RE: [linux-audio-user] 24bit 96khz cards that work well

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

Subject: RE: [linux-audio-user] 24bit 96khz cards that work well
From: Jan \ (
Date: Tue Dec 31 2002 - 01:55:37 EET


        JACK supports 96KHz. I'm using the same chipset on my DSP24 card (ST
Audio DSP2000 C-Port). I get some xruns but that comes with the
territory. If I increase the buffer size to 2048 and use the card's
digital mixer (via envy24control) to monitor I don't usually have any
problems (running at 96KHz). On the other hand, I'm running an Athlon
XP 1700+ and using fvwm2 to reduce use of system resources. I have,
apparently, the worst combination of hardware - envy24 chipset, VIA
KT133A chipset MOBO, Athlon processor but the ST Audio web site had some
good advice on this combination.


On Mon, 2002-12-30 at 17:03, Mark Knecht wrote:
> Anthony,
> It could be a huge number of things, but like you I doubt it's just
> interrupts. As you say, no card is going to generate more interrupts than it
> needs to. Some cards could require a few more interrupts to get the job
> done, but I doubt they'll generate that many more interrupts.
> More likely is the quality of the DMA controller in the sound chip, and how
> well it gets the data across the bus. If a card has to deliver 1024 bytes,
> and can do that in one burst of 256 cycles, while another card delivers the
> same 1024 bytes in 8 bursts of 128 bytes, the first card will be much more
> efficient and better behaved in the system, and probably use less PCI time
> doing it.
> This is also HEAVILY driven by what the chipset will allow a PCI device to
> so, hence my RME and your RME cards, while identical, might give different
> performance results because our PC chipsets give it different access to
> system resources like memory.
> To answer Brian's original question, I don't think Jack yet supports 96K,
> but the RME cards do, and they work pretty nicely. Unfortunately they are
> not inexpensive...
> One thing I hope Brian understand is that not every xrun is caused by the
> sound card. Many (IMO most!) xruns are potentially caused by the disk
> subsystem. Study that machine carefully Brian!
> With best regards,
> Mark
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> []On Behalf Of Anthony
> Sent: Monday, December 30, 2002 2:15 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: [linux-audio-user] 24bit 96khz cards that work well
> * Brian Redfern <> [Dec 30 02 14:03]:
> > Well, I figured out that the culprit to my xrun problem wasn't my 533mghz
> > processor, its my envy24 chipset based card, from the alsa wiki:
> >
> > "Many but not all users complain about sound glitches. This may be due to
> > the cards being IRQ hungry. (VU meter interface?) -- Tobiah"
> >
> > Given that the evil envy24 chip is in a lot of cards out there, I'm
> > wondering what cards people have had better results with?
> >
> >
> Also, out of interest, what does IRQ hungry mean? Isn't the frequency
> of interrupts determined by HW parameters you choose? How can there be
> any 'extra' interrupts. You mentioned in an earlier thread that your
> SB card didnt seem so interrupt hungry, but are you sure the device is
> opened with the same params? I'm no expert. Can anyone explain this?
> --ant

New Message Reply About this list Date view Thread view Subject view Author view Other groups

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Tue Dec 31 2002 - 02:07:13 EET