Final Words

The final verdict is that the SoundBlaster X-Fi Elite Pro is an excellent audio solution. With plenty of analog and digital I/O, the potential for improving game performance, lots of features, and better sound quality than any other consumer sound solution on the market, the SB X-Fi Elite Pro is simply impressive. Topping the performance of the Audigy 4 Pro and the Echo Gina 3G at every bit depth and sample rate, we can't help but acknowledge the superiority of the newest top-of-the-line card from Creative.

The X-Fi's SRC combined with its new Audio Ring architecture alleviate Creative's past problems with sample rate conversion and intermodulation distortion. All audio sources are played with the highest clarity and quality. Playback of 24-bit / 96kHz audio is pristine even from the back of the computer. When working with lower bitrate audio, X-Fi can apply certain filters (such as the 24-bit Crystallizer) that attempt to clean up and enhance the signal. More than twice the number of hardware voices are supported in games alongside the latest in EAX Advanced HD for 3D sound. Multi-channel works perfectly, and CMSS-3D adds some advanced algorithms for HRTF, spacialization, and multiple in, multiple out up and down mixing to support any source on any speaker configuration.

At the end of the day, we were very happy with the performance of the X-Fi Elite Pro as a sound card for gaming, as part of a pro audio chain, and as the center of an entertainment system. However, we did have some complaints. Our experience with this (and all other) hardware is that audio is best played on a speaker configuration that fits the source. Creative argues that their hardware is capable of dynamically "remastering" and "remixing" audio to best fit the system at hand. We would flat out deny this claim and are shocked that Creative would even pretend that they could provide quality on par with remastered audio. Having hardware approximated the job of an audio technician in training is something that we might be able to believe, but no amount of processing will make up for a lack of data from the source. Access to all the original tracks as they were recorded at full bitrate (or analog as the case may be) gives an audio engineer infinitely more control over the final product than Creative can have with any finalized audio. That's not to say that some assistance in fitting the source to a particular setup isn't helpful in some cases. Upmixing 5.1 audio to 7.1 comes to mind as an example of an application that makes sense.

Likewise, the 24-bit Crystallizer is not something that we would leave on (or even on one setting) all the time. It is possible for the Crystallizer to clean up, brighten up, and generally make some audio files sound "better". This is especially true in the case of over-compressed or understated audio: the Crystallizer adds a punchiness and depth to these. Of course, in cases where the transients are already fully in the foreground, enabling the Crystallizer can make already punchy audio overpowering. We understand that some dynamic range is lost on 16-bit audio, but it's not always the case that hardware can determine exactly what should fill the missing bits if the final target was 24-bit rather than 16.

We are interested in the performance advantages of the 64MB of onboard RAM. Unfortunately, we don't have many games that make use of this feature, so we aren't able to talk about the real advantages here. Creative has given us some indication that they expect some very significant quality gains in games that have very little impact on the CPU and enable developers to have more freedom in how they design audio.

The only thing that we would really like to see that we don't is Dolby Digital Live (realtime Dolby 5.1 encoding for output over SPDIF to a receiver). With all the processing power available, there is no excuse for not supporting this feature, yet we have seen no mention of it from Creative. Dolby Digital Live may not be as hot a topic as it was back when NVIDIA supported the feature in their onboard SoundStorm audio solution, but we would still like to see it added for completeness (especially when even Intel's onboard solution can handle it).

The last question that we have to address is the most important. Is the SoundBlaster X-Fi Elite Pro worth the $400 price tag? If the card is destined for a machine that will be multitasked as the centerpiece of an entertainment center, part of a gaming rig, and part of a small home studio for budding musicians, then the answer is "yes" (but only if high quality speakers and possibly a very high quality receiver and amp are to be used in conjunction with the product). The SoundBlaster X-Fi Elite Pro is not a sound card to be taken lightly, and it really deserves to be pushed to its limits.

We really can't recommend this part to the average user. Not only are the quality and feature set far beyond what a normal computer user will need, but the extremely high quality audio components used in the construction of the card are beyond what any, but audiophiles or musicians, will care about. This really is a semi-pro card packed with consumer level features and should be treated as such.

