Audio Codecs and API

[Old Right Member]

Why hasn't Microsoft made a set of audio extensions (like EAX) that would run in software in windows vista? Or have they?

What is the difference from version to version of Realtek's audio codec drivers? I know that the one I have now (2.13) sounds better than the previous version, but what exactly do they change? In the release notes it's rare for them to list anything other than "customizations." They fail to elaborate on what "customizations" are.

 

[Davros]

I think they are relying on openal for the fancy stuff

 

[Albuquerque]

Vista already allows for pretty much any codec to be installed, as codecs are a software layer.

I think you're asking for a hardware API that allows for hardware acceleration of sound objects, which they removed along with hardware-accelerated "directsound" support in Vista.

And while it's entirely true that they could have built an API for accelerated sound functionality, I guess they simply chose not to in light of the amassing CPU power we have today. Are there any benchmarks anywhere that demonstrate the benefit of hardware accelerated sound objects on modern hardware?

The last time I saw anything like that, the comparison was being done on old Pentium 3's and slightly-newer Pentium 4's of the ~2.4Ghz single-core non-hyperthreaded era. And on games that were entirely single-threaded. While modern games still have significant room to grow in the "threading" department, they're still far better than they once were.

Cliff notes: I'd like to see a performance analysis of modern games on modern hardware between "software" sound and "hardware-accelerated" sound options.

 

[Davros]

id like to see that too
do you now of any games that do enviroments ect using openal and actually work if your not using a cl card and alchemy ?

 

[Ateo]

Vista already allows for pretty much any codec to be installed, as codecs are a software layer.

I think you're asking for a hardware API that allows for hardware acceleration of sound objects, which they removed along with hardware-accelerated "directsound" support in Vista.

And while it's entirely true that they could have built an API for accelerated sound functionality, I guess they simply chose not to in light of the amassing CPU power we have today. Are there any benchmarks anywhere that demonstrate the benefit of hardware accelerated sound objects on modern hardware?

The last time I saw anything like that, the comparison was being done on old Pentium 3's and slightly-newer Pentium 4's of the ~2.4Ghz single-core non-hyperthreaded era. And on games that were entirely single-threaded. While modern games still have significant room to grow in the "threading" department, they're still far better than they once were.

Cliff notes: I'd like to see a performance analysis of modern games on modern hardware between "software" sound and "hardware-accelerated" sound options.

You are looking at this the wrong way.
EAX 5.0 ADDS to the immersion and is only possbile on a X-Fi.
The same way that AA of AF taxes performance, but gives better IQ and thus better immersion.
It's not only about the performance, it's also about the features.

But here is some nice reading up:
http://www.guru3d.com/article/auzentech-xfi-prelude-71-review/7
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/creative-x,1101-22.html
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/multimedia/display/creative-soundblaster-xfi_9.html#sect0
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=177&type=expert&pid=9

Nothing hard to find, just did a "X-fi review" on the site called google...

 

[Albuquerque]

Wow, you sure showed me...

Two reviews from more than three years ago, and the newest review showed a single game (Battlefield 2142) that showed any perceptable change in framerate -- all other benchmarks were pretty much dead-even in performance between "accelerated" and "software" sound.

Not really thinking that Vista is missing much by avoiding hardware acceleration. And as for "immersion"? Well, to each their own. I've got 5.1 sound, I get echo, reverb, attenuation and other aural oddities from my games -- I assume because they coded them into the audio engine. The best I'm gonna muster from "ZOMG I need a $150 audio card!" is an underwhelming meh.

 

[Ateo]

Wow, you sure showed me...

Two reviews from more than three years ago, and the newest review showed a single game (Battlefield 2142) that showed any perceptable change in framerate -- all other benchmarks were pretty much dead-even in performance between "accelerated" and "software" sound.

Not really thinking that Vista is missing much by avoiding hardware acceleration. And as for "immersion"? Well, to each their own. I've got 5.1 sound, I get echo, reverb, attenuation and other aural oddities from my games -- I assume because they coded them into the audio engine. The best I'm gonna muster from "ZOMG I need a $150 audio card!" is an underwhelming meh.

Nice skipping over the comparisons with AA and AF
But have you ever heard an EAX 5.0 game on EAX 5.0 hardware?
Simple yes/no question.

 

[Albuquerque]

Nice skipping over the comparisons with AA and AF
But have you ever heard an EAX 5.0 game on EAX 5.0 hardware?
Simple yes/no question.

