# Is Realtek's ALC 1150 noticeably better than the ALC 898 chip?



## Apolladan

I recently picked up the Z87 UD4H and noticed most other motherboards in the price range had 1150 instead of 898. How big of a difference, if any, is there between the two?


----------



## benbenkr

I can't subjectively tell yet because I haven't heard the new ALC1150. On paper and theoretically, it should be a substantial improvement, in-lines of going from an ALC898 to something like a cheap Xonar DG/DGX.


----------



## nleksan

I have yet to find a Realtek CODEC that actually meets it's specs, but the 898 was the closest, and by far the best of the Realtek chips. If the 1150 is actually an improvement, it might sound decent enough.


----------



## Apolladan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nleksan*
> 
> I have yet to find a Realtek CODEC that actually meets it's specs, but the 898 was the closest, and by far the best of the Realtek chips. If the 1150 is actually an improvement, it might sound decent enough.


I've heard that the individual implementation from one manufacturer to the other has as much to do with sound quality as the codec itself.

Edit: How would the ALC 898 on my UD4H compare to something like say, a decade-old Creative Sound Blaster Audigy 2, or the ALC888 that's on my current motherboard?


----------



## MxPhenom 216

Ive been wondering the same thing. Its unfortunate that all the Gigabyte boards have the ALC898 where as nearly all the rest of z87 boards from competitors run the ALC1150.


----------



## Apolladan

I wish there was something like this for the recent audio codecs.

http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tweakpc.de%2Fhardware%2Ftests%2Faudio%2Faudio_roundup%2Fs01.php&langpair=de|en&hl=en&ie=UTF-8


----------



## benbenkr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Apolladan*
> 
> I've heard that the individual implementation from one manufacturer to the other has as much to do with sound quality as the codec itself.
> 
> Edit: How would the ALC 898 on my UD4H compare to something like say, a decade-old Creative Sound Blaster Audigy 2, or the ALC888 that's on my current motherboard?


Wow, it's been a long time since I last heard my Audigy 2.
But honestly, instead of saying they sound as good as one another or which being better... it's more of the fact that both the ALC898 and Audigy 2 has their own characteristic.

I use to remember the Audigy 2 produces a rather warm sounding signature where the ALC898 is a lot more cold and analytic. I honestly can't hear the difference between the 2 in terms of pure audio quality because as I said, they sound different rather than being one better over the other.

As for mobo manufacturers on the ALC1150, some of them have better circuitary. Gigabyte has op-amp replacements (gimmicky indeed). Asus and MSI has a pretty decent intergrated headphone amp.
If anything, most of them will sound decent but nothing to really be extremely excited about if one already own a soundcard.

It's taken way too long for motherboard manufacturers to focus on other parts of the board other than "Z0mg!!! 30 phases VRM with water cooling and blah blah blah".


----------



## Apolladan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *benbenkr*
> 
> As for mobo manufacturers on the ALC1150, some of them have better circuitary. Gigabyte has op-amp replacements (gimmicky indeed). Asus and MSI has a pretty decent intergrated headphone amp.


Well the Gigabyte board I have uses a DRV632. How does that compare to the OPA1652 on the MSI GD65?


----------



## dkizzy

I've noticed that the volume level is not as high on my MSI Z87 M-Power with ALC1150 vs my Asus board with ALC892. There is definitely a clarity improvement. Is anyone else noticing the slight decrease in max volume? I'm using Mix Master's to compare. I could be wrong but it just seems a tad less volume. Either way I still love the M-Power board!


----------



## BoredErica

I'm also looking for more opinions. Good it's an improvement, I'll finally have reason to ditch my Audigy 4zs from the bygone!


----------



## Apolladan

So I actually returned my UD4H in favor of the GD65, and I've never heard audio this good before. It was even better than my brother's udac 2.


----------



## BoredErica

Bump.
Surely people have the new motherboard now and have tried onboard audio...
Comparable to Xonar?


