Creative: ASUS Misleading Customers on EAX Drivers

[imperialreign]

Originally Posted by BumbRush

creative claims it does support advanced hd(new name for all eax tech)

now as to your 128hardware voices.

. . .

and about quility cmedia vs x-fi hardware

. . .

just examps of the BS creative and their fanboi's hate to see, creative was once the choice for audio cards, now they are just, meh at best, crappy drivers, poor hardware design that dosnt work with all systems properly.

Ummm . . . if you're trying to compare a true X-Fi to an Auzen . . . that's no contest. Auzen have taken the roost for the absolute best audio quality in the market. Everyone else is battling it out for a close second. The X-Fi, though, takes the cake in performance - no other card can really match their proccessing speeds.

So, moot point. eff-dee-doo, IMO, that Auzen has better rated sound quality, find a better point to argue.


The X-Fi Xtreme Audio PCI and the PCI-E cards do not support EAX 3, 4, or 5 - and no where have I EVER read an advertisement that claimed they do. You can go and hope that other hardware designers can reverse engineer the EAX drivers, but without the hardware it still won't work. Usage of any hardware to impliment those features without consent from Creative is a major violation of intellectual rights, and could cost a manufacturer more money than they would actually make.

The Xtreme Audio do support EAX 1 and 2, which give Creative the right to spin their marketing on it and claim the cards support "EAX Advanced HD." Remember, marketing is all about getting someone to buy your product, as long as your relatively truthful, you can say as you wish - it's up to the customer to be informed and research a potential purchase - not the manufacturer's concern.


I'm sorry, but I don't see EAX being the only selling point to an X-Fi card. Biggest selling point, IMO, is a dedicated APU instead of a chipset. Find me a card that can process 128 hardware audio streams faster than an Xtreme Gamer Fatal1ty Pro. Seriously, go find me a review or something, as I'd like to see it . . . BTW, audio cards from the EMU line-up don't count, as those are Creative's products too.

ASUS screwed up on this one. You can trick the game software into thinking your hardware is EAX capable - but without the correct hardware to process the DSP calls, it won't sound right, or it won't function properly at all.

[department76]

Originally Posted by imperialreign

ASUS screwed up on this one. You can trick the game software into thinking your hardware is EAX capable - but without the correct hardware to process the DSP calls, it won't sound right, or it won't function properly at all.

wave the crackling audio across the line!

funny how few people realize what a DSP/APU actually is, what it does, and that the X-Fi is essentially the only one around. C-Media codecs (or Realtek, VIA, etc for that matter) just aren't the same thing.

[Mussels]

people are arguing the wrong points here - the Xfi does have hardware acceleration for EAX, but thats not what MAKES eax.

EAX can easily be done in software, and the guy before did show a quote claiming EAX was meant to be on these cards - EAX 'advanced HD' is thrown around a lot, but its really just creatives way of pushing people around.

Remember the whole uproar about how vista doesnt work in 5.1? Notice how it was ONLY EAX games that screwed up? Thats because creative insisted surround sound be tied in with their audio extensions (EAX)

Creative have good hardware, but horrible marketing and horrible software, and they DO lie about these things. They want audigy users to pay for EAX in vista, when X-fi users get alchemy for free... thats dodgy. no other word for it.

[btarunr]

Originally Posted by BumbRush

creative claims it does support advanced hd(new name for all eax tech)

now as to your 128hardware voices.



and about quility cmedia vs x-fi hardware



just examps of the BS creative and their fanboi's hate to see, creative was once the choice for audio cards, now they are just, meh at best, crappy drivers, poor hardware design that dosnt work with all systems properly.

You sir are a troll.

Those charts were put up by Auzentech for marketing the X-Meridean on their website, they removed them after the X-Fi Prelude came up, for obvious reasons...so you can pretty much guess their accuracy. The charts were hosted and re-hosted over and over agin until you got them.

The Xtreme Audio does not support EAX 4.0 and 5.0.

"Advanced HD" is NOT the new name of EAX, stop making things up. EAX is the effects DSP, when the audio output format happens to be 24-bit with > 44.1 kHz sample rate, it becomes HD audio....by Intel's Azalia specifications. So in a multichannel setup such as 5.1 or 7.1, 96 kHz sample rate is used for the output audio track with 6 (or 8) channels in all. Some games up the resolution to 24-bit and so it becomes "Advanced HD".