That being said, audiophiles and musicians (who don't use a balanced audio setup) will be very pleased with this card, especially if they enjoy gaming as well as just listening. We also can't wait to get our hands on other X-Fi cards. Ranging in price from $130 to $280, the rest of the new SoundBlaster line-up look to be very compelling offers. The differences between the Elite Pro and the rest of the pack include onboard RAM, the quality of the audio components used, and the I/O options included. Our guess is that most users will be quite satisfied with the SoundBlaster X-Fi XtremeMusic (the $130 card).

Creative informed us that cards should be shipping as of last week, but we still can't find them online or in stores. Even Creative's own site lists the X-Fi line up as pre-order. We will have to check into the availability of these parts as we certainly don't want the recently ATI disease ("paperlaunchitis") to spread to the rest of the computer industry.


Qualitative Analysis: Audio Listening
Comments Locked

110 Comments

View All Comments

  • Fricardo - Saturday, October 29, 2005 - link

    I would really like to see performance numbers on the cheaper x-fi components.
  • flachschippe - Monday, October 24, 2005 - link

    quote:

    the Quartet is made up of 4 independent two-issue SIMD engines

    "Thread-Interleaved" could also mean simply multithreading, but on a single processor ("engine").
  • Gooberslot - Thursday, September 1, 2005 - link

    Am I wrong in assuming that having high stereo crosstalk in the upper ranges is worse than having it in the lower ranges? If not then this X-fi is junk because that crosstalk is way too high.
  • ceefka - Thursday, September 1, 2005 - link

    You're right: the whole idea behind a 5.1 setup. With most modern music however a lot of high frequencies aren't even panned in a distinctive direction.
  • Anton74 - Wednesday, August 31, 2005 - link

    What's the resolution of the ADC? Is it the same for the various X-Fi cards available at the moment?
  • MrCoyote - Wednesday, August 31, 2005 - link

    Creative still hasn't got it right. The chip resamples all audio, just like the Audigy series. This is no good for musicians and amateurs that want to use it to record audio. If you set your audio software to record 24bit 96KHz, it will downsample to 16bit 48KHz, and then upsample output back to 96KHz. Cheaper audio cards from M-Audio can do true sampling faithfully. Why can't Creative get it right?

    Sorry, but I'm passing it up and sticking with M-Audio. I may lose a few FPS and not have EAX3, but true, faithful sampling is what I also need for recording. I don't just play games. Creative thinks audio cards are only good for games, not recording. I'm not wasting money to buy two different audio cards.
  • dejerez - Wednesday, August 31, 2005 - link

    What product do you refer to? X-Fi does not need to down- or upsample. Everybody has their preferences but being M-Audio advocate does not mean you do not have to read review of the product you are posting comments about. X-Fi's clock works at the speed of your choice. And if you WANT to use sample rate conversion this has been vastly improved. That is the only card on the market that does distortion-free SRC which is great if you want to mix sounds from sources recorded at differnet sampling rates. Are you musician? I wish you were because you are not in position to appreciate how much this card can help a recordist or sound engineer...
  • DerekWilson - Wednesday, August 31, 2005 - link

    dejerez is right -- you can set the card to internally sample everything at 96kHz.

    I'll also agree that mixing sources of different samplerates with no distortion and no conversion necessary is a nice thing. But locking samplerate is also important in the current landscape of audio software.
  • mindless1 - Thursday, September 1, 2005 - link

    I'm not so sure you're correct here. Setting it to "sample everything at 96Hz" may be exactly what causes the resampling that audiophiles want to avoid. Internal sampling rate is a variable any card could do with software alone, but I/O sampling rate is not.

    It also appears to have NO 44.1 crystal, meaning it can't even play back an audio CD properly without resampling it.
  • Somerset - Tuesday, September 6, 2005 - link

    You can set X-Fi to play back audio CDs at 44.1kHz without any resampling. In the Audio Creation mode, you can easily set the master clock to 44.1kHz if desired. On the other hand, resampling is no longer a negative with X-Fi as all audio test graphs clearly show that X-Fi's resampling produces a very clean signal. Resampling should no longer be considered a weakness of X-Fi.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now