----------



## Sin0822

ALC898 is a very high quality codec, and the ALC1150 is also a very high quality codec, however nothing special, just a slightly higher SNR. Both codecs will have to use the Intel HD Audio built into the chipset(PCH), the ALC1150 was originally called the ALC900 but that was changed i guess for marketing. Let me ask you can you hear the differnce between an ALC898 and an ALC889? Or ALC889 and an ALC892 and ALC898? You can prob tell the difference between an ALC892(898 is better than 892) and an ALC898, the truth is all these last three codecs have been around for a while now, ALC898 is 110dB and ALC1150 is 115dB, so that is what 5dB or SNR difference? How much has realtek released about ALC900/1150? close to nothing so I am not quite sure how you would compare them... lol

But pertaining to those boards, the UD4H has a built in amplifier the DRV632, they spent money on a decent built in amp for a motherboard instead of a higher end codec, i am not sure why they thought maybe it was a better deal, jut not sure why they put it on the front audio output.


----------



## Apolladan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sin0822*
> 
> ALC898 is a very high quality codec, and the ALC1150 is also a very high quality codec, however nothing special, just a slightly higher SNR. Both codecs will have to use the Intel HD Audio built into the chipset(PCH), the ALC1150 was originally called the ALC900 but that was changed i guess for marketing. Let me ask you can you hear the differnce between an ALC898 and an ALC889? Or ALC889 and an ALC892 and ALC898? You can prob tell the difference between an ALC892(898 is better than 892) and an ALC898, the truth is all these last three codecs have been around for a while now, ALC898 is 110dB and ALC1150 is 115dB, so that is what 5dB or SNR difference? How much has realtek released about ALC900/1150? close to nothing so I am not quite sure how you would compare them... lol
> 
> But pertaining to those boards, the UD4H has a built in amplifier the DRV632, they spent money on a decent built in amp for a motherboard instead of a higher end codec, i am not sure why they thought maybe it was a better deal, jut not sure why they put it on the front audio output.


the DRV632 is just a boost line driver, the OPA1652 on the GD65 is a low-noise op amp


----------



## Sin0822

Line driver for the most part is an amp


----------



## Apolladan

you can look up the specs on TI's site, it's inferior


----------



## BoredErica

What is TI?

I dunno, if I go with my current board, I cannot get a cheap Xonar DSG from Marketplace... :/


----------



## Sin0822

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Apolladan*
> 
> you can look up the specs on TI's site, it's inferior


Ti is texas instruments, but yes DRV632 is inferior to the OPA AMP of course(it is better than what one other manufacturer uses tho), that is a given lol. I have tested both, you should see the G1.Sniper 5's RMAA scores, they are through the roof(good). The OPA is a amp that is used a lot of many aftermarket audio devices.


----------



## Apolladan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sin0822*
> 
> Ti is texas instruments, but yes DRV632 is inferior to the OPA AMP of course(it is better than what one other manufacturer uses tho), that is a given lol. I have tested both, you should see the G1.Sniper 5's RMAA scores, they are through the roof(good). The OPA is a amp that is used a lot of many aftermarket audio devices.


it's also $400

the UD3H is priced similarly to the GD65 and has a worse codec and a worse amp


----------



## Sin0822

oh i see 600ohm i see eon the specs, which amp does the GD65 have?


----------



## Sin0822

NVm i thought you were referring to the other amp on the Sniper 5, so the MSI one has a OPA1652, it only has 1 amp, right? I am looking at it now . So the MSI one AMP goes to the front or the back?

Also the UD3H has other things it is better at than the GD65, but yea for audio you can't take a non gaming board and put it up against the non gaming board. There is also the G1.Sniper M5 which has the same sound as the SNiper 5.


----------



## All3n

My ASRock Z87 Extreme4 for has 1150 codec and "purity sound".
It is the nicest on-board audio I have heard yet, good enough to displace my buggy Xonar DX. It's really hard to say which is better as I did not "A B" them, but it is decent.
I have not tried the headphone amp.

Replaceable OPAMPs is not that gimmicky as some people like to swap OPAMPs in audio gear.

