Does X-Fi Satisfy a "0" Latency Seeker?

[ftt]

Hi, your newbie's here again.

I was about to buy an E-Mu 0404 or M-Audio Audiophile 24/96. Then I stared at an online shop from which I have a gift check. However, there's no professional entry-level sound cards in their stock; the only useful I could find was a Creative X-Fi Xtreme.

My concern: My configuration (that consists an onboard Realtek chip) lacks instant key action. In order to eradicate the latency problem, can X-Fi work similar to, let's say, an E-Mu 0404?

Thanks,
ftt

[darem]

I am using an X-Fi Extreme Music. Forget all claims about 0ms latency, no matter WHO makes them, it's technically impossible.

The X-Fi can go as low as 3ms with the Creative ASIO driver, but you wouldn't want to use that setting, because it stresses the CPU a lot. During recording, I have the latency set to either 7ms or 10ms, Which is both acceptable (10ms introduces feelable audio latency for me, but that's ok, it's the same as being 3 meters away from the audio source - you will be hard pressed to find that annoying).

The X-Fi isn't what you would call a highly respected sound card amongst audiophiles, but it's far from being a bad one. The one concern you should have is that funny enough, the driver for Vista is extremely BAD - but if you plan to use XP for some time, the card might be pretty OK for you. I will keep it and not replace it until I get a new DAW, then I will most likely go for a RME card...

[Sam@Megablastic]

10ms card latency turns into 23-26ms real world latency so it's more like 7 - 8 meters from the speakers. I personaly wouldn't go creative at all, the 24/96 m audio is a real little work hoarse and does it's job well for the money.

[darem]

At least not in Cubase - it turns to 9/12 with low latency setting on.

And I beg on my knees that people do NOT underestimate the X-Fi. I know that Sounblaster has no charisma at all *g* - but this is a pretty decent card, especially if you don't use it for a DAW exclusively. If you plan to play a game once in a while, stay away from M-Audio - these cards suck a lot when it comes to gaming.

[vonRed]

At least not in Cubase - it turns to 9/12 with low latency setting on.

Which would use a buffersize of 9ms or less, yet still adds up to 21ms. Also remember that Cubase only knows what the ASIO driver is telling it, which may or may not be completely accurate, but usually isn't -- e.g. many drivers neglect to add the time required for AD and DA conversions.

And I beg on my knees that people do NOT underestimate the X-Fi. I know that Sounblaster has no charisma at all *g* - but this is a pretty decent card, especially if you don't use it for a DAW exclusively. If you plan to play a game once in a while, stay away from M-Audio - these cards suck a lot when it comes to gaming.

M-Audio cards (or any cards dedicated for DAW use) are no worse for games than Soundblaster cards are for DAW use. However, wanting to play a game once in a while seems to me a rather bad reason to compromise how well your soundcard can function in a DAW context.

[bleebsen]

Doesn't ASIO4ALL make an on-board realtek chip work at pretty low latencies too?

Replacing realtek with creative is chasing the devil with beelzebub (hm, german idiom, does it make sense?).

[snooky]

At least not in Cubase - it turns to 9/12 with low latency setting on.

And I beg on my knees that people do NOT underestimate the X-Fi. I know that Sounblaster has no charisma at all *g* - but this is a pretty decent card, especially if you don't use it for a DAW exclusively. If you plan to play a game once in a while, stay away from M-Audio - these cards suck a lot when it comes to gaming.

they suck? wow! - cause I have never had such a pleasurable experience playing games on my puter as when I got my AP 24/96 - superstable drivers and great sound..easily better then the creative shite

(and that's before taking into account htat the creative EAX feature and their drivers themself eat up loads of processor power, unlike the m-audio drivers that are built for speed and a low footprint)

[dj_flash_]

I was using the onboard Realtek chip with my old computer all the time. Just make shure to use the http://www.asio4all.com/ driver. Onboard chips can have a very low latency and sound quality is not that bad.

[vonRed]

Using onboard sound with ASIO4all, even with a buffersize of 128 samples, might give you a real-world latency close to 50ms instead of 5ms. It depends on the onboard sound and the driver. In any case, ASIO4all will not report the correct latencies, nor most likely anything close to them (it can't).

