|
|
还是从废柴16/44开始吧: f0 I# {* V; s0 s) x
ALC888:* }! k9 M. C+ K! A
Summary| Frequency response (from 40 Hz to 15 kHz), dB | +0.06, -0.40 | Good | | Noise level, dB (A) | -91.4 | Very good | | Dynamic range, dB (A) | 91.2 | Very good | | THD, % | 0.0043 | Very good | | THD + Noise, dB (A) | -79.8 | Average | | IMD + Noise, % | 0.014 | Very good | | Stereo crosstalk, dB | -90.4 | Excellent | | IMD at 10 kHz, % | 0.110 | Average | | General performance | ' ~# ]3 X$ A( N+ n9 k
| Very good |
# Z$ l9 n4 S$ [ _, P+ q$ Z是不是很糟糕?IMD表现非常弱,就像当初那个解释创新src问题的文章里描述的一样
0 X: ^& l! h/ t( ]! n) O3 X( e事实证明,HDAUDIO依旧无法绕过传统的SRC问题,16/44注定是垃圾表现. i7 `4 [9 m9 x. |2 \
虽然其他指标已经超过了很多声卡的水平6 s+ u* d- N. _9 n! P2 ?
# a- ]' K9 N2 N$ o$ \: p: i
找个竞争对手,谁呢?就se200的7.1输出吧
. s& I; k! I& `7 |Summary| Frequency response (from 40 Hz to 15 kHz), dB | +0.02, -0.25 | Very good | | Noise level, dB (A) | -92.0 | Very good | | Dynamic range, dB (A) | 92.0 | Very good | | THD, % | 0.0016 | Excellent | | THD + Noise, dB (A) | -85.4 | Good | | IMD + Noise, % | 0.0074 | Excellent | | Stereo crosstalk, dB | -89.1 | Excellent | | IMD at 10 kHz, % | 0.0075 | Excellent | | General performance | * X f, p% g- e. b; x ^
| Excellent | IMD的差距足以致命0 s6 C, h4 w% e: N+ L
" Y* }8 _+ E0 Q6 n
那么,16/48如何呢?se200的16/48和16/44差不多的
9 d9 ^% U# X4 y# N& u0 ]不过hdaudio么:/ W; ] L" p7 L9 n( u8 v
Summary| Frequency response (from 40 Hz to 15 kHz), dB | +0.04, -0.21 | Very good | | Noise level, dB (A) | -91.8 | Very good | | Dynamic range, dB (A) | 91.7 | Very good | | THD, % | 0.0012 | Excellent | | THD + Noise, dB (A) | -84.1 | Good | | IMD + Noise, % | 0.0080 | Excellent | | Stereo crosstalk, dB | -90.1 | Excellent | | IMD at 10 kHz, % | 0.0075 | Excellent | | General performance |
( h1 s& F7 C. i8 j. g/ Z | Excellent | ! [, ~1 Q6 w. R/ n+ v8 B6 Q( ]* ~
注意IMD,已经达到se200 7.1的水平了!# H$ r$ T- c! q+ Q ]2 V
其他数据也不弱!# Q8 t! w1 v0 t
9 F& p- N2 v& R6 J9 X/ H
不过么,16bit下的测试向来被我无视的:shifty: |
|