Motherboards built in audio 7.1 prcesion

[Islam Ghunym]

When it comes to audio, I have no idea which manufacturer makes best of it for gaming. I don't care about immersive clarity, higher bit rates or Hz. What I do care about is how precision the real and virtual surround channel seperating in competitive games. I learnt that the software is what is going to determine this accuracy, but I myself didn't experience that as accurate information because at least on 2 different motherboards on the same OS (same drivers) with only variable being the motherboard (ASUS H310M-D vs Gigabyte H310M S2H 2.0) I found ASUS much better when it comes to differentiating between the left/right and rear left/right on "7.1 virtual surround" stereo headset.

From the first look at both motherboards I thought that Gigabyte should offer better audio because it has 4 big solid capacitors while ASUS one has 2 small + 2 big, but then looking at tech specs of ASUS Prime motherboard I found these extra features that are not mentioned in Gigabyte one tech specs and these are:

• LED-Illuminated design
• Audio shielding
• Dedicated audio PCB layers

However I am not sure if these are already in Gigabyte one even if they are not mentioned.

If somebody could clear things out for me that would be very appreciated.

[Tigerleon]

20 minutes ago, Islam Ghunym said:

When it comes to audio, I have no idea which manufacturer makes best of it for gaming. I don't care about immersive clarity, higher bit rates or Hz. What I do care about is how precision the real and virtual surround channel seperating in competitive games. I learnt that the software is what is going to determine this accuracy, but I myself didn't experience that as accurate information because at least on 2 different motherboards on the same OS (same drivers) with only variable being the motherboard (ASUS H310M-D vs Gigabyte H310M S2H 2.0) I found ASUS much better when it comes to differentiating between the left/right and rear left/right on "7.1 virtual surround" stereo headset.

From the first look at both motherboards I thought that Gigabyte should offer better audio because it has 4 big solid capacitors while ASUS one has 2 small + 2 big, but then looking at tech specs of ASUS Prime motherboard I found these extra features that are not mentioned in Gigabyte one tech specs and these are:

• LED-Illuminated design
• Audio shielding
• Dedicated audio PCB layers

However I am not sure if these are already in Gigabyte one even if they are not mentioned.

If somebody could clear things out for me that would be very appreciated.

The simple answer is don't use 7.1 surround in headphones. It is pure BS and marketing tricks. It just doesn't work. Having good stereo headphones with good seperation and imaging will be much better for anything anyways. Paired with a cheap sub $50 DAC/amp combo it can outperform a built in realtek chip by A LOT. I wouldn't worry about different Hz or bitrates since that hardly matters in a cheap little DAC/amp built in. And not noticable at all probably depending on what you listen to. 

 

So to actually help with this. Don't look for audio in motherboards, look at audio from audio brands.

25 minutes ago, Islam Ghunym said:

LED-Illuminated design

This hardly matters now does it?

26 minutes ago, Islam Ghunym said:

Audio shielding

Every audio equipment has some sort of RF shielding from electromagnetic interference stuff.

27 minutes ago, Islam Ghunym said:

• Dedicated audio PCB layers

 

This is just that the audio components are seperate on an own PCB.

[mariushm]

Dude, the number of capacitors and all that crap doesn't do anything for quality of audio.

 

Also, "7.1 virtual surround"  is produced entirely by the headphones, it's in your head. The sound card produces STEREO sound, a chip in your headphones takes that stereo sound and makes fake 7.1 sound.  The sound card on the motherboard has no influence on how that fake 7.1 sound is produced.

Has nothing to do with the actual sound card's ability to produce 7.1 sound.

You're talking about how "precision the real and virtual surround channel separating" - that's has nothing to do with your actual sound card, unless it's some checkbox or something in the software that comes with the sound card, but even then, both cards would have the same effects because it's the same shitty audio chip.

 

 

Led illuminated design - how would illumination affect sound quality

audio shielding - that would affect quality but even the budget motherboards have shielding - shielding is just some metal foil covering the audio chip.

dedicated audio pcb layers - nothing fancy, all recent motherboards separate the audio section from the everything else.