I had to get a DAC though with optical isolation as I experience ground loops and hash from my computer with my tube amp, no matter what configuration (Or computer) I use.
(Long story but it's because my DIY amp has a grounded power cord for safety which makes it sensitive to interference from the computer)


----------



## SpacemanSpliff

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sin0822*
> 
> But pertaining to those boards, the UD4H has a built in amplifier the DRV632, they spent money on a decent built in amp for a motherboard instead of a higher end codec, i am not sure why they thought maybe it was a better deal, jut not sure why they put it on the front audio output.


If they put it in line with the front audio jack, it's there to serve as a pre-amp for headphones... which seems like a waste of time and money to me as most gaming headsets and high quality headphones these days are moving towards being USB powered and having built in pre-amps etc.


----------



## Sin0822

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SpacemanSpliff*
> 
> If they put it in line with the front audio jack, it's there to serve as a pre-amp for headphones... which seems like a waste of time and money to me as most gaming headsets and high quality headphones these days are moving towards being USB powered and having built in pre-amps etc.


yea i see a lot of users are moving towards USB headsets, but then again a lot of people still have good old analog.


----------



## Apolladan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sin0822*
> 
> oh i see 600ohm i see eon the specs, which amp does the GD65 have?


OPA1652


----------



## 4514kaiser

Just out of interest how well would one of these new integrated sound cards handle something like Beyerdynamics DT990 600 ohm headphones anyone one tried it?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sin0822*
> 
> yea i see a lot of users are moving towards USB headsets, but then again a lot of people still have good old analog.


god i hate usb headphone just spent 6h trying to get some corsair 1500's to work on the new maximus hero z87 mb for my brother updated windows 7, uninstalled all audio software, clean reg files re installed corsair software and did it all over again nothing worked









On another note it is a shame most MB review never touch on the sound I would have though some of these newer chips had acceptable audio output especial compared to some sound cards or maybe the marketing is just working on me


----------



## DoctorWorm

Do you think the ALC 1150 has better sound than an Asus Xonar DG/DS/DX?


----------



## BoredErica

If it's just as good as Xonar then I'm already happy.


----------



## benbenkr

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *4514kaiser*
> 
> Just out of interest how well would one of these new integrated sound cards handle something like Beyerdynamics DT990 600 ohm headphones anyone one tried it?
> god i hate usb headphone just spent 6h trying to get some corsair 1500's to work on the new maximus hero z87 mb for my brother updated windows 7, uninstalled all audio software, clean reg files re installed corsair software and did it all over again nothing worked
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *On another note it is a shame most MB review never touch on the sound I would have though some of these newer chips had acceptable audio output especial compared to some sound cards or maybe the marketing is just working on me*


That's because most of these reviewers do not know what proper, good audio quality is. As long as it sounds acceptable, they think it's good.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DoctorWorm*
> 
> Do you think the ALC 1150 has better sound than an Asus Xonar DG/DS/DX?


I've tested a MSI Z87-GD65 Gaming and a Xonar DGX.

Honestly, they actually sound pretty close... right down to their signature. It's as though Realtek ripped the CMI8786 and did some modifications on it.
The DGX still has the slight edge that it sounds cleaner than the ALC 1150 however, not a huge difference but I did pick up a little bit of distortion depending on the headphones used.

The headphones I was using to test was a fairly standard Sennheiser HD558 and a Superlux 681f. Not high-end headphones as they are targeted at entry-level DACs like the DGX and ALC 1150.

Have not tested on speakers enough yet to draw a conclusion, but again... they sound pretty similar. So, have we reached a point where onboard audio is at least passable? Perhaps.
If one is on an ALC 1150 already, I see no reason to get a DGX/DSX anymore.

As for the DX, that's still quite a bit better than the ALC 1150.


----------



## adridu59

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Apolladan*
> 
> So I actually returned my UD4H in favor of the GD65, and I've never heard audio this good before. It was even better than my brother's udac 2.


On paper both chips are very close. Maybe there's more difference than it seems since they bothered bumping up the model number.

