On Mon, 8 Aug 2005 13:01:25 +0000 (UTC), "Synapse Syndrome"
<synapse@NOSPAMgomez404.elitemail.org> wrote:

>
>"puck" <puck@DO-NOT-REPLY-SEE-SIGNATURE-FOR-REPLY-ADDRESS.COM> wrote in
>message news:flkef1164ldu70jmf5mj8qc6rn34prvro6@4ax.com...
>>i have used a turtle beach santa cruz sound card for the last four
>> years. although it has 5.1 but i use it as a 4.1 setup.
>>
>> i am in the process of putting together a new system with the
>> following asus motherboard -
>> http://uk.asus.com/products4.aspx?l1...75&modelmenu=1
>>
>> not that i need a free pci slot or anything like that, but was
>> wondering if the onbaord sound on this board is equal or better than
>> my turtle beach card. in the bad old days onboard sound used to be
>> rubbish but a review of the motherboard i read stated that the sound
>> quality is better than $50 sound cards. a link to the review is also
>> provided below -
>> http://www.sysopt.com/reviews/asus-P4C800-E_Deluxe/
>>
>
>
>What I want to know is whether on-board sound uses any more processor time
>than a dedicated soundcard using the same sound chip.


No, but why would you want a sound card with the same chip?

The same chip will have exact same CPU utilization on a
card, and when it's on the motherboard (unlike southbridge
integrated sound support) it's even on the PCI bus just like
the card would be.

Primarily the card "might" give you better analog filtering
because it has more room for the filter circuitry. That's
always true though, some cards are very cheap and
minimalistic compared to other cards.