 

In theory, the type of capacitors (electrolytic vs solid/polymer vs tantalum) should not affect sound quality. In practice, SOME people claim that electrolytic capacitors (due to their technical properties, crappier, whatever) in fact produce BETTER quality sound compared to solid/polymer capacitors which they say are "too precise, too mechanical"

Also, most "audio grade" electrolytic capacitors have lower technical specs compared to high end electrolytic capacitors or solid polymer capacitors but even those lower technical specs are way better than what an audio circuit would need. 

 

Both motherboards ( ASUS H310M-D vs Gigabyte H310M S2H 2.0 ) are shitty budget motherboards, with a shitty budget chipset (h310m)

 

The asus board uses an ANCIENT audio codec, ALC887, which was released in July 2008, so we're talking about 13 year old technology.  

The gigabyte board uses the same ANCIENT codec, ALC 887

 

Both have the same separation on the circuit board, which is more or less pointless :

That yellowish stuff is simply circuit board material without traces, separates the area with the audio circuit from the rest of the board.

Proper audio shielding would cover the chip with a metal shield ... both boards are equally dumb when it comes to extra shielding

Both boards have same number of electrolytic capacitors, just placed in different positions... one by the audio header, the other near the audio jacks.

 

 

 

 

[Tigerleon]

I had to make another comment...

Which headphones do you use, that is one of the most important factors in how good it will sound. The headphones are the key here.

31 minutes ago, Islam Ghunym said:

I don't care about immersive clarity, higher bit rates or Hz. What I do care about is how precision the real and virtual surround channel seperating in competitive games

You are basically being against yourself in the same comment.

 

[Tigerleon]

2 minutes ago, mariushm said:

Dude, the number of capacitors and all that crap doesn't do anything for quality of audio.

 

Also, "7.1 virtual surround"  is produced entirely by the headphones, it's in your head. The sound card produces STEREO sound, a chip in your headphones takes that stereo sound and makes 7.1 sound.

Has nothing to do with the actual sound card's ability to produce 7.1 sound.

You're talking about how "precision the real and virtual surround channel separating" - that's has nothing to do with your actual sound card, unless it's some checkbox or something in the software that comes with the sound card, but even then, both cards would have the same effects because it's the same shitty audio chip.

 

 

Led illuminated design - how would illumination affect sound quality

audio shielding - that would affect quality but even the budget motherboards have shielding - shielding is just some metal foil covering the audio chip.

dedicated audio pcb layers - nothing fancy, all recent motherboards separate the audio section from the everything else.

 

In theory, the type of capacitors (electrolytic vs solid/polymer vs tantalum) should not affect sound quality. In practice, SOME people claim that electrolytic capacitors (due to their technical properties, crappier, whatever) in fact produce BETTER quality sound compared to solid/polymer capacitors which they say are "too precise, too mechanical"

Also, most "audio grade" electrolytic capacitors have lower technical specs compared to high end electrolytic capacitors or solid polymer capacitors but even those lower technical specs are way better than what an audio circuit would need. 

 

Both motherboards ( ASUS H310M-D vs Gigabyte H310M S2H 2.0 ) are shitty budget motherboards, with a shitty budget chipset (h310m)

 

The asus board uses an ANCIENT audio codec, ALC887, which was released in July 2008, so we're talking about 13 year old technology.  

The gigabyte board uses the same ANCIENT codec, ALC 887

 

Both have the same separation on the circuit board, which is more or less pointless :

That yellowish stuff is simply circuit board material without traces, separates the area with the audio circuit from the rest of the board.

Proper audio shielding would cover the chip with a metal shield ... both boards are equally dumb when it comes to extra shielding

Both boards have same number of electrolytic capacitors, just placed in different positions... one by the audio header, the other near the audio jacks.

 

 

 

 

Thank you for this explenation!

[Islam Ghunym]

7 hours ago, Tigerleon said:

I had to make another comment...