So a game utlizing HD format audio with EAX 3.0 and up becomes EAX 24-bit Advanced HD. There's a logo for that as well.

And just what 'quality' prefix are you giving C-Media? No, C-Media did design the Oxygen HD CMI-8788 chipset for the X-Meridean BUT you cannot give the chipset credit for the card's superior output quality, it was because Auzen used stage II DAC chips made by Asahi Kasei that the output quality was that good. The CMI 8788 basically did the signal processing job there while the CPU processed audio. Get your facts right.

[candle_86]

while with EAX i have no knowlege i do have it alot of experince with sound cards. C-Media uses a codec, all of there cards do, this means the CPU does the work and the card outputs it. I ran a compairson between my Sound Blaster Live and a c-media card last year, and guess what my live did better yet its from 1998. As for Vista support, blame MS for removing hardware APU support via DirectX, the only way around this is to bypass DirectX and that means a new card.

As stop insulting members, your a troll, so go back to your bridge, though from your statements elsewhere i think you belong here

http://www.rage3d.com/board/

go there and annoy them, they are very much like you

[Mussels]

BT's comments have a logical backing. while i didnt get his point originally, he has made it clear he is basing it on fact and not assumptions.

why blame MS, when creative were the only people using hardware audio, and it was choking the industry? they STILL dont let anyone use EAX above 2.0, and WONDERFULLY limit most games - ever noticed how say, EAX 5.0 games... ONLY support 5.0. no 4, no 3, no 2 - its Creative or go home. i'm GLAD microsoft killed that.

[candle_86]

creative has a right to hold there license and do what they want with them.

Im sure creative is working on a new APU that can bypass the secruity and allow hardware accelerated audio agian.

[sman83]

Originally Posted by candle_86

while with EAX i have no knowlege i do have it alot of experince with sound cards. C-Media uses a codec, all of there cards do, this means the CPU does the work and the card outputs it. I ran a compairson between my Sound Blaster Live and a c-media card last year, and guess what my live did better yet its from 1998. As for Vista support, blame MS for removing hardware APU support via DirectX, the only way around this is to bypass DirectX and that means a new card.

As stop insulting members, your a troll, so go back to your bridge, though from your statements elsewhere i think you belong here

http://www.rage3d.com/board/

go there and annoy them, they are very much like you

I found this thread most informative and entertaining !! I had to make a comment about the Creative Audigy/Xi-Fi drivers for Vista.

Yea Creatives drivers for Vista suck I think that anyone can recognize that, and they are being lazy and greedy bastards when it comes to there drivers for Vista. That pissed me off when I bought a Creative Audigy Platinum eX for $30 from there website for a St. Pattys day special. I didnt need anything special just something to replace the onboard sound.

After much dissappointment with there reference drivers for Vista I found this guy on the Creative forums with FULLY FUNCTIONAL(the spdif for 64bit vista doesnt work, but I use 32-bit) drivers for Vista !!

Been using these and they work perfect onboard DD and DTS encoding work, spdif works, gameport and EAX sounds just like I remember for XP !

Here the links cudos to Daniel K !

Drivers:
http://forums.creative.com/creativel...hread.id=29151

Software Pack:
http://forums.creative.com/creativel...hread.id=24260

Modified Alchemy to work with new drivers:
http://forums.creative.com/creativel...hread.id=18972

This guy will get my money for the drivers not Creative !

[btarunr]

I know that guy, Daniel K...very helpful chap.

[btarunr]

Originally Posted by candle_86

Im sure creative is working on a new APU that can bypass the secruity and allow hardware accelerated audio agian.

Some comic relief

[candle_86]

Originally Posted by btarunr

Some comic relief

lol man you made my day

[BumbRush]

Originally Posted by candle_86

Im sure creative is working on a new APU that can bypass the secruity and allow hardware accelerated audio agian.

vista support has nothing to do with the hardware in this case, its all to do with creative needing to rewrite their drivers from scratch and they hate do do that, they just like to mod the ones they already have a little and callit a new version.....