Also I wouldn't call the µDAC 2 a reference in this regard http://nwavguy.blogspot.fr/2011/02/nuforce-udac-2-drama.html
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sin0822*
> 
> yea i see a lot of users are moving towards USB headsets, but then again a lot of people still have good old analog.


USB headsets.... meh. Headphones offer much better sound for the money usually.


----------



## DoctorWorm

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *benbenkr*
> 
> Have not tested on speakers enough yet to draw a conclusion, but again... they sound pretty similar. So, have we reached a point where onboard audio is at least passable? Perhaps.
> If one is on an ALC 1150 already, I see no reason to get a DGX/DSX anymore.
> 
> As for the DX, that's still quite a bit better than the ALC 1150.


The DX is 90% identical to the DG, by the way. They both use the same chipset.

EDIT: As Tiihokatti said, the DG actually uses a CMI8786, not a CMI8788 like the other Xonar cards. My bad, Asus' chip rebranding can be confusing.


----------



## BoredErica

I use a speaker system and do not have a full PCI slot, so I'll skip Xonar for now.


----------



## Tiihokatti

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *DoctorWorm*
> 
> The DX is 90% identical to the DG, by the way. They both use the same chipset.


Sound quality and chipset has nothing to do with eachother.
Its all about the quality of the other components (DAC, EMI shielding, and so on).
Chips matter when talking about directional audio.

This is why Recon3D is craptastic compared to the Z-series, both use the same core3d chip but the other components are completely different.

And the most important point is: DX and DGX do not use the same chipset. DSX and DX do indeed use the same chipset, but not DGX.


----------



## Peanuts4

boggles my mind how everyone except for Asrock kept to allowing you to use your pci slot when you are using SLI/Crossfire makes no sense to me how these manufacturers can obviously allow for a x1 slot at the top and then put the pci slot in a place that isn't usable but another x1 slot is. How many people are really using two x1 slots compared to people who still have pci gear?


----------



## All3n

Hmm 333mHz, 333 posts, 3 Rep-3 unique.


----------



## Peanuts4

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *All3n*
> 
> Hmm 333mHz, 333 posts, 3 Rep-3 unique.


Yeah nobody gives me any, which is wonderful so I can't sell my old hardware on this site. Really awesome criteria they have here.


----------



## All3n

It's a blessing in disguise, you don't want to sell your stuff here, too many loogans.


----------



## Sin0822

i always sell my old hardware here, but it really isn't that old. i don't trust ebay even though i could get so much more for it there.


----------



## 4514kaiser

Ebay is trustworthy as never used to trust any one on it but after a dozen purchases and no problems the thought really does not enter the mind ( if i'm buying from a decent seller that is that is )
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Peanuts4*
> 
> Yeah nobody gives me any, which is wonderful so I can't sell my old hardware on this site. Really awesome criteria they have here.


Feel you pain, sometimes i even google **** for randos, I generally find if you help some one that has 2+ years on OCN you get rep however they tend to know to much by then so unless you and expert in something like SIn0822 who knows all about MB's + stuff no rep for you!! If its some New Guy with a dozen posts no rep for you even if you link them up and everything they can't find the rep button...... But enough *****ing and moaning....









To the point









( this is also why i don't get rep lol )

Just tried a new pair of DT990 Pro's on my house mates new 1150 rig ( Maximus Hero MB ) which as a ALC 1150 chip plus "SupremeFX - Supremacy through discrete-caliber audio" which in my mind meant hyped bearable junk. Much to my surprise it sounder half good, it ran the DT990 Pros rather well..... maybe my ears are going after last weeks concert... But yer it was all quite impressive I am a complete sucker for the DT990 Pro's in all fairness but the bass...... The BASS and treb and mids were all a joy..... the mids were a bit in the background but that's the DT990 pro's, the headphones sounded clean and clear with no distortion or artifacts for all I could tell!!

for the record these are only 250ohm headphones so I don't know if something a bit more beastly would run of this setup!!