Which headphones do you use, that is one of the most important factors in how good it will sound. The headphones are the key here.

You are basically being against yourself in the same comment.

 

It is hyper x cloud stinger 

And np I am not going against myself, but I don't usually use proper words for explaining. I do mean by precision is sound positioning

 

 

[Islam Ghunym]

8 hours ago, mariushm said:

Also, "7.1 virtual surround"  is produced entirely by the headphones, it's in your head. The sound card produces STEREO sound, a chip in your headphones takes that stereo sound and makes fake 7.1 sound.  The sound card on the motherboard has no influence on how that fake 7.1 sound is produced.

Has nothing to do with the actual sound card's ability to produce 7.1 sound.

You're talking about how "precision the real and virtual surround channel separating" - that's has nothing to do with your actual sound card, unless it's some checkbox or something in the software that comes with the sound card, but even then, both cards would have the same effects because it's the same shitty audio chip.

from what I understand is that the sound positioning is all about the headset and the inboard sound codecs have nothing to do with that even if it was ALC1220 supreme FX which is modified by ASUS in a way I am not aware about . Well, it is not very good headset, but not bad either (Hyper X Cloud Stinger).

If that is true then how different surround audio softwares makes different sound like Dolby Atmos vs Razer surround sound vs Windows Sonic for headset.

Also in Realtek Audio console you can either config the headset (or speakers because it see everything as speakers) as 7.1 and test that in Windows annnd it seems to work when testing all channels except the subwoofer

Or you can set headset as stereo and use virtual surround system.

Either way I can't tell the difference by much between rear left and side channels I should say. What is annoying is that when I can't tell the difference if someone was up or down in intensive games like Apex Legends.

I used to be able to tell in the past with Windows Sonic 7.1 virtual surround using the same headset, but later after I switched the motherboard to Gigabyte one I was unable to tell. I am not sure if it is the game that changed, the motherboard or the Windows itself.

What I can say is that I tried the game with B450M-A ASUS board (after I was on Gigabyte) and that B450 board uses the same of everything that H310M-D have in audio and the game seemed to be better as I could tell the difference better so I started to blame the motherboard

[Islam Ghunym]

8 hours ago, Tigerleon said:

The simple answer is don't use 7.1 surround in headphones. It is pure BS and marketing tricks.

I can't agree with you here because I experienced actual positioning in the past using virtual surround rather than stereo. However kike I said I have no experience in audio stuff so if you are claiming that is a marketing stuff then pls explain how and why so I can take the info from you

[Tigerleon]

29 minutes ago, Islam Ghunym said:

I can't agree with you here because I experienced actual positioning in the past using virtual surround rather than stereo. However kike I said I have no experience in audio stuff so if you are claiming that is a marketing stuff then pls explain how and why so I can take the info from you

All pro players don't ever use surround. You're brainwashed by these companies tricking you. That is your brain. You've adapted to the "7.1" virtual surround in headsets. What it really is, is EQing through software. 7.1 virtual surround is the software messing with EQ all the time to trick you into thinking the sound is coming from a certain direction. The problem is that it is too all over the place. Inconsistent. It also just ruins the sound quality overall. Getting actual good headphones will make you better almost instantly. You do know that 7.1 isn't achievable through headphones right? There are one driver in each cup, which instantly disproves that 7.1 is a thing in headphones. Secondly, the drivers are too close to your ears in order to even make you hear in surround. Headphones with good IMAGING will sound better than your 7.1 bs. Good headphones with a good DAC/amp will be your surround headset you've forever wanted. I've been exactly where you are right now. I also thought surround was the best, I was wrong.

 

42 minutes ago, Islam Ghunym said:

What is annoying is that when I can't tell the difference if someone was up or down in intensive games like Apex Legends.

That is literally impossible without good game engine or just good sound design overall. Also again, 7.1 can't help you there lol. If a game is designed to be used with stereo headphones. The devs make it so that the audio is being delivered specifically for that. Which means that if you'd put a surround layer on top of the already good sound design you're just ruining it and making sound cues go all over the place.

