I don't get this

[nabeshin]

My CMI 9739 AC97 is very simular to the audigy 2 zs in rightmark, why is this? Or am I just mistooken?
24bit at 44KHz
Frequency reponse +0.00, -0.00
Noise Level DB -147.7
Dynamic Range DBA 133.4
THD % 0.0000
Stero Crosstalk -149.0

 

[Crashman]

I wouldn't be too surprized, Creative's been blowing smoke for years.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[nabeshin]

But I heard a huge difference between my old AC97 and my old audigy. Hopefully the audigy 2 ZS is going to make an improvement.

 

[Crashman]

AC97 just means it's a compliant codec, codecs have gotten better over the years.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

 

[r2k]

Frequency reponse +0.00, -0.00
Noise Level DB -147.7
Dynamic Range DBA 133.4
THD % 0.0000
Stero Crosstalk -149.0

I'm sorry for you. Because either you haven't connected any cables and there's something very wrong with the RMAA program or (and I'm afraid this is the case) because you're outright lying and think that everyone here is just as stupid as yourself. As simple as that.

The scores you are quoting here can't be achieved even by the mighty mighty Lynx TWO. Why? After all it's a 24-bit card and 24-bit resolution = 144dB of signal to noise ratio; and that's only the theoritical limit, in reality it's "at best" around 120dB (for Lynx TWO at 24/96; Audigy2 ZS will never break the 110dB mark and that's pushing it). And you want me to believe a -147.7dB SNR for a non-24bit ordinary CoDec on a noisy mainboard? And then you compare it with an Audigy and say it has acheived the same results?

And you know the funniest part? Others have already started the usual anti-Creative babble without even glancing at the fake scores you made up!

 

[nabeshin]

I'm sorry for you. Because either you haven't connected any cables and there's something very wrong with the RMAA program or (and I'm afraid this is the case) because you're outright lying and think that everyone here is just as stupid as yourself. As simple as that.

The scores you are quoting here can't be achieved even by the mighty mighty Lynx TWO. Why? After all it's a 24-bit card and 24-bit resolution = 144dB of signal to noise ratio; and that's only the theoritical limit, in reality it's "at best" around 120dB (for Lynx TWO at 24/96; Audigy2 ZS will never break the 110dB mark and that's pushing it). And you want me to believe a -147.7dB SNR for a non-24bit ordinary CoDec on a noisy mainboard? And then you compare it with an Audigy and say it has acheived the same results?

And you know the funniest part? Others have already started the usual anti-Creative babble without even glancing at the fake scores you made up!

What are you talking about, I did not make up those scores at all.

<A HREF="http://members.shaw.ca/out_law_star/Rightmark.JPG" target="_new"> A picture to prove it. </A>

I never said the same i said simular. My question is, why are you flaming me for?

 

[nabeshin]

I'm sorry for you. Because either you haven't connected any cables and there's something very wrong with the RMAA program or (and I'm afraid this is the case) because you're outright lying and think that everyone here is just as stupid as yourself. As simple as that.

The scores you are quoting here can't be achieved even by the mighty mighty Lynx TWO. Why? After all it's a 24-bit card and 24-bit resolution = 144dB of signal to noise ratio; and that's only the theoritical limit, in reality it's "at best" around 120dB (for Lynx TWO at 24/96; Audigy2 ZS will never break the 110dB mark and that's pushing it). And you want me to believe a -147.7dB SNR for a non-24bit ordinary CoDec on a noisy mainboard? And then you compare it with an Audigy and say it has acheived the same results?

And you know the funniest part? Others have already started the usual anti-Creative babble without even glancing at the fake scores you made up!

What are you talking about, I did not make up those scores at all.

<A HREF="http://members.shaw.ca/out_law_star/Rightmark.JPG" target="_new"> A picture to prove it. </A>

I never said the same i said simular. My question is, why are you flaming me for? Also I think that it's against the rules to flame people. I ask for you to aplogize.

 

[Rob423]

ahhhhh evidence does wonders! lol

Asus A7N8X Deluxe
80gb Maxtor
200gb WD 8mb cache..
Lian-Li PC-60
Lite-On 52X
AMD XP2800+
LeadTek GeForce 4 Ti4200 w/vivo 128mb 8x
Hitachi CML174
1 GB Corsair XMS PC3200 Cas2

 

[r2k]

You want to continue this [-peep-] with that picture? OK, here we go: Everyone can check this page at CMedia's own website and read for themselves what the actual manufacturer has to say about the CMI9739:

http://www.cmedia.com.tw/product/CMI9739.htm

Let's forget the fact that manufacturers try to quote the best-case scenario scores for their products (e.g. Creative claiming 108dB SNR for Audigy2 ZS) and see what CMI has to say (I'm just quoting the important parts):

CMI9739A is a 6CH AC’97 CODEC applicable to desktop PC, notebooks, IA, etc. With C-Media’s Xear 3D sound technology, CMI9739A is a cost-effective total solution for multi-channel audio of information systems.
...
Meets PC2001 audio requirements with high performance S/N ratio & Dynamic Range (>90 dB) (See now? Even they themselves don't claim ridiculous scores. The score you're quoting here is beyond the capabilities of what a theoritically perfect 24-bit digital audio chip can reproduce)
Supports 96K sample-rate audio frame (doesn't mean it can actually deliver it clear and clean BTW; See Creative's BS 24/96 claims about Audigy and the actual frequency response curves to understand what I mean)
...
18-20 bits DAC interface for S/PDIF I/O (for ICH4) (it's at best a 20-bit DAC and then only in digital output)
...

Also, check their technical brief and data sheet at the end of that page. Nuff' said.

 

[nabeshin]

You have no proof I do, you are just flabbing your gab. You have nothing to stand on.