----------



## Sin0822

so i got my hands on some information pertaining to the differences between the ALC1150 and the ALC898 and they are actually pretty equal.
These are the differences:

ALC1150:
Back Panel headphone out: 115db, however this line out requires a differential
All its other rear channels are 98dB
Front headphone is 110dB

ALC898:
All channels are 110dB includng all rear channels and front headphone and rear headphone
Same cost as the ALC1150


----------



## TYESC

I had the realtek 898 on a z77 extreme4 and upgraded my motherboard to the realtek 1150 on a g45, for the better part the audio sounded exactly the same. I wouldn't be surprised if they were the *exact* same thing just rebadged. I have also tested a xonar DGX on my ath-pro500s vs the realtek 1150 and thought the realtek had slightly more detail, however the dgx had louder mids, so I took my dgx out and am using the realtek 1150.

I might upgrade to an Onkyo soundboard here just to try them and have some novelty in the pc world - or I am thinking of getting a modi from the schiit, but need a mic in port as well for recording.... hmmm choices.


----------



## TheBoom

Two weeks ago when i bought the Asrock OC Formula Z87 it came with no pci slots. So my trusty old X-fi Elite Pro had to start collecting dust in the cupboard. Since I paid quite abit for the motherboard I decided to use the onboard audio ("Purity Sound") instead of going out to buy another pci-e soundcard.

So I hooked up my Gigaworks S750 to the onboard audio, started out testing. The realtek room correction function really helps by the way. Speakers were much better calibrated after the corrections.

Music was actually decent, couldn't tell much of a difference from the Elite Pro at first. Thats where I started missing the CMSS-3D. Realtek's speaker fill function is supposed to do the same thing but it doesn't always work for some reason.

Anyway on to movies. Put on a bluray mkv rip of R.I.P.D with DTS 5.1 in VLC. Sounded pretty good up until this part in the movie where some cars drop from a carpark behind the camera. Immediately noticed distortion and crackling coming from the rear speakers. Two days later my front audio jack mysteriously started outputting the left channel only (upon further reading realized its a common problem with realteks jack connectors) .

Decided I had enough and went out to buy the D2X. Crappy drivers but otherwise no problems and a noticeable leap in sound quality.


----------



## paulerxx

I'm not sure which sound card is built into my motherboard, but I automatically notice the difference between onboard vs my nearly ten year old x-fi xtreme music.


----------



## smoke2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TYESC*
> 
> I had the realtek 898 on a z77 extreme4 and upgraded my motherboard to the realtek 1150 on a g45, for the better part the audio sounded exactly the same. I wouldn't be surprised if they were the *exact* same thing just rebadged. I have also tested a xonar DGX on my ath-pro500s vs the realtek 1150 and thought the realtek had slightly more detail, however the dgx had louder mids, so I took my dgx out and am using the realtek 1150.
> 
> I might upgrade to an Onkyo soundboard here just to try them and have some novelty in the pc world - or I am thinking of getting a modi from the schiit, but need a mic in port as well for recording.... hmmm choices.


I owned Asrock Z77M Extreme4 (micro ATX variant) and the sound was very quiet, especially through headphones. I owned normal 32ohm cheap headphones.

Can you please compare the loudness on Z77 Extreme 4 you owned with MSI Z87-G45 you have now?

Thank you kindly.


----------



## TYESC

In volume terms I would say it was about 33% louder (max volume level). I just recently got the Soundblaster Z and my god, very very impressive for a soundcard, can recommend it if you are thinking about dropping some more money on audio.


----------



## smoke2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TYESC*
> 
> In volume terms I would say it was about 33% louder (max volume level). I just recently got the Soundblaster Z and my god, very very impressive for a soundcard, can recommend it if you are thinking about dropping some more money on audio.


Which one was 33% louder? MSI or Asrock?


----------



## TYESC

The MSI was about 33% louder than the asrock, I found both were fine for low imp headphones (32-64), both these amps however wouldn't power a 250ohm or 600ohm headphone properly.


