cards.

    SLId double width cards in the P5N32 (as well as the A8N32, not being tested here) would only leave one pci slot and since I have an ide raid array with at least a year or 2s life in it, that leaves me with no slot for a sound card therefore say, a USB Audigy NX would be useful. This would apply to other people with other cards such as mpeg, extra nics etc... two other boards in the review here (Asus + Epox) leave only 2 pci slots so its still a possibility to offload sound to the usb, provided the performance was not horrible.

    Thanks a lot
  • Gary Key - Tuesday, November 15, 2005 - link

    quote:

    Could you please include at least one external USB sound card/processor?


    I will see what I can do. The next article will have the X-FI, HDA Mystique 7.1, and a surprise audio solution. ;-)

    I completely agree about losing the slots and did not like Asus's AMD layout with both PCI slots in the middle. Due to SLI and CrossFire the available real estate on the board is shrinking rapidly and at this time we know of no PCI-e audio solutions on the horizon. It will be PCI or on-board for a while so proper slot layout or better audio solutions are a must.

    I have found through repeated testing (over 300 runs) of our BF2 benchmark that the largest impact to the sound results were with the aircraft. We would get frame stuttering with the ALC88x solutions when the aircraft came on screen during the benchmark. However, the sound quality was very good in all games and was quite a surprise after hearing the SB Z2S in comparison (not saying it is better but good enough for most people). I am continuing testing in this area along with headphones and 7.1 output now instead of 2,4, and 5.1 output.

  • Missing Ghost - Tuesday, November 15, 2005 - link

    That's sad. I want pcie sound cards.
  • yacoub - Tuesday, November 15, 2005 - link

    See, sound enabled can make a HUGE difference. Thanks for testing that, Gary. The obnoxious few around here that actually DON'T want you to test that because they think they know everything and "oh it doesn't make that much difference and it's just making more work for the reviewer" can go eat their feet. Here's damning proof it can and does make a huge difference in the performance even on this system with an 820D and 7800GTX OC!
  • Houdani - Tuesday, November 15, 2005 - link

    Dude, no one argues that sound has no influence on benchmarks. Particularly the case of integrated sound. It makes sense to test the affect of sound when you're testing a motherboard which has on-board sound to see it's impact.

    HOWEVER, when you're reviewing a graphics card or processor, the sound should be removed from the equation entirely so as to test the product with the fewest amount of outside variables possible. After all, in those reviews we want to see the performance of the individual component, NOT the performance of the system as a whole.
  • yacoub - Tuesday, November 15, 2005 - link

    You might, but that would be silly. Gamers care infinitely more how the new graphics card does in the real world - ie, playing games - and that would be with sound enabled considering most of us are not deaf. It's great that it's all uber and whatnot - cool, that's fine. Now also show us how it does in a real rig under real conditions. It's not asking much and it's a lot more useful for those of us trying to decide which GPU we should get.
  • peldor - Tuesday, November 15, 2005 - link

    It's just not interesting to do so. Anyone serious enough about gaming to buy an expensive video card can spend <$50 for a sound card which puts the actual fps difference into the low single digits. In a video card review, all that's going to happen is that the scores drop by 2-4 fps across the board. That's not going to really change the relative performance.
  • yacoub - Tuesday, November 15, 2005 - link

    Situation: You have to upgrade your GPU no matter what. You have a soundcard you are happy with. You want to know if CardA will provide enough performance gain for your system or if you should go with CardB instead. You cannot tell that with the current GPU tests done at Anandtech.
  • Houdani - Tuesday, November 15, 2005 - link

    Well, see, that's where I go out and read sound card reviews -- to see how much system overhead they require. I pick and choose based on individual price/performance for all the components, which gives me an idea of how the completed system will perform.

    We clearly have different philosophies for how we select our components, and there's nothing wrong with that. I just happen to prefer the "filtered" performance benchmarks which isolate (as much as possible) the individual components because that provides me with the purest data for making my buying choices. It's then up to me to put all the pieces together in my head, knowing the individual contributions for each component based on reviews for each part.

    Today I get to enjoy the goodness of putting together a Shuttle SFF, X2 4400+, 7800GT, 2GB RAM, et al. Reading a review of the 7800GT on a DFI motherboard with an X-Fi soundcard isn't nearly as useful to me as reading a review of the vid card in an isolated environment. Why? Because my system isn't the same as the reviewer's benchmarking system. Therefore, the isolated scores of the video card works best for me. The same can be said for the HDD, memory, processor, optical drive, ...
  • yacoub - Tuesday, November 15, 2005 - link

    quote:

    Well, see, that's where I go out and read sound card reviews -- to see how much system overhead they require. I pick and choose based on individual price/performance for all the components, which gives me an idea of how the completed system will perform.


    Funny, when I'm in the market for a new GPU, I don't go read soundcard reviews - I already have a soundcard! What I would want to know, though, is whether or not a -CardA- is going to give me enough performance boost over my current card or if I need to step up to a -CardB-. Your backwards approach is funny, and it supports the status quo, but it still isn't logical.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now