[mariushm]

1 hour ago, Islam Ghunym said:

from what I understand is that the sound positioning is all about the headset and the inboard sound codecs have nothing to do with that even if it was ALC1220 supreme FX which is modified by ASUS in a way I am not aware about .

 

 

You're incorrect.  There's some things like Signal To Noise Ratio and other specifications which influence how well the sound is produced by a sound card.

Think of it like the amount of background noise or hiss you hear when playing something, how low can the sound card reproduce sound (a good audio chip with good output filters would accurately reproduce a 10-20 Hz bass while the cheapo ALC887 may only go as low as 30 Hz, so if you have good headphones or a good amplifier, you may miss bass related sound effects while watching a movie, for example.

 

Cheaper onboard sound cards with cheap output filters may also distort the output sound a bit - for example, think of it like having an equalizer configured to lower anything above some frequency by a few dB or distorting the bass a bit.... may be an intentional effect applied to hide some flaws in the chip, or flaws caused by using cheaper components (example using ceramic capacitors instead of electrolytic or tantalum or film capacitors... ceramic capacitors are cheap but have different specifications and have flaws like microphonic effects

 

Newer onboard chips may also have better headphone amplifiers built in, capable of driving speakers with higher impedance. For example, the ALC887 may not be able to drive higher end headphones because their impedance is too high, so  the sound will be muffled, low volume, distorted in some cases... so you'd need a headphone amplifier to properly hear those headphones. An ALC1200 or better onboard sound could have better headphone amplifier, or the motherboard may have opamp onboard to amplify for headphones.

 

I couldn't find ALC1200 or ALC1220 datasheet but I found the ALC1150 ... if you're really curious (which I doubt) you can browse them and see the differences ... but I'll just copy paste some details so you can see there are differences

 

 

ALC 887 : ALC887-RealtekMicroelectronics.pdf

ALC 1150 : alc1150 datasheet.pdf

 

ALC887:  High-performance DACs with 97dB Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) (these are outputs), ADCs with 90dB SNR  (that's your microphone, line in , inputs)

 

ALC1150 :

Front-DAC with 115/110dB SNR (A-weighting, Differential/Single-End Output), ADC09h with 104dB SNR (A-weighting)   - this is your stereo output, highest quality

DACs (except Front-DAC) with 96dB SNR (A-weighting), ADC08h with 93dB SNR (A-weighting)  - these are all other channel outputs - about as good as the old chip

 

Much better sound quality on the analogue outputs, mostly the stereo out jack. There's way more other features like digital filters, microphone filters built in, a lot of stuff is described in the datasheet.

 

 

1 hour ago, Islam Ghunym said:

Well, it is not very good headset, but not bad either (Hyper X Cloud Stinger).

If that is true then how different surround audio softwares makes different sound like Dolby Atmos vs Razer surround sound vs Windows Sonic for headset.

Also in Realtek Audio console you can either config the headset (or speakers because it see everything as speakers) as 7.1 and test that in Windows annnd it seems to work when testing all channels except the subwoofer

Or you can set headset as stereo and use virtual surround system.

 

Your headphones take the analogue audio and apply some algorithms to make fake 7.1 sound. If you get garbage audio in, you get garbage 3d audio out. 

 

If you set the output to headphones in the control panel, that may be a hint for the driver to enable the headphones amplifer inside the chip, and that would give better results if you have high impedance headphones.

 

It will also be a hint  for games that you use headphones instead of speakers - a lot of games either use that, or allow you to configure between speakers and headphones in their menu, because the games themselves have 3D sound effects and parameters for those effects are different if you use headphones compared to speakers ... the headphone speakers are closer to your ears, compared to speakers, so they have to adjust effects.

 

Try for example a game like... I don't know... Dead Space for example ... try the game set to speakers WITH speakers and then try the game set to headphones with headphones.  Without the shit 7.1 virtualization.

 

Triple A games are smart enough to have their own 3D and proper positioning of sounds in your headphones, without you having to distort your sound by faking 7.1 speakers.

