Well written article and a good fun read. However, I would like more information such as: CPU usage while playing back audio in movies and games vs onboard Impressive Surround Sound quality comparison between the card and onboard specifically competitive FPS play such as Counter Strike, BF3/4, COD or whatever the author has. Impressive Surround Sound quality in movies such as Live Free and Die Hard 4, Dark Knight, Fifth Element, Return of the Jedi, Predator 1, Saving Private Ryan opening beach attack sequence or Akira anime. EAX or OpenAL, DirectSound compatibility To me, 3D Surround Sound Immersion in the most important property for movies and games while quality is more important for music. Everytime I test sound cards with friends, I still cannot get over how good that old classic Aureal 3D until EAX 4 came out. Gamers who had the privileged of playing Half Life with Aureal 3D back then know what I'm talking about.

I certainly liked the review alot thx Mister Mitchell i also liked the humor in it a moment of zennnn :thumbup:. That's what i like about guru3d reviews there is always a fun moment in reading them oh and mister Hagendoorn don't be bothered with some guy being rude he's not worth it.I sincerley hope you keep posting soundcard reviews most of us here understand the hard work you do for the community!

After first one ! I stoped reading comments lol I'm Happy with my SB-Z Gamer ED, PCIe Gold Plated with Nichicon “Fine Gold” (MOD) Supported by PAX Moded Drivers -> all Games run with Creative ALchemy OpenAL (disabled DirectX) on mY Wooden 5.1 600W -> My Dad tells me after Movie: "son its like Home Cinema" 🙂 And i say: Dad, cuz' it's the Home Cinema ! 🤓 Besides, SB still is the best for Gaming IMO :banana:

If you want to fix the "Win10 above 48khz distortions" please download the most recent Win10 driver from the manufacturers hp and download the driver for SC808 (CM8888 Chip): aimpro21. com/support_download_soundcard.asp It fixed all the problems i had. This soundcard sounds exceptional in STEREO out of the RCA's. But the biggest downside for me is that this soundcard dont use the Wolfson DAC and the changeable Op Amps in 5.1/7.1. Instead sound ist processed via the codec which still sounds good. I am out lookin to test the new ASUS Strix Soundcards because of the 8 channel DAC. Maybe they release a new Essence Line in the next months, like a sucessor to STXII 7.1 would be great.

Give the reviewer a break!!

Agreed. If we all bought our audio equipment based solely on numbers, most of us would have gone back to onboard sound and cheap 2ch speakers by now just due to cost. The numbers are meaningless without a reference point anyway and most gamers really don't care to learn THAT much just to buy a damn sound card. At the end of the day, as long as the audio output is pleasing to YOU, that's all that matters. The numbers aren't going to change whether or not you enjoy what you're hearing. What sounds good to one person, won't necessarily be pleasing to another. For reference, I have a Creative Sound Blaster Z and Logitech Z313 2.1ch speakers and Superlux HD681 headphones..... I'm quite happy with the sound quality. I really don't care whether they look good on paper or not. I only care how they sound to MY ears.

