Closed Solved

Best Sound Card Under $100? (Xonar DX vs. Striker)

So I built my computer about a month ago and I'm loving it so far. I've done some research and found out that sound cards are a TON better than build-in audio on the motherboard. I listen to music a lot and also play games, and I want an upgrade. Currently, my setup is my Sennheiser HD280s connected to my Turtle Beach Ear Force DSS, which is connected to the optical output on my motherboard. So now that I've told you what I basically need, which sound card would be best for me? Would the audio quality improve since I'm using the DSS?

Here are my choices so far. I stayed away from Creative since I've heard their drives are horrible.

ASUS Xonar DX: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16829132006

HT | Omega Striker: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16829271001

Not sure which is better. Opinions? Any other better cards for around this price range?
13 answers Last reply Best Answer
More about best sound card xonar striker
  1. Answer: none! You honestly won't hear a difference. Show me your source, and not just some random forum post raving about somebody's new Blaster. The placebo effect can go a long way. Integrated sound used to be a problem; it's true. The chips that used to be used took all sorts of interference. Now, though, the tech has progressed to the point where it doesn't matter a bit.
    Sound cards are useful for specialized circumstances, mainly extra connections and amplification. If you want to do away with that amp, you can get a cheap Xonar DG. Otherwise, integrated will be all you ever need.
  2. kajabla said:
    Answer: none! You honestly won't hear a difference. Show me your source, and not just some random forum post raving about somebody's new Blaster. The placebo effect can go a long way. Integrated sound used to be a problem; it's true. The chips that used to be used took all sorts of interference. Now, though, the tech has progressed to the point where it doesn't matter a bit.
    Sound cards are useful for specialized circumstances, mainly extra connections and amplification. If you want to do away with that amp, you can get a cheap Xonar DG. Otherwise, integrated will be all you ever need.
    Ok thanks I'll probably just stick with my DSS. Also, I have another question. My friend produces music and would he benefit from a sound card? He's really critical when it comes to sound quality...
  3. I'm tired of people who claim soundcard makes no difference. They do, and its VERY noticable on any decent set of speakers.

    Both the Striker and DX are solid cards, but the DX is a more modern design. I'd go DX over Striker.
  4. gamerk316 said:
    I'm tired of people who claim soundcard makes no difference. They do, and its VERY noticable on any decent set of speakers.

    Both the Striker and DX are solid cards, but the DX is a more modern design. I'd go DX over Striker.
    Is the difference noticeable on headphones? I'm kinda skeptical about getting speakers since I love bass but my parents don't :/ And the adapter that comes with the DX is for optical right? Cuz that's what I'm going to be using.
  5. On headphones as well, though that changes the equation a little. Depending on the extact headphones, getting a soundcard with a dedicated headphone amp, such as the ASUS Xonar DG [among others] can really make a huge difference.

    And yes, all ASUS Cards use coax out by default, but come with Coax->Optical converters. I always found them a bit on the flimsy side, but they work fine.
  6. Ah, finally someone who sounds willing to prove it. If I see evidence to the contrary, I'll immediately come around; I've just never heard any. I can't tell the difference on my DG, but it's low-end.
    Would you be willing to do an experiment? Get someone else to switch between discrete and integrated sound without telling you which one's working. If you can tell the difference with a fair degree of reliability, I'll never say this again.

    Headphones don't need amps, generally. Only very large ones want the extra current.
  7. ^ I agree with you. It's not that I don't believe that sound cards are an improvement, it's just that I want to make sure if I spend $75, it's for something worth it. Also, my headphones are 64 Ohms, so do they need an amp?
  8. No, they do not. Mine are 64 too (Sony MDR-V6), and my integrated sound handles them easily.
  9. Best answer
    Striker uses CMI8770 which is 96khz, Xonar DX uses a 192Khz chip, for music listening I prefer the HT Omega. Higher sample rate chips produces ear fatigue/headache.
    (own an Xonar Essence ST, tested: Xonar DS/DG, TB Montego DDL, SYBA SD-CM-PCI8)
  10. yougotjaked said:
    ^ I agree with you. It's not that I don't believe that sound cards are an improvement, it's just that I want to make sure if I spend $75, it's for something worth it. Also, my headphones are 64 Ohms, so do they need an amp?


    64Ohms is right on the borderline for needing an amp; how sensitive they are to voltage/current comes into play a bit. As a general rule, if they are loud enough on onboard, you don't need an amp.
  11. Thanks for all your help guys, I'm going to end up getting the Striker!
  12. Best answer selected by yougotjaked.
  13. This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey
Ask a new question

Read More

Sound Cards Motherboards Components Product