Yes, from my friend Joel who got an X-Fi something-or-other for free from his uncle when he upgraded to a newer rig... The only game I heard it in was UT3, and I couldn't tell enough difference to care.

If someone gave me one for free? I'd use it. But I see no point in purchasing one, there simply isn't enough difference to me nor enough supported games that I want to play to make it worth the expense. Seriously, coming from an onboard Envy24 to whatever my current onboard 5.1 audio is, the pricetag does not merit whatever trivial increase in audible quality I can attach to it.

I do have a need for surround-sound gaming these days, but all the modern games I've played (HL2, Crysis, FarCry 2, FallOut 3, World in Conflict, several others) already have enough surround audio effects for what I want.

And why the correlation to AA / AF? AA and AF are "open standards"; any video card can support them because they're not some closed specification. EAX has to be specifically written into the app, and further, isn't an open specification for other hardware to support.

Your comparison is far more like CUDA than AA or AF. And CUDA does nothing for me either, because the things I want to do don't have any use for CUDA either.

 

[Ateo]

Yes, from my friend Joel who got an X-Fi something-or-other for free from his uncle when he upgraded to a newer rig... The only game I heard it in was UT3, and I couldn't tell enough difference to care.

If someone gave me one for free? I'd use it. But I see no point in purchasing one, there simply isn't enough difference to me nor enough supported games that I want to play to make it worth the expense. Seriously, coming from an onboard Envy24 to whatever my current onboard 5.1 audio is, the pricetag does not merit whatever trivial increase in audible quality I can attach to it.

I do have a need for surround-sound gaming these days, but all the modern games I've played (HL2, Crysis, FarCry 2, FallOut 3, World in Conflict, several others) already have enough surround audio effects for what I want.

And why the correlation to AA / AF? AA and AF are "open standards"; any video card can support them because they're not some closed specification. EAX has to be specifically written into the app, and further, isn't an open specification for other hardware to support.

Your comparison is far more like CUDA than AA or AF. And CUDA does nothing for me either, because the things I want to do don't have any use for CUDA either.

I compare the two(well three actually) because the effects of the effects and similar.
More real world like, sure you can game without, but that removes a lot of the immersion.

I personally game on a X-Fi Elite Pro with 7.1 surround and there is no way I could go back.
And if you ever game a Battlefiled game we wouldn't have this disscusion as the difference is like night and day.
And even in none EAX games have 128 hardware accelerated sounds does also make a big impact.

Like Guru3d wrote:
"Both X-Fi Prelude and X-Fi XtremeMusic cards happily did the ultra 128 voice mode. The X-Meridian is about as fast in 64-voice mode as the X-Fi's are in the 128-voice mode. What was even more impressive was that I actually heard some EAX effects, occlusions and multi-environments (OK, that was in EAX 4), and had a suspension of disbelief!

Since I had not played this game for quite some time, I stayed in the game after the benchmark was completed and just enjoyed the immersion with the Prelude."

For me gaming with onboard sound is like gaming with an IGP...just don't cut it.

 

[Albuquerque]

I compare the two(well three actually) because the effects of the effects and similar.
More real world like, sure you can game without, but that removes a lot of the immersion.

Yes, but again, AA and AF can (mostly) be applied freely to any game. EAX cannot be "applied', it must be directly written in. And the games that I play? The majority of them don't bother writing it in.

And if you ever game a Battlefiled game we wouldn't have this disscusion as the difference is like night and day.

Not interested in any of the BF series.

Like Guru3d wrote: <snip>

And it was also the only game to show a difference, I like how you deep-linked to the only page in the review that could show a difference. I suppose you wanted me to ignore the other 13 pages of "it didn't matter one iota"?

I'm glad you like it, but don't act like it's a godsend when it clearly isn't.

 

[Ateo]

Yes, but again, AA and AF can (mostly) be applied freely to any game. EAX cannot be "applied', it must be directly written in. And the games that I play? The majority of them don't bother writing it in.

Most games I play actually support EAX *shrugs*

And it was also the only game to show a difference, I like how you deep-linked to the only page in the review that could show a difference. I suppose you wanted me to ignore the other 13 pages of "it didn't matter one iota"?

I'm glad you like it, but don't act like it's a godsend when it clearly isn't.