----------



## Skorpioz

I have the ASRock Fatal1ty Z87 Killer board and use it with both AT A900X and Sennheiser HD 580 headphones and it drives both perfectly. The Sennheiser HD 580 are 300 ohm and sound great and the Purity sound has plenty of power to spare to drive them. The Purity sound is way better than the XtremeGamer I had. Interestingly I found the HD580's are going for $269 used on Amazon.


----------



## smoke2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TYESC*
> 
> The MSI was about 33% louder than the asrock, I found both were fine for low imp headphones (32-64), both these amps however wouldn't power a 250ohm or 600ohm headphone properly.


Have you tried Gigabyte Sniper board with Creative Sound Core?
These are very loud, but have hiss issue.
I think older Realtek chipsets were louder.
I owned ALC889 on ASUS board before and it was way louder then newer chipset ALC898 on Asrock.
Don't know if it is due the chipset or the implementation on the board?
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Skorpioz*
> 
> I have the ASRock Fatal1ty Z87 Killer board and use it with both AT A900X and Sennheiser HD 580 headphones and it drives both perfectly. The Sennheiser HD 580 are 300 ohm and sound great and the Purity sound has plenty of power to spare to drive them. The Purity sound is way better than the XtremeGamer I had. Interestingly I found the HD580's are going for $269 used on Amazon.


Thanks.
Have you tried loudnes on lower impedance headphones, how the Purity Sound can drive them?


----------



## Skorpioz

Yes my ATH-A900X headphones only have 42 ohms impedance and sound great. They sound way better now than they did on the Creative card with better bass and textures. No hiss or noise at all. I am using a Antec P280 case which has great shielding for the front output connectors. My old case an Antec 900 had no shielding on the front output connector cables and had noise through the headphones when plugged in front of the case. I had to plug into the back of the case for no noise. I think a lot of issues people have are with headphones plugged into cases in the front Jacks that have poorly shielded connector cables or who are using bad quality power supplies.


----------



## TYESC

I haven't tried creative soundcore on gigabyte's motherboard solution, just have a look at the spec sheet and see what amp they are using to drive the headphones as this is one of the most important things. I have finished with most of my testing though I have to publish results, and basically the realtek 1150 DAC has its limitations, though it is really really good for an onboard solution and when coupled with some $50-100 cans it all balances to give a good sound. If looking to spend more I would step up it with Fidelio X1's or VModa CF 100s with the creative Z / separate amp, my god it will give you one hell of a sound (though it is pricey).

I hooked up some headphones from work, some DT990s and they sounded pretty faint on my MSI onboard (600 ohm version). However from an amp they sounded good, but I didn't really like the sound sig of the phones.


----------



## Skorpioz

To fairly judge the1150 DAC you would need to listen to it through each manufacturers board where it is used as the Electronics are different. I nearly got the MSI but got the ASRock instead. I have read reviews where people compared the ASRock to the MSI and liked the ASRock better.
The AsRock uses no Capacitors in the output which they claim degrades the sound some in their literature whereas the MSI does though the MSI supposedly uses a better amp. Of course one can't go wrong going with a Creative Z or a ZXR. There are so many options to choose from with the USB DAC amps also. I did not expect to like the onboard on the ASRock when I got it and was planning on getting an STX or a ZXR.


----------



## smoke2

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Skorpioz*
> 
> Yes my ATH-A900X headphones only have 42 ohms impedance and sound great. They sound way better now than they did on the Creative card with better bass and textures. No hiss or noise at all. I am using a Antec P280 case which has great shielding for the front output connectors. My old case an Antec 900 had no shielding on the front output connector cables and had noise through the headphones when plugged in front of the case. I had to plug into the back of the case for no noise. I think a lot of issues people have are with headphones plugged into cases in the front Jacks that have poorly shielded connector cables or who are using bad quality power supplies.


And what about loudness in comparision with Creative?


----------



## Skorpioz

Much louder and better than the Creative I had.


