Forget the .1, your headphones have no sub. Anyway, reasonable quality codecs provide similar sound quality to reasonably priced soundcards.
<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>
Yes its true, but the alot more is just a small percentage, like 3 to 5%
<font color=red><pre>\\//__________________________________
And the sign says "You got to have a membership card to get inside" Huh
So I got me a pen and paper And I made up my own little sign</pre><p></font color=red>
It really depends on several factors. Certain Creative soundcards still have a very high CPU load compared to older technology, but still lower than onboard codecs with similar features. So a huge exception here were boards with the nForce APU, which had high CPU load but not as high as without the APU, very competitave with Creative's soundcards for example.
Formerly, many boards actually used hardware sound chips onboard. So even back then onboard sound didn't mean high CPU loads as compared to similar sound cards.
It's always a case of looking at exactly which onboard solution you're comparing to exactly which sound card. Onboard sound generally uses more CPU power, but not always.
<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>
You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months. If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.