Borderline lying now are we?
http://www.guru3d.com/article/auzentech-xfi-prelude-71-review/6

After the benchmarks were completed, there were quite a few spots where I lingered longer just to listen to the enveloping soundspace and the scary sound effects. The placement accuracy of the Prelude with the surround sound was top notch, followed by the X-Fi, with the X-Meridian sounding the least immersive. It had a slight mixing problem between the surrounds and the front speakers, which is easy enough to fix through volume controls, but it would occassionally pop or glitch audibly when switching from surround to front channels.

It's more icing on the cake, just like AA/AF...you keep deraling about the technique, not the results and thus you fail.

 

[Albuquerque]

Borderline lying now are we?
http://www.guru3d.com/article/auzentech-xfi-prelude-71-review/6

What am I supposed to see here? 1fps? Wow. Glad you noticed.

It's more icing on the cake, just like AA/AF...you keep deraling about the technique, not the results and thus you fail.

Please tell me where I can check a box and play any game with hardware accelerated EAX on any sound platform available. Go ahead and show me where you can apply EAX in a case where it didn't exist from the developers.

Your comparison to AA and AF is as inane as your last retort; antialiasing is a concept, it is not a licensed and copyrighted technique. Anisotropic filtering is a concept, it is not a licensed and copyrighted technique. Antialiasing and anisotropic filtering can be applied to games without the developer coding for it; EAX and it's hardware acceleration can only be used in games where it was specifically written for.

If there was any amount of "fail" in this thread, it is assuredly your dogged and illogical attempt to link a technology item that must be specifically included versus a pair of concepts that can be ubiquitously applied without cost.

I believe you sir are a "fanboi", as evidenced by your little tirade, and as such I will reply no longer to your idiocy.

 

[Ateo]

What am I supposed to see here? 1fps? Wow. Glad you noticed.

Are you being deliberately stupid?
Search for "immersion" *hint-hint*

Please tell me where I can check a box and play any game with hardware accelerated EAX on any sound platform available. Go ahead and show me where you can apply EAX in a case where it didn't exist from the developers.

Your comparison to AA and AF is as inane as your last retort; antialiasing is a concept, it is not a licensed and copyrighted technique. Anisotropic filtering is a concept, it is not a licensed and copyrighted technique. Antialiasing and anisotropic filtering can be applied to games without the developer coding for it; EAX and it's hardware acceleration can only be used in games where it was specifically written for.

If there was any amount of "fail" in this thread, it is assuredly your dogged and illogical attempt to link a technology item that must be specifically included versus a pair of concepts that can be ubiquitously applied without cost.

I believe you sir are a "fanboi", as evidenced by your little tirade, and as such I will reply no longer to your idiocy.

Like I stated, you fail for wanting to divert from the RESULTS!!!

What next...Windows is evil because it not an open standard?

 

[suryad]

I also have the Elite setup along weith the 7.1 S750 gigaworks speaker setup and I dont think I could go back to anything else. Crysis was just awesome...the breeze rustlingthrough the bushes was enough to make me jump and think someone was behind me...you could almost tell what direction the sounds of your enemies chatting or their sounds of their feet were coming from. In GRAW1/2 you could tell where the bullets were coming from relative to your position...from the side or the back or at 3 o clock etc etc and that made ducking and running like hell to avoide the barrage a lot easier lol. I dont think Ateo is being silly here.

 

[Ateo]

I also have the Elite setup along weith the 7.1 S750 gigaworks speaker setup and I dont think I could go back to anything else. Crysis was just awesome...the breeze rustlingthrough the bushes was enough to make me jump and think someone was behind me...you could almost tell what direction the sounds of your enemies chatting or their sounds of their feet were coming from. In GRAW1/2 you could tell where the bullets were coming from relative to your position...from the side or the back or at 3 o clock etc etc and that made ducking and running like hell to avoide the barrage a lot easier lol. I dont think Ateo is being silly here.

First time i fired Battlefield 2 up with EAX 5.0 and 7.1 I actually moved my head due to a bullet buzzing by...

I have grown used to using sound in the Army..now I can use it in games to...I love it!

 

[Albuquerque]

I also have the Elite setup along weith the 7.1 S750 gigaworks speaker setup and I dont think I could go back to anything else. Crysis was just awesome...the breeze rustlingthrough the bushes was enough to make me jump and think someone was behind me...you could almost tell what direction the sounds of your enemies chatting or their sounds of their feet were coming from.

Seeing as how I get the same effect in my onboard 5.1 setup, you will have to provide a better example

I dont think Ateo is being silly here.