----------



## Tan1415

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sin0822*
> 
> so i got my hands on some information pertaining to the differences between the ALC1150 and the ALC898 and they are actually pretty equal.
> These are the differences:
> 
> ALC1150:
> Back Panel headphone out: 115db, however this line out requires a differential
> All its other rear channels are 98dB
> Front headphone is 110dB
> 
> ALC898:
> All channels are 110dB includng all rear channels and front headphone and rear headphone
> Same cost as the ALC1150


So the front headphone that is powered by an headamp is not 11 5 sur. Are you sure? Where did you get this info?


----------



## Skorpioz

The Front headphone is 115 db and Iam sure it is an improved DAC. Check out the Specs here:
http://www.realtek.com/products/productsView.aspx?Langid=1&PNid=24&PFid=28&Level=5&Conn=4&ProdID=328


----------



## TYESC

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Skorpioz*
> 
> The Front headphone is 115 db and Iam sure it is an improved DAC. Check out the Specs here:
> http://www.realtek.com/products/productsView.aspx?Langid=1&PNid=24&PFid=28&Level=5&Conn=4&ProdID=328


That 115db if you check the spec sheet is to a differential input, which I am sure msi and gigabyte didn't do to keep the costs down. So it is pretty much the alc898's 110 vs the 1150's 110, and since the ALC898 has better specs on the other outputs I would rather the alc898 for HT use. For normal use with a pair of cans/single line out they are not going to make a difference (the dacs that is) and pretty sure you could just call them the same thing. As others have mentioned it is all about the implementation of the circuitry that comes after the dac and that will depend on the motherboard manufacturer, however the onboard audio really does represent extremely good bang for buck nowadays and anyone telling you different is trying to slip you some snakeoil. Although the exact output impedance of my MSI-Z87 G45 is still elusive as I don't have the gear to test, but I am guessing it is anywhere from 47ohmz - 102.


----------



## Skorpioz

I agree onboard is very good these days. If I were going to go with headphones and HT I would go with a Creative ZXR or a Asus STX or a Quality USB Dac with an separate amplifier for the speakers. My low impedance ATH-900X headphones sound great so the impedance can't be too high on the ASRock. Like I said it sounds great with my 300 ohm Sennheiser HD580's and the ATH-900X with power to spare. I do plan on going the HT route some time in the future most likely with a quality USB dac and a quality amp for the speakers however I am still amazed how great ASRock Purity sound is out of my quality headphones. HardOCP had a great write up on my motherboard and analyzed the audio though not in too much detail here:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014/01/29/asrock_z87_killer_fatal1ty_motherboard_review/4#.UwWxRvldX2E


----------



## incidentflux

I can only offer a comparison between ALC1150 (Digital only) and Audigy2 ZS (DAC)

I'm very happy with the 2 channel PCM output via TOSLINK to my Yamaha RX-A840 DSP does a terrific job of upmixing 2 channel music to 5.1 and pumping it to my GoldenEar Triton Three (8Ohm) and Aiwa SX-N999 (6Ohm) speakers. Also happy with Audigy 2 DAC, to output to Creative Inspire 7700 system, (Will upgrade speakers to a Tannoy 402s studio monitors soon).

When anyone is buying a soundcard, we effectively pay for the DAC, and their DSP algorithm, if they have one, else it's licensed from DTS or Dolby.

The discernable sonic signature will vary little between high end DACs and can only be detected if your entire chain is high end or above average, room eq etc and power conditioned, at least with UPS, including speakers (end-to-end).

Add a decent AVR or an Amp with a UPS and it'll reveal quite a lot of audible difference.

PC soundcards with digital outputs, currently only lack the top end DTS-HD Master Audio and Dolby TrueHD lossless multi-channel features.


----------



## victzhang

I
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sin0822*
> 
> so i got my hands on some information pertaining to the differences between the ALC1150 and the ALC898 and they are actually pretty equal.
> These are the differences:
> 
> ALC1150:
> Back Panel headphone out: 115db, however this line out requires a differential
> All its other rear channels are 98dB
> Front headphone is 110dB
> 
> ALC898:
> All channels are 110dB includng all rear channels and front headphone and rear headphone
> Same cost as the ALC1150


I think ALC898 is actually an better chip than ALC1150 overall. In fact, the ALC1150 is only better than ALC898 when the Front Channel DACs (located in rear panel) are connected to external differential amplifiers. In this case, ALC1150 provides 115db SNR, while ALC898 provides 110db (because ALC898 does not have a differential output).