[imperialreign]

part of the major problem Creative has had with the Vista drivers is less time to write them compared to other manufacturers. During the design process for Vista, MS was working with both Creative and nVidia in trying to bring about an API that would replace DirectSound, and allow full hardware acceleration from within Vista. Problems arose when nVidia pulled out of the collaboration, and MS then decided to quit supporting the project as well - leaving Creative high and dry in the matter; so then they turned all their attention towards the open source OpenAL API. Big reason why Creative was very late to the field with Vista drivers, and big reason why Vista drivers have been very dodgy and have had numerous beta releases as they try to catch up.

Besides, every audio manufacturer has had their slew of driver issues with Vista - Creative is not alone in this matter, they've just taken the brunt of the flak because their hardware is so more widely used. Come to think of it - every manufacturer from audio to video has had driver issues with Vista . . . but only a few companies are taking the heat

Originally Posted by Mussels

people are arguing the wrong points here - the Xfi does have hardware acceleration for EAX, but thats not what MAKES eax.

EAX can easily be done in software, and the guy before did show a quote claiming EAX was meant to be on these cards - EAX 'advanced HD' is thrown around a lot, but its really just creatives way of pushing people around.

Remember the whole uproar about how vista doesnt work in 5.1? Notice how it was ONLY EAX games that screwed up? Thats because creative insisted surround sound be tied in with their audio extensions (EAX)

Creative have good hardware, but horrible marketing and horrible software, and they DO lie about these things. They want audigy users to pay for EAX in vista, when X-fi users get alchemy for free... thats dodgy. no other word for it.

I can't argue that Creative doesn't lie - TBH, I can't think of a single manufacturer that hasn't lied at some point or another. I did think it was really effed up that they wanted Audigy users to pay for the ALchemy drivers; it's not just dodgy, it's wrong - a means of trying to force people to upgrade to newer hardware.

The thing I was trying to make clear, though, is that it doesn't matter if an audio card can trick a game or software into running EAX - EAX DSPs are written based around a hardware design and architecture. While some DSPs might work without the hardware they were written for to be present, most will not function properly, if at all. I'm not talking about hardware acceleration being related to EAX, I'm talking about the hardware's ability to process the EAX calls.

As to the Vista 5.1 issue - there are a ton of programs that have run into issues with 5.1 audio, not just EAX games (although, they do present the majority). Creative's form of surround sound, CMSS-3D, runs on it's own DSPs, being only partially tied into the EAX routines at a software level - IIRC.

[BumbRush]

EAX can be software emulated, and thats how they added it to the pci-e "x-fi" card, its buggy still because its using creative drivers, and i got a feeling that other companys are using those drivers to model their eax support method on(such as this asus card) hence problems show up.

just like OGL can be emulated using d3d or d3d be emulated via ogl(sitech gldirect for example) you can emulate/convert the API calls for eax 3-4-5 to run in software or use the hardware thats avalable to run them, EAX is not really so much a hardware feture as creatives way of doing enviromental sound, aureal and some others had their own ways, that really where supperior in many ways for thier days, but they are all dead now, mostly due to creatives market power :/

cmedia survived and their xear3d is quite good im my experiance, even with headphones you really get a feeling of 3d possitioning, not as good as true surround sound, but hey, its better then most other options.

creative for years has needed to start from scratch with their drivers, but they dont want to do that, Oh and the audigy thing, utter horseshit,charge people to get support that other companys would give for free!!!!

do you know that the old 8738 got driver updates for both vista and XP just after Vista came out?(and had betas b4 that) the chip is as old as the sblive, a card creative refuses to support anymore, but has GOOD WORKING DRIVERS even under vista!!!!(i tested this and 6ch sound works in vista both in games and in movies) thats enought proof for me of who the better company is........

[imperialreign]

Originally Posted by BumbRush

EAX can be software emulated, and thats how they added it to the pci-e "x-fi" card, its buggy still because its using creative drivers, and i got a feeling that other companys are using those drivers to model their eax support method on(such as this asus card) hence problems show up.

just like OGL can be emulated using d3d or d3d be emulated via ogl(sitech gldirect for example) you can emulate/convert the API calls for eax 3-4-5 to run in software or use the hardware thats avalable to run them, EAX is not really so much a hardware feture as creatives way of doing enviromental sound, aureal and some others had their own ways, that really where supperior in many ways for thier days, but they are all dead now, mostly due to creatives market power :/

<sigh>

the PCI and PCIE Xtreme Audio is capable of EAX 2, because of the chipset that's present on the PCB. It's not added as a "software emulated" variety, nor by any other means - the card's hardware is capable of EAX 2, nothing further, and that's that. If it were truly capable of EAX 3,4 or 5, I'm 100% positive that Creative would advertise that fact on their site like they do with ALL THE OTHER X-FI CARDS. Again, EAX capability is limited by hardware capability.