I completely agree with your post. I do not consider myself to be an audiophile, but I know good sound when I hear it. I have been building PCs since 1989 and have used everything from the original Sound Blaster (yup, ISA bus) to my current Sound Blaster Z, plus the Turtle Beach Santa Cruz (remember that one?) not to mention the total ASUS Xonar lineup to exclude their Essence series. I have exposure to the old Auzentech cards as well, including the X-Meridian 7.1 among others. I have, of course, used every variation of onboard sound. Now, here are my opinions on the state of onboard sound: 1. Properly implemented, a Realtek ALC889 or ALC1150 will sound VERY good for analog-out stereo music duties. When I mean properly implemented, I am referring to not only the new and improved L/R channel isolation, ground layers, audio PCB separation, high end OP-AMPs, decent CAPS, etc. that are being used on “gaming” motherboards but also good DPC latency and PCB/trace layout design. 2. Onboard sound typically falls flat when thrown something like surround gaming while using headphones. It just does not work well…no matter what. There are a couple of exceptions, like when using a Creative Sound Core 3D processor for the onboard sound, but those onboard solutions are the exceptions and not the rule. 3. Speaker quality can and does affect your experience just as much as the sound solution, when the sound solution is doing the digital to analog conversion. My ASUS X99/A USB 3.1 motherboard has ALC1150 with all of the special gaming “stuff” and in reality I have trouble telling the difference between it and my Sound Blaster Z even when it is in 24bit/192KHz Stereo Direct mode because I have Klipsch Pro Media 2.1 speakers. I was debating whether to continue using the SB Z when I realized this, but virtual surround sound while using headphones in games was the deal breaker and I continued with the SB Z. Now, here are my opinions on the state of sound cards: 1. The drivers have been, and frequently still are, buggy as all hell. The cards themselves many times do not behave well and drop out of Device Manager and are no longer discoverable until a reboot. 2. Sound cards, when you pick the right one for YOU, and paired up with the right speakers and headphones, typically BLOW AWAY onboard sound—especially with virtual surround gaming. My Sound Blaster Z is testament to this. 3. C-Media cards have historically been really bad at providing good virtual surround gaming, no matter the version of the CODEC/CPU or the manufacturer of the card. From the review, it sounds like C-Media and Power Color are getting it right this time around. Not only do we have a sound card that sounds great in music and movies, but also sounds great while doing virtual surround when using headphones for gaming. Driver stability is paramount, and from the review it appears this is not a major issue like it is for Creative from time to time. Although RMAA results would have been nice to see, they DO NOT tell the whole story and can be misleading despite looking at the cold hard numbers. They are not the end-all / be-all of a sound card review. RMAA results are just one facet. There are many other factors to worry about as I detailed above. I think this review nailed it as far as what I worry about. I have tried and returned so many sound cards over the years that I have lost count. I returned every ASUS Xonar I tried for one reason or another…there was just some tradeoff I could not live with. Most of those ASUS Xonars had beautiful RMAA results! Every single one either could play music/movies well or do virtual surround over headphones in games well, but NEVER both. The Xonar DG-X is the poster child for what I am talking about. Up until now, the only card that seems to have gotten it > 90% right is the Creative Sound Blaster Z and I am NOT a huge Creative fan. In fact, I am one of the biggest Creative bashers of all time and forever more, but I am giving credit where credit is due and wrote a super detailed review on it at Newegg. It is, in fact, the top featured positive review and has been for two years now. As for gaming performance (that being FPS and if it is affected by your sound solution): THIS IS LARGELY A NON-FACTOR ANYMORE. With the advent of the new Windows driver model starting with Vista, the ability of the sound solution to utilize ultra high end acceleration features to alleviate bottle necks and maybe even increase FPS is about ZERO. In fact, I have personally benched on-board sound in various games against my Sound Blaster Z under Windows 7, 8/8.1 and 10 and found NO DIFFERENCE in FPS. So, please DO continue the sound card reviews because the timing of this review was beautiful. I am actively considering the Devil HDX but have been holding off until their Windows 10 driver comes out of BETA. I was also very interested to know that 48KHz is the speed limit (so to speak) when using any of the advanced sound effects like virtual surround for gaming. I will wait until that is fixed now. Without this review, I would have been in the dark regarding a purchase decision since there is only one other review of this card on the web and it is practically a gloss-over review and quite frankly SUCKS in comparison to this one. I am not the least bit sorry for this long post. I have forgotten more than most people will ever know when it comes to PC hardware and I love to write about my experiences. I hope you had the patience to read through it!

Although RMAA results would have been nice to see, they DO NOT tell the whole story and can be misleading despite looking at the cold hard numbers. They are not the end-all / be-all of a sound card review. RMAA results are just one facet. There are many other factors to worry about as I detailed above.

RMAA's shortcoming, but properly understood it's actually a huge compliment to RMAA: http://nwavguy.blogspot.hr/2011/02/rightmark-audio-analyzer-rmaa.html

/cut As for gaming performance (that being FPS and if it is affected by your sound solution): THIS IS LARGELY A NON-FACTOR ANYMORE.

out of that WoT, this is the only thing I can agree with, without any caveats

Uncalled for

kinda ask me the same thing, I went over the gaming section, and the text tells me how somebody "describes" the sound. They should definitely take a peek at other sites and see what is mandatory for a soundcard check. (noise measurement / spectrum, etc.). If you don't have the means, plz don't do a review at all.

I agree that a objective measurement should have been included, like RMAA results. I DO NOT agree that the entire review was BS based upon the lack of RMAA results. YOU did not buy the card, open it, install it, test drive the various features, and then write a long article about it including copious pictures. The reviewer did, however. There is only one other review on the web regarding this card and it lacks RMAA results (or half the useful information this review has for that matter). I think driver quality is rather critical and this review went into some much needed depth on that score. Since you are being this critical of a free review, then why not buy the card and review it yourself? I would personally be interested in another take on this card...you cannot have too many reviews when making a buying decision!