If the Front Channel DACs are not connected to an external differential amplifier (working in single-ended mode, which is usually the case for cost reduction), they provide the same SNR as ALC898.

Unfortunately, in ALC1150, all other DACs except for the Front Channel DACs (e.g., DACs for center, surround, subwoofer channels) only have *96 db* SNR! In the meantime, all DAC channels in ALC898 provide *110 db* SNR!!

Furthermore, the ALC898 has better THD+N (-92 db) than ALC1150 (-88 db). When the headphone amplifier is used, ALC898 provides much better THD+N (-88 db vs -75 db, it's a huge difference!).

In conclusion:

ALC1150 = 2 good DACs (110 db, or 115 db with external differential amplifier) + 8 mediocre DACs (96 db)
ALC898 = 10 good DACs (110 db)

You an look for all the numbers I mentioned in the datasheets linked below:

http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/datasheets/ALC1150-CG_DataSheet_1.0.pdf
http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/datasheets/ALC898_DataSheet_0.60.pdf


----------



## bangler

whats the best sounding x97 board ?
pref under 200$


----------



## HeliXpc

Nothing beats a dedicated sound card or a good DAC


----------



## Dan-H

I'm looking at building an HTPC around an i7 3770, and good LGA 1155 motherboards are getting hard to find. I'm looking at two refurbished Asus.

One is Z77 chipset with ALC887,
One is H77 chipset with ALC892

How important is the audio codec when using S/PDIF digital out to an external receiver?

edit: receiver is a Denon AVR 2802. Video is 5.1 and music is just stereo.


----------



## Fickle Pickle

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dan-H*
> 
> I'm looking at building an HTPC around an i7 3770, and good LGA 1155 motherboards are getting hard to find. I'm looking at two refurbished Asus.
> 
> One is Z77 chipset with ALC887,
> One is H77 chipset with ALC892
> 
> How important is the audio codec when using S/PDIF digital out to an external receiver?
> 
> edit: receiver is a Denon AVR 2802. Video is 5.1 and music is just stereo.


Not at all, the receiver will be doing the decoding.


----------



## Dan-H

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fickle Pickle*
> 
> Not at all, the receiver will be doing the decoding.


Thank you !

I hope this isn't too much of a thread hijack but I found this posting and wanted to share it.

http://www.avsforum.com/forum/76-htpc-linux-chat/997533-howto-make-coax-spdif-output-bracket.html

Since I don't care about the Codec, I can now also not care if it has optical out since I can easily and cheaply have digital coax out, [edit] assuming there is an S/PDIF header.

Anyway, if anyone objects let me know and I'll post this to a new thread.

keywords: S/PDIF Coax header easy


----------



## Photek

The audio stopped working on my Asrock Z77E-ITX (ALC 898) a long time ago. The night before it stopped working I heard a faint noise I've never heard before from the speakers (computer off, stereo on). The audio jacks are grayed out in the Audio Manager.

I'd really like to fix it, but I don't even know what's broken. I've seen people swapping chip on youtube, dunno if that's the way to go.

Any suggestions?


----------



## KG101

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Dan-H*
> 
> I'm looking at building an HTPC around an i7 3770, and good LGA 1155 motherboards are getting hard to find. I'm looking at two refurbished Asus.
> 
> One is Z77 chipset with ALC887,
> One is H77 chipset with ALC892
> 
> How important is the audio codec when using S/PDIF digital out to an external receiver?
> 
> edit: receiver is a Denon AVR 2802. Video is 5.1 and music is just stereo.


If it's actual spdif or coax bracket out should be cool, Just be sure to keep the main volume of it between 50-75% max .

The issue with onboard audio sill bein noise ,snr & lack of dynamics
But yeah your receiver would do the decoding , and hopefully your onboard can do dts out as well many realtek chipsets it is enabled fairly easily


----------