[dj_flash_]

That might be true, but I think it would be better to try configuring ASIO4all to use hardware buffers than to buy a new sound card. A new soundcard might have the same latency issues. E-Mu cards also won't report the correct lateny. For playing VST-instruments in "realtime" the onboard chip should be good enough. If recording quality is important, than that's a whole different story.

[vonRed]

That might be true, but I think it would be better to try configuring ASIO4all to use hardware buffers than to buy a new sound card. A new soundcard might have the same latency issues.

Not if it's a card intended for DAW use. Sure, it might not report the latency completely accurately, but it won't be off by more than a few ms, and any made in the last few years will comfortably give you a throughput latency of about 10ms, with most PCI cards going under that.

E-Mu cards also won't report the correct lateny.

Actually, IIRC, they're one of the few that do (or at least they are very close, I can't remember the exact details and I'm too lazy to do a loopback test now).

For playing VST-instruments in "realtime" the onboard chip should be good enough. If recording quality is important, than that's a whole different story.

That I can certainly agree with, unless you're unlucky enough to have onboard sound with 20ms or more latency (I haven't checked up on the currenct batch, but this used not to be uncommon).

[darem]

At least not in Cubase - it turns to 9/12 with low latency setting on.

And I beg on my knees that people do NOT underestimate the X-Fi. I know that Sounblaster has no charisma at all *g* - but this is a pretty decent card, especially if you don't use it for a DAW exclusively. If you plan to play a game once in a while, stay away from M-Audio - these cards suck a lot when it comes to gaming.

they suck? wow! - cause I have never had such a pleasurable experience playing games on my puter as when I got my AP 24/96 - superstable drivers and great sound..easily better then the creative shite

(and that's before taking into account htat the creative EAX feature and their drivers themself eat up loads of processor power, unlike the m-audio drivers that are built for speed and a low footprint)

Each one to his believe, I think. But if you mind the facts, here I have them for you: The X-Fi uses nearly ZERO CPU power for EAX and effects - guess why? Right, it's done ON the card. M-Audio (at least the 24/96) has problems with a couple of games, and has been proven to slow them down cosiderably (TES IV: Oblivion being one of them).

Before you explode: I didn't say that X-Fi would be a better card for a pure DAW than the M-Audio card, because that would be bullshit. However, I think that starting with the X-Fi (if not with the better Audigys), it is a better solution for a mixed(!) environment, more so as you can switch between the modes the X-Fi offers (it has one mode dedicated to games, one to playing music and one for DAW's - and they are considerably different in how digital signals are handled).

That's all I wanted to say, and I wanted to stand up against the senseless SB bashing that might have been true in the late 90ies, but is an urban legend nowadays.

[bloodyMary]

+1 to try ASIo4ALL.

I use onboard audio with ASIO4ALL driver, which gives me 64 buffers, or 5.5ms realworld (loopback test) latency - that's lower than most pro cards would go, at least on entry level. of course, you can use ASIO4ALL with these pro cards too, but I dont believe it's possible to go under 64 samples (cubase reports 1.33ms ASIO latency)

I guess I'm very lucky with my onboard sound, most of chips won't perform this good. try it anyway before you are spending money. If you dont need superb s/n ratio or noise level (read - AD/DA quality) , you might just be satisfied with ASIO4ALL for now. By the way I'm not sure that cheap m-audio or crealive will outperform good onboard audio, both latency- and sound quality-wise.

try running some tests on your onboard audio and then look for same tests performed on cards you intend to buy (official specs tend to be too optimistic)

I'd advise RMAA, www.rightmark.org for audio quality test.

[BertKoor]

Well, BloodyMary, the O.P. already complained that latency of his onboard sound chip "lacks instant key action". I read that (and recognise my Realtek AC'97) as a huge latency which Asio4All can't correct. How nice the other technical specs are, it's lacking a key feature.

@ftt: if your webshop has a friendly return policy you may take the risk and try the x-fi hands-on for at most the cost and hassle of returning a parcel.

[james0tucson]

I am using an X-Fi Extreme Music. Forget all claims about 0ms latency, no matter WHO makes them, it's technically impossible.

The possible speed of electrons through a circuit should make <<1ms technically quite "possible."

it's the same as being 3 meters away from the audio source - you will be hard pressed to find that annoying).

If I were playing piano with my head leaning over the fallboard, I would find a 10ms delay highly annoying.
Likewise, if I were playing an acoustic guitar I'd certainly want faster feedback than this, and 10ms latency would make it quite difficult to play.