Really, so EAX is just like AA and AF? You can apply it to any game that supports audio? Because that's not how I recall the situation.

 

[Ateo]

Seeing as how I get the same effect in my onboard 5.1 setup, you will have to provide a better example

Not anyway near as accurate, which is his and my point:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_audio_extensions#EAX_5.0
EAX 5.0

EAX 5.0 is present in Sound Blaster X-Fi sound cards.

* 128 simultaneous voices processable in hardware and up to 4 effects on each
* EAX Voice (processing of microphone input signal)
* EAX PurePath (EAX Sound effects can originate from one speaker only)
* Environment FlexiFX (four available effects slots per channel)
* EAX MacroFX (realistic positional effects at close range)
* Environment Occlusion (sound from adjacent environments can pass through walls)

Really, so EAX is just like AA and AF? You can apply it to any game that supports audio? Because that's not how I recall the situation.

Still walking the fallacy road are we?
It's not about the fucking way it gets implemented, it's about the fucking results
The immersion EFFECT of EAX is for sound what AA and AF are for IQ, how many times will you ignore this?

 

[Albuquerque]

Not any near as accurate, which is his and my point.

Are you sure? Why don't you go look up Crysis and it's support for EAX.

Come back when you can admit your error.

Still walking the fallacy road are we?
It's not about the fucking way it gets implemented, it's about the fucking results
The immersion EFFECT of EAX is for sound what AA and AF are for IQ, how many times will you ignore this?

Except that, again, AA and AF can be applied to essentially every 3D asset. You compared onboard audio to that of an IGP's graphics quality. You know what? My onboard audio gets the same sound positioning and immersion in Crysis as your X-Fi without having to spend another penny.

The difference between my pair of 4850's and an Intel GMA would be significantly different in a cutting-edge game like Crysis. You make comparisons where there are none to be made. The "effect" of AA and AF is entirely seperate from EAX -- one can be applied ubiquiteously, one must be specifically coded into the game or else it's entirely useless. And since the number of games that support EAX 5.0 profiles is also incredibly small (among the grand total of games available), it's impact is equally minimized.

You say 'immersion' like it's an automatic thing. It's not.

Edit: Nice edit on your part. I'm ignoring the bullet list, as I already know what EAX is. It doesn't matter, none of those things apply to a game that wasn't specifically written for it. And since the overwhelming majority of games weren't written for it, it isn't like AA and AF in the slightest.

 

[Ateo]

Are you sure? Why don't you go look up Crysis and it's support for EAX.

Come back when you can admit your error.

I don't have to, even if a game don support EAX, it dosn't take away the X-Fi's superior 3D positioning...when will you start being intellectual honest?

Except that, again, AA and AF can be applied to essentially every 3D asset. You compared onboard audio to that of an IGP's graphics quality. You know what? My onboard audio gets the same sound positioning and immersion in Crysis as your X-Fi without having to spend another penny.

Are you claming that you soundcard can do 128 hardware accelerated sounds at the same time?
Name you onbaord sound, and you will have relaved your ignorance.

The difference between my pair of 4850's and an Intel GMA would be significantly different in a cutting-edge game like Crysis. You make comparisons where there are none to be made. The "effect" of AA and AF is entirely seperate from EAX -- one can be applied ubiquiteously, one must be specifically coded into the game or else it's entirely useless. And since the number of games that support EAX 5.0 profiles is also incredibly small (among the grand total of games available), it's impact is equally minimized.

You say 'immersion' like it's an automatic thing. It's not.

Edit: Nice edit on your part. I'm ignoring the bullet list, as I already know what EAX is. It doesn't matter, none of those things apply to a game that wasn't specifically written for it. And since the overwhelming majority of games weren't written for it, it isn't like AA and AF in the slightest.

Why do talk about a subject you have no notion about, Mr. my-onboard-sound-can-do-128-hardware-accelerated-simultaneous-sounds
Lets hear what you hardware is, I love that you have cornered yourself without knowning it

 

[Albuquerque]

I don't have to, even if a game don support EAX, it dosn't take away the X-Fi's superior 3D positioning...when will you start being intellectual honest?

Do you really believe this? Because if you do, then this conversation is entirely over. Your assumption here is entirely incorrect; if the game is not written for direct EAX support, then the output from your Xfi is just as positionally accurate as my onboard audio when supporting the same number of channels.

End of discussion.