Yup

out of that WoT, this is the only thing I can agree with, without any caveats

That is why reviewing a sound card is so difficult...just about everything will have a caveat and just about everyone has different tastes. What sounds good to one person will sound horrific to another regardless of the objective results!

How about a round-up?

He might have gone into driver detail, however the text he tries to describe the sound quality is simply subjective and of no real value. Comparrison between other cards is not possible. I have a soundcard, and my job isn't to review. However I can critique this"review" which simply seems like advertisement and clickbait. It is not a proper review by standards. Hilbert's GPU/CPU and Mobo reviews follow a certain established standard, this one doesn't and is subpar. If this was a thread started by a user and was called first impression, or detailed hands on, it would be another story. But it definitely is not a proper review, for this sites standards, or in general.

Yes, this review did not include every possible way to review a sound card. I disagree that it was clickbait or some sort advertisement. I think he was genuinely impressed with it. The art of sound card reviewing has gone by the wayside with the advent of better onboard sound solutions and the lack of innovation in the sound card market. I have seen the decline myself. The days of massive benchmark suites being run against them are well and good OVER. This site is not dedicated to sound card reviews. If it was, I would have ripped into the review with even more aggressiveness than you. Believe me. I can be a real bastard when it comes to this. I am giving the reviewer the pass because he is not an expert, does not review sound cards as a profession or even hobby, probably is young and inexperienced in regards to how sound cards have progressed and then...not progressed...over the years. I think, however, that lemons can always be made into lemonade. I believe it is time for Guru3D to do a sound card round up of the latest onboard solutions with some very recent motherboards including a sound card from each manufacturer at a price point below $150 give or take a couple of dollars. I further think everyone should be invited to chime in on what should be included in the review, how the solutions should be reviewed, and all of the input should be distilled into a viable round-up methodology and voted upon. Your thoughts?

Further... Further, I do believe that SUBJECTIVE listening tests are actually just as useful as the objective ones, like RMAA. You have to take both into consideration. Had *I* done so, I would never had bought the Xonar DG-X for example. The RMAA results were good, but the panel of subjective sound listeners had some objections to it. I ignored that and paid the price. Subjective listening tests, when done in the context of a panel of various folks who expect different levels of sound quality (a average user, power user, professional user, gamer, and the audiophile) are highly effective and should be given weight in the conclusion. How much weight is up for debate, but my experience says just as much weight as the RMAA results. I think besides the lack of objective RMAA testing, the only mistake the reviewer made was not using a panel of subjective listeners and only using himself for that part of it.

Well, this blew up more than anyone expected. All I can say is that I got my Xonar D2X because I read the review here. Rightmark Analyzer numbers are almost necessary, but I loved the writing on the article. Please don't stop doing them, there aren't many places that will seriously review "gaming" cards. My question still stands to the reviewer, or whoever has this card. How does this stack up to the D2X/Essence etc? How is it compared to the high end of the "previous" generation of sound cards?

Well, this blew up more than anyone expected. All I can say is that I got my Xonar D2X because I read the review here. Rightmark Analyzer numbers are almost necessary, but I loved the writing on the article. Please don't stop doing them, there aren't many places that will seriously review "gaming" cards. My question still stands to the reviewer, or whoever has this card. How does this stack up to the D2X/Essence etc? How is it compared to the high end of the "previous" generation of sound cards?

Hence the dire need for that roundup I was talking about!

I there any difference with soundcards after HW directsound was destroyed really?

Well, this blew up more than anyone expected. All I can say is that I got my Xonar D2X because I read the review here. Rightmark Analyzer numbers are almost necessary, but I loved the writing on the article. Please don't stop doing them, there aren't many places that will seriously review "gaming" cards. My question still stands to the reviewer, or whoever has this card. How does this stack up to the D2X/Essence etc? How is it compared to the high end of the "previous" generation of sound cards?