You seem to forget in the early days, there was a TON of competition in the audio market. Companines that were acquired by Creative had nothing to do with Creative's market power (which was relatively low during the 90s due to how many other competitors were on the market). Companies had problems though, as everyone had their own way of doing things, and actual card performance and capabilities varied greatly from one brand to the next. Aureal was Creative's biggest competitor in the audio market, and was still relatively new when Creative acquired them. A legal battle started by Aureal over copyright infringement between the two companies left Aureal in bankruptcy, even though they won the lawsuit (although Creative's patent was found to be valid and didn't infringe upon Aureal's technology), and shortly thereafter Creative purchased Aureal and gained the rights to their technology which was vastly incorporated into EAX. E-Mu, which focused more on music production than audio re-production, was purchased back in 93, and partnership between the two companies lead to EAX 1 and 2. Ensoniq, which was focused more on synthesizers and music much like E-Mu was, was acquired by Creative sometime in 98, and their technology was incorporated into EAX as well (and their API was the foundation for Creative's virtual audio positioning).

Every competitor that Creative had during the 90s was acquired - their biggest flaw was that the companies were focused more on a very specific target audience . . . not the PC. E-Mu started as a synthesizer produced, as well as Ensoniq. Aureal was started as a specialty company as well. It has only been within the last couple of years that a lot of competition with Creative has again flared up - as ASUS, Razer and HT Omega have entered the ring, and onboard solutions are advancing. Truthfully, though, Creative's only true competitor right now is C-Media, as they supply all the chipsets found on all competiting products (excluding the Auzen Prelude).

[BumbRush]

acctualy i have seen some cards that are good for anything but gaming that use via or crystal chips(the crystal chips cost to much tho, so most companys dont use them)

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16829121006

not the best but damn good for movies and music.

personaly most people i know who have had newer systems built have ended up sticking with the onboard sound (just tweak the EQ and it sounds quite good on decent boards)
even had a few ppl who tryed sblive5.1/24bit cards that ended up dumping those cards for onboard because the sound was the same or better and the drivers where more up to date, BTW the sblive24 is an audigy chip.......and dosnt have decent/working vista drivers :/

thats also why u see alot of games that dont use EAX anymore, because alot of gamers have moved away from creative so why spend $ to support something a large part of ur audiance isnt using?

[Wile E]

I have to jump in here. Although EAX4-5 are hardware calls, any hardware call can be emulated in software. The hardware isn't 100% necessary. It's the same idea as running game console emulators. Our computers don't have any PS1 related hardware in them, yet we can still play PS1 games with an emulator.

Who's to say somebody won't accomplish this with EAX?

[imperialreign]

Originally Posted by Wile E

I have to jump in here. Although EAX4-5 are hardware calls, any hardware call can be emulated in software. The hardware isn't 100% necessary. It's the same idea as running game console emulators. Our computers don't have any PS1 related hardware in them, yet we can still play PS1 games with an emulator.

Who's to say somebody won't accomplish this with EAX?

That's a valid point that could prove possible, but emulators don't always function properly on every system either, and emulation can not always duplicate the original product correctly.

Keep in mind, also, that most console emulators break US laws, and same would hold true for someone to reverse engineer the EAX routines to "emulate" them in some way. It's Creative's intellectual property, and without their consent . . .

[Mussels]

dont forget they already have an emulator, they call it Alchemy... which translates EAX into *drumroll* software openAL calls.

It can be opened up, they just dont want to. They should obviously get money, but at least allow other companies to pay for EAX above 2.0 (HOW DAMNED LONG have they been stuck at 2.0! my old athlonXP onboard audio had that!) and definately allow games to roll back to earlier versions (EAX 2.0 card can play 5.0 games, just with less effects)

The best solution would be 100% software, with the cards accelerating it - that way they at least have the marketing of faster FPS/performance compared to other companies.