 

 

1 hour ago, Islam Ghunym said:

Either way I can't tell the difference by much between rear left and side channels I should say. What is annoying is that when I can't tell the difference if someone was up or down in intensive games like Apex Legends.

 

 

[Islam Ghunym]

6 hours ago, Tigerleon said:

 That is literally impossible without good game engine or just good sound design overall. Also again, 7.1 can't help you there lol. If a game is designed to be used with stereo headphones. The devs make it so that the audio is being delivered specifically for that. Which means that if you'd put a surround layer on top of the already good sound design you're just ruining it and making sound cues go all over the place.

I have been messing up with audio all the day trying different sound systems.

Windows sonic 7.1 virtual thing have always made sound annoyingly crisp to my ears and also messed up with low frequencies. However the sound issue in Apex Legends is all about bugs in the game itself. Dev messed up a lot over time. What I found after trying every shit today from sound cards to different headsets to weird 7.1 virtual stuff from razer , dolby... Whatever. Nothing actually made any difference!. I can say that only dolby atmos fairly different audio quality than stereo.

Thank you and the other guy very much. I guess I got all information I need for my use case.

All these circles and time wasted just to understand that nothing better than stereo headphone and it is the game who is responsible for the shit that is going on. I also found my headset pretty good and better compared to other higher end ones from other companies. I can say I didn't regret having it for over 3 years.

[Tigerleon]

13 minutes ago, Islam Ghunym said:

I also found my headset pretty good and better compared to other higher end ones from other companies

In what way? Describe "better than other higher end companies". Also which companies? All headphones are different.

[CTR640]

7.1 in a stereo headphone is a load of 24 carats poop, fact.

If you want better soundstage and imaging, then Sennheiser HD800S is probably the way to go but it's not really cheap.

 

If you want more affordable headphone that sounds better than that shit you have now? Fidelio X2HR!

[Islam Ghunym]

I found this btw. It confirms everything I experienced. It is all about having a good headset and proper software unlike above claims about hardware stuff (headset is not the one that convert the stereo to surround with it's built in chip as claimed above) and it says that best results was with Dolby Atmos just like I noticed, but as I experienced it was barely any better than stereo sound and does not deserve the extra 15$ for that, but Actually I may consider that and pay for it.

 

 

[Islam Ghunym]

12 hours ago, CTR640 said:

7.1 in a stereo headphone is a load of 24 carats poop, fact.

If you want better soundstage and imaging, then Sennheiser HD800S is probably the way to go but it's not really cheap.

 

If you want more affordable headphone that sounds better than that shit you have now? Fidelio X2HR!

You are talking like the sound depth is going to tell where it comes from.

sounds hilarious.

[Tigerleon]

49 minutes ago, Islam Ghunym said:

You are talking like the sound depth is going to tell where it comes from.

sounds hilarious.

When you percieve something in a different and more open way. A larger soundstage is like having more room to breathe and like the speakers or in this case, the drivers sound farther away whilst they aren't. You often have a more natrual sense of sound and presencse meaning you'll locate sound cues better. A closed headphone with almost zero soundstage will be horrible for gaming and music.

12 hours ago, CTR640 said:

If you want better soundstage and imaging,

And imaging as CTR said, is the key for pin pointy precision left to right. Your headphones suck ass if you can't hear good without your 7.1 surround since bad tuned drivers doesn't sound good without EQ and you want as little EQ as possible. Maybe bump up the treble and lower the bass for the best imaging. Also it isn't even surround as I said before. It is basically random EQ in real time and most often than not causing artifacts and horrible sound quality meaning you'll have more trouble hearing stuff. Stereo is the purest form for gaming and definitely music and there are no arguments about that.

 

Also vertical sounds aren't better with surround as well. That is the game's part on doing good sound design.

[CTR640]

1 hour ago, Islam Ghunym said:

You are talking like the sound depth is going to tell where it comes from.

sounds hilarious.