I can't answer fully but I had a D2X before I got the Phoebus, technically the D2 and D2X are described as more "gaming" oriented sound cards and the Phoebus is sort of the follow up to that and now the Strix is a follow up to the Phoebus in three separate editions and this from Powercolor seems to be oriented similarly. PowerColor appears to have taken the CM8888 sound processor or what they are called that were also used in the Phoebus and unlike the D2X this and the Phoebus are truly native PCI-E cards without a "bridge" chip, also appears to be using molex connectors directly from the PSU for a "cleaner" power loop if I understood things right whereas the D2X used that four pin thinner connection. If this has the same audio capacity as the Phoebus you get some additional features to play around with although I assume the "GX" thing Asus used is not present and that's probably for the better since the thing never really worked right and it's not "true" EAX 5.0, only some attempt to emulate the effect. (EDIT: You probably get Dolby Pro what it was called as well for even more features though I prefer to turn off most enhancements but if you want to customize stuff like bass and other effects fully this can be very very handy and should be pretty straightforward too.) Audio card here seems to be aimed at headphones and digital with a daughter-board for analog speaker connections, nothing new there I believe and some Creative cards have also used this design. Quality wise doesn't the D2X have something like -116Db or what it advertised whereas this is -124 and both can do 192Khz / 24 bit though for both of these features I am very unsure if there's a audible difference, would likely require extremely good headphones and or speaker setups for full effect. (And if you are that serious about audio equipment maybe you'd have a dedicated audio connection instead of a PCI-E card.) I think this card can also drive more powerful headphones than the D2X although I don't know the technical details and specifications on this sort of thing, probably nothing you'd need to worry about with most standard headphones either I assume. Honestly I'd say the D2X is probably good as-is unless you really want to upgrade, access to the unified driver setups is very useful too which you'd lose with newer C-Media audio chips. (The Phoebus drivers I'm using have worked well even in their beta releases but there's a lot of complaints on the ROG forums on missing features, especially for Windows 10 functionality so if it's the same with this Powercolor card compatibility could be a bit of a hassle with the current drivers if you're unlucky.) Not the best of answers I suppose, maybe someone with a better insight or knowledge about audio devices can give a more useful comparison between the older audio card using I think it's the AV100 / AV200 something chip (Or was it 8700 something and the AV was another thing?) and these CM8888 ones and the other newer components used for the full audio device. 🙂 (Actually come to think of it I believe the AV100 and AV200 only differed in one thing between the D2 and D2X and they might have used the CM8788 chip.)

Everytime I test sound cards with friends, I still cannot get over how good that old classic Aureal 3D until EAX 4 came out. Gamers who had the privileged of playing Half Life with Aureal 3D back then know what I'm talking about.

I really know what are you talking about, I played Thief (the firsth) with a3d card, then I switched to diamond monster a3d on vertex2, geeez...that was 3d sound...played america's army or other games fps style and can hear every detail of enemy's approaching... That was real 3d sound, real 3d acceleration, real 3d sound immersion...but killed by creative and their trolololpatent processes. A3d won them, but when it was to late, and it killed em, too costly...

where are the fr, distortion, snr and output impedance measurements, I think the website is bugged because I cannot see them 🙁

I think that if you are not a filthy peasant you will get A PROPPER sound solution, odac/o2, schiit magni/modi

Appreciate the review. Even more appreciative that sound cards are still being released today, especially by alternative manufacturers like PowerColor. Sound cards can be a touchy subject for some. Personally, I'm a staunch believer and have been using them in every build I've ever owned. The original SB Live! Platinum, Audigy 2 ZS, Xonar DG, ST and currently a STX II with HD700's. The SB Live! gave me crackling and popping sounds with multiple motherboards but other than that, have never ran into any issues. Nothing "disappearing" from device manager, poor surround, etc. I use UniXonar drivers. I believe the rules to problem free sound is 1) Driver cleaning/clean installs and 2) 3rd party drivers. I plan on eventually moving to external solutions once the budget allows it because that's where you start seeing larger gains but in the meantime, I am perfectly happy with my setup currently.

Nvml I'm going to get drunk for the new year.

I really know what are you talking about, I played Thief (the firsth) with a3d card, then I switched to diamond monster a3d on vertex2, geeez...that was 3d sound...played america's army or other games fps style and can hear every detail of enemy's approaching... That was real 3d sound, real 3d acceleration, real 3d sound immersion...but killed by creative and their trolololpatent processes. A3d won them, but when it was to late, and it killed em, too costly...

Going off topic .... Those were the days right? I remember playing counter strike alphas and betas up to 1.5 and guys on the servers thought I was hacking when it just superior 3d audio positioning giving them away (walking helps to sneak up on people, not running). I was hoping modern sound cards would actually do some "real" 3d game sound positioning but not many still gets close to A3D. Some EAX 4.0 specific games can get close but nothing as good as A3D. Now I hope AMD would get their TrueAudio 3D HRTF sound technology working and widely supported so we can have a 3D audio Renaissance.