Audio Performance

We are no longer showing the individual CPU utilization rates as the use of a dual core processor means the driver load is balanced between each processor with our audio solutions. The 2.3 version of Rightmark properly supports dual core processors but the results are almost meaningless for dual-core users. We have found the CPU utilization rate improvements with the dual-core setup in this test do not have any bearing on actual game benchmarks as the reduction in frame rate percentages are the same as on our single core systems.

Game Audio Performance - Battlefield 2

Game Audio Performance - Company of Heroes

Game Audio Performance - Half Life 2 - Lost Coast

Game Audio Performance - Rise of Legends

The audio performance numbers remain consistent between the Analog Devices and Realtek Codecs but both finish consistently behind the SoundBlaster X-Fi in the benchmarks. This is to be expected as the ADI and Realtek Codecs are host processing units dependent upon the CPU and drivers for generating their audio streams. The SoundBlaster X-Fi on the other hand has dedicated hardware that generates its audio streams and offloads this burden from the CPU. We are finding the CPU utilization rates to be constantly decreasing for the onboard solutions as CPU processing power increases and driver optimizations improve but they still take a toll in certain games. This is reflected in our numbers as Battlefield 2 has an average loss of 22% (was 28%), Half Life 2: Lost Coast at 5%, Company of Heroes at 5%, and Rise of Legends at 22%.

Rise of Legends is a very CPU intensive game with numerous sound effects and as such the CPU hit for generating audio is more significant, although we did not notice any stuttering during game play. Battlefield 2 utilizes EAX 2 settings for our ADI and Realtek HD Codecs which creates another significant demand on the CPU to process the audio streams, especially with the sound effects set to high. In this case the ADI and Realtek solutions still create a significant hit on frame rates in this game where frame rates are everything.

After comparing the ADI 1988B to the Realtek ALC-88x series in Battlefield 2 and other games such as F.E.A.R. we must agree with assertions that Realtek is improving frame rates and CPU utilization at the expense of audio quality in their latest drivers. In fact, the ADI 1988B generated EAX 2 sound effects that were very close or equal to our Audigy 2 and within hearing distance of our X-Fi at times. The audio quality differences in EAX capable games between the ADI and Realtek HD Audio Codecs were almost startling.

We firmly believe this is due to obstructions and occlusions not being implemented correctly in the Realtek drivers. In EAX 2 capable games that feature outdoor areas or vast expanses we found sounds at one end of the map to have the same volume and distance correlation as sounds in front of the character. We compared earlier driver releases from Realtek and noticed this issue has become worse over the course of the last year. We suggest turning off EAX 2 in games when utilizing the Realtek solution, as the resulting audio quality just sounds better the majority of time.

The audio differences in other games such as Company of Heroes were minimal although still present. This was especially true in the CoH benchmark where the two American soldiers are treading through the water to meet their group. You could hear the water gently move as they walked while with the Realtek solution the water sounded like a beached whale. This pattern held true for all of our games we tested throughout the benchmark process including close to forty games that we tested off-line.

Obviously, if you are a serious gamer, then a dedicated sound card is still required to ensure consistent frame rates averages across a wide variety of games, and in the case of the Sound Blaster X-Fi, you also get greatly improved audio quality and EAX3/4/5 support. If you'd like more details on the Realtek or ADI solutions, you can refer to the Realtek HD Audio Codec Specifications or SoundMAX HD Audio Codec Specifications.

Firewire, USB, and Network Performance Final Words
Comments Locked

13 Comments

View All Comments

  • mostlyprudent - Wednesday, December 6, 2006 - link

    I had been looking forward to the review of the MSI board. I can understand some OC limitation at the price, but then don't call it a "Platinum" board. I really don't do very much OCing, but always view the ability to reach high overclocks as a sign of a more well engineered board.

    Anyway, thanks for the review.
  • Beachspree - Monday, December 11, 2006 - link

    I was wondering why the Firewire performance is so poor in these reviews:

    Firewire 400 gets a best throughput of 230.6Mb/s

    It is known that Macs have poor USB 2 performance but look at the Firewire results by Barefeats:

    http://www.barefeats.com/usb2.html">http://www.barefeats.com/usb2.html
    http://www.barefeats.com/hard70.html">http://www.barefeats.com/hard70.html

    Without the perfect conditions of a RAM disk and no cacheing they get real world performance of up to:

    Firewire 400: 304 Mb/s (31% faster)
    Firewire 800: 464 Mb/s (41% faster)

    For comparison, Macs are getting lousy USB 2 performance. Intel Macs have improved it but that takes it from around 136Mb/s to 168Mb/s. That's 75% slower.

    Given the importance of Firewire in critical multimedia applications and it's likely use for HD video camcorders does this poor performance not warrant a mention?
  • Beachspree - Monday, December 11, 2006 - link

    To be clearer:

    Can we please have some real world figures for USB 2.0, eSATA and Firewire 400/800 transfers?

    That should take the form of transfers of:

    a) Many small files
    b) One large file

    under default settings and off an internal 7200 HDD you standardize on. That's what most people actually do when the backup, so that's what we need to see in order to make informed choices. I suspect these data rates you keep publishing are ones we will actually never see.

    I suggest, also, that poor Firewire performance in Windows is more important than poor USB on Macs. They always have Firewire built in and tend to it on peripherals, while Windows users often make do with USB until they get into music or video editing when they then find the need for Firewire and hit this poor performance just when they start needing mission critical performance. I'm talking about dropped frames and music latency.

    Why is that ignored in all your motherboard reviews?

    Thanks.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now