Which is the best-sounding Realtek driver so far?

[emanresu]

I haven't been able to decide yet.
But I know that I do prefer the HDA type of Realtek audio driver, beyond the DCH variant.

So I'm kindly asking for some feedback;
Which is your favourite Realtek audio driver version, and why? Is it HDA or DCH?

 

[mx62]

an external dac
sorry couldn't resist

 

[thewan]

There is no difference. DCH is just another way of packaging and validating drivers on Windows. Inside is the same drivers found on non DCH drivers.

 

[emanresu]

Hmm.. I might have used different versions when comparing DCH and HDA..
But EVERY LITTLE DIFFERENCE in math operations and such do matter. You can't ignore hard-on calculations behind what you are actually in the end receiving a result of.

Windows has abandoned pure audio for DRM since Vista.
Kernel audio on XP is unrivaled!

Now you think Default Output©®™ device (lol) or this 'fake' Wasapi (vs the Exclusive mode one) is *not* being resampled (48kHz 24bit) nor goes thru CAudioLimiter in the mixer?
It do!

 

[Ferather]

@emanresu, chill a bit, you asked for feedback, no need to respond that way lol (a little ott).

I prefer working with DCH over HDA in terms of the inf and current APO's.

 

[emanresu]

Yes. Needs to be spread so we don't fool ourselves with DTS:X ultra and sheit when we haven't even gotten "pure in, pure out"
Still looking for the best sounding driver input, all feedback welcome. I know other audio forums are extreme on hyping every release there is, and praise individual drivers. It's not always an update is better, tl:dr.
Do try WDM / Windows Audio / Fake Wasapi Vs MME / DS Vs (WDM-KS)Kernel Vs ASIO, if you haven't and draw your own conclusions.

 

[kapone32]

The 1220 Codec has actually Impressed me.

 

[emanresu]

The 1220 Codec has actually Impressed me.

Nice. I read on some Brazilian forum that this (Asus?) component was made available as part of a haxxed driver on there. Need to see if I can ever find it again ^^

 

[dododo]

HDA=BIG
DCH=SMALL

 

[natr0n]

Best sounding driver is the one that you manually tweak its sound effects and such.

 

[Ferather]

I also agree with @kapone32, and also lossless rated digital transmission. They key with some APO's is to make lossy audio sound closer to lossless audio (which needs no processing).
If you are playing MP3's or in-fact storing your audio in lossy form, you are already off to a bad start, adding analogue to that adds insult to injury.

An APO that manages to restore some or most of the loss is something you will notice more.

 

[emanresu]

What I've learned the hard way is to respect sample rates and bitdepth..
E.g. if you listen to a CD or this standard RIAA (Redbook?) format, then make sure there is no conversions taking place. Bypass the Windows Mixer. You can disable the CAudioLimiter with a regedit confusion hack. It works like an APO you don't want called upon unless you have multiple audio sources (Clipping & Distortion Inc.) One way to roll is simply using KS when available or Wasapi Exclusive mode. They've made it easy for us to not notice everything that goes under the hood, but when you bite into the "bitperfectness" it's difficult not to feel enlightened. ^^

 

[Ferather]

Sounds like you are looking for direct raw transmission of PCM to me, and should eliminate analogue and practically as many hardware components as possible.
At the moment you are running into software (OS, APO's), hardware processing (plus extra parts if analogue), and of coarse software drivers.

The circuit for SPDIF is quite a bit more simpler than analogue, there is no amp, dac, and other parts, an alternative is fiber HDMI.

----

I admit the quality and improvements to the parts used to produce SPDIF, including its transmitters and receivers (up to 15 channels), can vary a bit.

S/PDIF Transmitter (SPDIF_Tx) (infineon.com)

----

Fiber cable OEM: https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachments/cables-png.240661/
Soundbar: https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachments/soundbar-png.240662/
Other: https://www.techpowerup.com/forums/attachments/1643727410593-png.234857/

You can see this elsewhere in different sites and specs.

 

[Operandi]

an external dac
sorry couldn't resist

Not sure if this was a joke reply or not but its correct. Drivers don't have any impact on quality, the software stack itself does (the OS) and Windows resampling isn't the best but even this has minimal impact compared to everything else going on.

Sounds like you are looking for direct raw transmission of PCM to me, and should eliminate analogue and practically as many hardware components as possible.
At the moment you are running into software (OS, APO's), hardware processing (plus extra parts if analogue), and of coarse software drivers.

The circuit for SPDIF is quite a bit more simpler than analogue, there is no amp, dac, and other parts, an alternative is fiber HDMI.

----

I admit the quality and improvements to the parts used to produce SPDIF, including its transmitters and receivers (up to 15 channels), can vary a bit.

S/PDIF Transmitter (SPDIF_Tx) (infineon.com)

SPDIF is objectively the worst interface you could choose. Its beholden by the PC's clock which for audio purposes is terrible, and the optical transmitting components used by SPDIF on a desktop PC are also poor compared to what you would find in dedicated audio components. If you are chasing quality a external USB DAC where the external DACs clock is used (async USB audio 2) is the best way to get audio out of a PC.

 

[erpguy53]

HDA=BIG
DCH=SMALL

DCH/UAD = mainstream/widespread in the 2020s; modern driver interface; fully Win11 certified
HDA (nonUAD) = traditional/legacy driver interface (non-DCH). Realtek isn't making nor releasing any new HDA driver versions since 6.0.9273.1 from MS Catalog. not being used much anymore by OEMs

 

[eidairaman1]

Placebo, i suggest a sc or dac

 

[Ferather]

@Operandi, drivers can impact audio quality, as much as graphics drivers can be unstable or produce artefacts so on, drivers can be unstable/issue prone.
Both USB and HDA will be using CPU, in both cases the external DAC receives PCM, any APO including Microsoft will also use CPU.