Yes, it does. The DT990, 1990 and 1770 are very popular amongst FPS players to pinpoint their enemies and footsteps. The enemies even asked them how they know where they are. Keep the 7.1 for actual speakers, not for headphones that has only two drivers aka stereo. Or have you ever seen a headphone with 7.1 drivers? No? You can talk all you want, keep being brainwashed.

 

People who wants a very good sound and comfort are not in the market to get shitty headphones like Beats, Corsair and definitely not from Razer. Or better said: they stay away from keyboard, mice and mobo manufacturers for audio.

[Islam Ghunym]

17 hours ago, Tigerleon said:

When you percieve something in a different and more open way. A larger soundstage is like having more room to breathe and like the speakers or in this case, the drivers sound farther away whilst they aren't. You often have a more natrual sense of sound and presencse meaning you'll locate sound cues better. A closed headphone with almost zero soundstage will be horrible for gaming and music.

And imaging as CTR said, is the key for pin pointy precision left to right. Your headphones suck ass if you can't hear good without your 7.1 surround since bad tuned drivers doesn't sound good without EQ and you want as little EQ as possible. Maybe bump up the treble and lower the bass for the best imaging. Also it isn't even surround as I said before. It is basically random EQ in real time and most often than not causing artifacts and horrible sound quality meaning you'll have more trouble hearing stuff. Stereo is the purest form for gaming and definitely music and there are no arguments about that.

 

Also vertical sounds aren't better with surround as well. That is the game's part on doing good sound design.

I like how are you dedicated to convince me. Thank you. I think I have better idea now

so the best way to get a good audio positioning is just to use a good headphone not necessarily gaming related  + a good DAC/amp in stereo mode which would outperform all the crap I tried no matter the realtek chip ALC1220 codecs or the 13 years old one, right?

do you have any recommendations about a headphone + DAC/Amp in your mind?

[Islam Ghunym]

16 hours ago, CTR640 said:

Yes, it does. The DT990, 1990 and 1770 are very popular amongst FPS players to pinpoint their enemies and footsteps. The enemies even asked them how they know where they are. Keep the 7.1 for actual speakers, not for headphones that has only two drivers aka stereo. Or have you ever seen a headphone with 7.1 drivers? No? You can talk all you want, keep being brainwashed.

 

People who wants a very good sound and comfort are not in the market to get shitty headphones like Beats, Corsair and definitely not from Razer. Or better said: they stay away from keyboard, mice and mobo manufacturers for audio.

Sry, I was just trying to get more info using mean way of talk . it is effective usually

[Tigerleon]

59 minutes ago, Islam Ghunym said:

do you have any recommendations about a headphone + DAC/Amp in your mind?

What is your budget? There are the SHP 9500 with the Vmoda boom pro that can be attached in like a headset. Or the big brother X2HR which I use and they are fcking amazing. A cheap DAC/amp such as the sound blaster G3 or even if you wanna step up the budget, the G5 is really good. It comes with easy EQ and other settings in its software. I never use surround in  it tho because we've talked about this lol.

Reason why I recommended these is because they have pretty good microphone in into the 3.5mm jack.

[CTR640]

5 hours ago, Islam Ghunym said:

I like how are you dedicated to convince me. Thank you. I think I have better idea now

so the best way to get a good audio positioning is just to use a good headphone not necessarily gaming related  + a good DAC/amp in stereo mode which would outperform all the crap I tried no matter the realtek chip ALC1220 codecs or the 13 years old one, right?

do you have any recommendations about a headphone + DAC/Amp in your mind?

Correct. From all the reviews and experiences from the others who owns the Sennheiser HD800S, this one has the widest soundstage. It has nothing to do with gaming related stuff. I have the ALC1150 and only God knows how old this chip is but it's only alright for earphones, the mobo is from 2014. Now I got the Fiio K5 Pro to power my Beyerdynamics, Fidelio X2HR and other headphones. It was fun hearing footsteps in GTAO when in adversary mode lol, the one you can't see your enemies, it was Halloween themed one I think.

 

If you want good audio, we recommend you brands that are actually specialized in audio.