[imperialreign]

Originally Posted by Mussels

dont forget they already have an emulator, they call it Alchemy... which translates EAX into *drumroll* software openAL calls.

But, the one difference here is that EAX and ALchemy are Creative's property; OpenAL API is an open source audio protocol that Creative have spent a lot of time and money collaborating with developers on for a couple of years now. ALchemy drivers only work with X-Fi and Audigy hardware drivers. I don't see anything wrong with this arrangement.

Originally Posted by Mussels

It can be opened up, they just dont want to. They should obviously get money, but at least allow other companies to pay for EAX above 2.0 (HOW DAMNED LONG have they been stuck at 2.0! my old athlonXP onboard audio had that!) and definately allow games to roll back to earlier versions (EAX 2.0 card can play 5.0 games, just with less effects)

The best solution would be 100% software, with the cards accelerating it - that way they at least have the marketing of faster FPS/performance compared to other companies.

I totally agree on this point that Creative should open EAX up to their competitors. At the very least, considering their age, release EAX 3.0 (and possibly 4.0) to be used for free. EAX 5.0 is the newest, and was re-designed to compliment the capabilites of the X-Fi APU, so I think it'd be alright if they kept 5.0 capability for themselves. EAX 2 has been around since 1998, IIRC (might have been '01 . . .), I know EAX 4 was released with the Audigy 2's back in '02, so . . .

[btarunr]

Originally Posted by Wile E

I have to jump in here. Although EAX4-5 are hardware calls, any hardware call can be emulated in software. The hardware isn't 100% necessary. It's the same idea as running game console emulators. Our computers don't have any PS1 related hardware in them, yet we can still play PS1 games with an emulator.

Who's to say somebody won't accomplish this with EAX?

Great! How about emulating Shader Model 4.1 ? If Creative isn't lying, the CA20K1 crunches more instructions / second than the Athlon64 FX 55. Emulate it, and watch your CPU usage shoot up.

[Wile E]

Originally Posted by btarunr

Great! How about emulating Shader Model 4.1 ? If Creative isn't lying, the CA20K1 crunches more instructions / second than the Athlon64 FX 55. Emulate it, and watch your CPU usage shoot up.

I'm gonna have to go out on a limb and say they are lying, or at least greatly exaggerating. I have a great deal of experience dealing with audio in a production environment, and today's modern cpus can easily handle 64 voices and numerous DSP effects. Simulating EAX4/5 would be a cakewalk in comparison to running 103 tracks, all with at least one DSP effect (with an average of 3 DSP effects each, actually).

At any rate, that's not the point I was making. My only point is that it is completely possible, whether or not it increases cpu load, or is practical.

And emulating SM 4.1 is altogether possible as well, that doesn't meant it would prove very useful. lol.

[Mussels]

btarunr: and if they did that, then people WOULD buy those cards. Creative should open up EAX via openAL to other card manufs, simply because creative (if they arent lying) would have a huge performance lead - hello reason to buy their cards.

As it stands, most people dont care about EAX and so they're happy without it.

[candle_86]

Originally Posted by imperialreign

But, the one difference here is that EAX and ALchemy are Creative's property; OpenAL API is an open source audio protocol that Creative have spent a lot of time and money collaborating with developers on for a couple of years now. ALchemy drivers only work with X-Fi and Audigy hardware drivers. I don't see anything wrong with this arrangement.




I totally agree on this point that Creative should open EAX up to their competitors. At the very least, considering their age, release EAX 3.0 (and possibly 4.0) to be used for free. EAX 5.0 is the newest, and was re-designed to compliment the capabilites of the X-Fi APU, so I think it'd be alright if they kept 5.0 capability for themselves. EAX 2 has been around since 1998, IIRC (might have been '01 . . .), I know EAX 4 was released with the Audigy 2's back in '02, so . . .

nah 98, i still have my sound blaster live box, it adverties EAX2.0. EAX2 and EAX1 sound very diffrent

[candle_86]

Originally Posted by btarunr

Great! How about emulating Shader Model 4.1 ? If Creative isn't lying, the CA20K1 crunches more instructions / second than the Athlon64 FX 55. Emulate it, and watch your CPU usage shoot up.

actully they already do that, thats how most cards are designed, before the core is built they emulate it and the enviroment, but it takes a server farm to pull it off