Does a USB DAC use cpu cycles in games? | Move your USB mouse rapidly with task manager open on CPU.

----

In many cases if you use the Microsoft driver with Realtek and SPDIF, you will likely see all sample rates supported.
If you install the official Realtek driver, you will suddenly see less sample rates supported.

----



----

Realtek HDA, using SPDIF-TOSlink out, various APO's (DTS Interactive, DTS APO4, Equalizer APO, Realtek), no delay.
I am playing a radio stream @ 192k, re-processed to 48k 32b, there is also other audio apps open.




----

Example of software related sound processors, FX systems causing instability:

 

[Operandi]

@Operandi, drivers can impact audio quality, as much as graphics drivers can be unstable or produce artefacts so on, drivers can be unstable/issue prone.
Both USB and HDA will be using CPU, in both cases the external DAC receives PCM, any APO including Microsoft will also use CPU.

View attachment 279902View attachment 279903

Does a USB DAC use cpu cycles in games? | Move your USB mouse rapidly with task manager open on CPU.

----

In many cases if you use the Microsoft driver with Realtek and SPDIF, you will likely see all sample rates supported.
If you install the official Realtek driver, you will suddenly see less sample rates supported.

----

View attachment 279908View attachment 279909

----

Example of software related sound processors, FX systems causing instability:

View attachment 279910

None of that maters to the question at hand; "best sound driver" because there isn't one. There is no sound to a driver as the only impact to sound quality at the software stack is how resampling is handled and to my know thats all handled by the OS not the driver (correct me if I'm wrong), so no, its not like a graphics driver. And if you you are looking for the best sounding you don't want to be resampling at all. Different capabilities of the Codec might vary between different drivers but thats just determines what the OS has access to, not how any of it functions. If its digital audio and you aren't resampling or doing any sound processing its just a stream of 1s and 0s irregardless of what interface you use to connect to the DAC so it comes down to what interface is the best and thats a physical hardware implementation thing. Physical resources of the host system CPU are not a factor, this beyond trivial for modern hardware.

 

[Ferather]

If a driver took away a sample rate you where using, that otherwise you had without it (or visa versa), you would be forced to re-sample or re-encode that audio.
I was mostly addressing the sentence where you say SPDIF is essentially worse due to CPU (although no different), all digital has clock jitter.



Whats more important right now is getting more than 8 PCM channels.

 

[Operandi]

If a driver took away a sample rate you where using, that otherwise you had without it (or visa versa), you would be forced to re-sample or re-encode that audio.
I was mostly addressing the sentence where you say SPDIF is essentially worse due to CPU (although no different), all digital has clock jitter.

Again, that has nothing to do with the driver. A (audio) driver is just exposing the OS to capabilities (bit depth and sample rate) of the hardware (audio codec in the case of SPDIF), and its just really simple trivial stuff for a modern CPU to do, there is no better or worse way of doing it. It either works or it doesn't, if a frame of audio gets lost somehwere its getting lost at the point of transmission not with where the frame (driver, OS audio stack) is created.

SPDIF is the worst interface on a PC because its synchronous with the PCs clock (which is awful) and is dependent on transmitting / receiving hardware and medium. The clock is always the same, its a constant factor, all interfaces are not equal though.

 

[qubit]

SPDIF is objectively the worst interface you could choose. Its beholden by the PC's clock which for audio purposes is terrible, and the optical transmitting components used by SPDIF on a desktop PC are also poor compared to what you would find in dedicated audio components. If you are chasing quality an external USB DAC where the external DACs clock is used (async USB audio 2) is the best way to get audio out of a PC.

As long as the signal isn't corrupted in transmission, ie same numbers received as transmitted, and it's buffered at the receiving end, it won't sound any different since any jitter will be removed.

 

[Operandi]

As long as the signal isn't corrupted in transmission, ie same numbers received as transmitted, and it's buffered at the receiving end, it won't sound any different since any jitter will be removed.

Yeah, and thats not what happens. There are clear differences in performance of different interfaces, thats not up for debate. Thats not really what this thread is about and there are tons of articles out there on that subject so there is no reason to rehash it here.

 

[qubit]

Yeah, and thats not what happens. There are clear differences in performance of different interfaces, thats not up for debate. Thats not really what this thread is about and there are tons of articles out there on that subject so there is no reason to rehash it here.

I think it is what happens. And I was just responding to your comment, which by your definition was off topic.

 

[Operandi]

I think it is what happens. And I was just responding to your comment, which by your definition was off topic.

I didn't bring up SPDIF, and only commented on it in the context that the interface itself is something matters not the drivers behind the interface.

 

[emanresu]

Lol you guys who claim drivers don't sound the sound of audio don't know much..
There are in-built Highpass/Lowpass (even EQ) on some (most) audio drivers.
Other forums are C-RAZY about new releases, will null-test them and use their ears. You can read semi-complete descriptions all you want. It's like in Mastering. They have the whole truth and partition it out in semi-truths or even deliberately sneer in on false info.. so you will pay pay pay for something that isn't better than what existed on WinXP with free plugins (JUCE framework and Steinenberg?¿ - lol). They nerf the code and functional 'purity' that powers our tech since the hardware speccs are becoming increasingly better..
Now you know.