No room for Soundcard!

Discussion in 'Computer Information' started by RayL12, Feb 6, 2011.

  1. RayL12

    RayL12 Guest

    Well, am I upset!

    I upgraded my system at the expense of £480. One of the reasons for
    doing so was because my Creative Xfi was up against my gfx card fan.

    So I decided upon an ATX board(M4A89GTD Pro) with 2 PCI-E slots
    thinking I could use the first in order to keep a PCI slot clear.

    Comments on-line were all positive.

    So, how disappointing to find that it was designed to use the 2nd PCIE
    slot in single gfx card mode and a riser card in the first!? The Geforce
    GTX 460 covers both remaining PCI slots completely.

    What is it with these designers?? Surely they know that a gfx card is
    potentially going to cover the PCI slots?

    I'm struggling to find a work-around and a flying lead-out is all I
    can think of. Ofcourse, this will mean the Xfi card sits outside the PC?

    If anyone has any ideas I'd be grateful.

    Cheers...

    ....Ray.






    --
    Learn why we are suffering..
    www.zeitgeistthefilm.com/
     
    RayL12, Feb 6, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. RayL12

    Paul Guest

    RayL12 wrote:
    >
    > Well, am I upset!
    >
    > I upgraded my system at the expense of £480. One of the reasons for
    > doing so was because my Creative Xfi was up against my gfx card fan.
    >
    > So I decided upon an ATX board(M4A89GTD Pro) with 2 PCI-E slots
    > thinking I could use the first in order to keep a PCI slot clear.
    >
    > Comments on-line were all positive.
    >
    > So, how disappointing to find that it was designed to use the 2nd PCIE
    > slot in single gfx card mode and a riser card in the first!? The Geforce
    > GTX 460 covers both remaining PCI slots completely.
    >
    > What is it with these designers?? Surely they know that a gfx card is
    > potentially going to cover the PCI slots?
    >
    > I'm struggling to find a work-around and a flying lead-out is all I can
    > think of. Ofcourse, this will mean the Xfi card sits outside the PC?
    >
    > If anyone has any ideas I'd be grateful.
    >
    > Cheers...
    >
    > ...Ray.


    Have you tested the video card in the white slot ?

    Paul
     
    Paul, Feb 6, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. RayL12

    RayL12 Guest

    On 06/02/2011 20:43, Paul wrote:
    > RayL12 wrote:
    >>
    >> Well, am I upset!
    >>
    >> I upgraded my system at the expense of £480. One of the reasons for
    >> doing so was because my Creative Xfi was up against my gfx card fan.
    >>
    >> So I decided upon an ATX board(M4A89GTD Pro) with 2 PCI-E slots
    >> thinking I could use the first in order to keep a PCI slot clear.
    >>
    >> Comments on-line were all positive.
    >>
    >> So, how disappointing to find that it was designed to use the 2nd PCIE
    >> slot in single gfx card mode and a riser card in the first!? The
    >> Geforce GTX 460 covers both remaining PCI slots completely.
    >>
    >> What is it with these designers?? Surely they know that a gfx card is
    >> potentially going to cover the PCI slots?
    >>
    >> I'm struggling to find a work-around and a flying lead-out is all I
    >> can think of. Ofcourse, this will mean the Xfi card sits outside the PC?
    >>
    >> If anyone has any ideas I'd be grateful.
    >>
    >> Cheers...
    >>
    >> ...Ray.

    >
    > Have you tested the video card in the white slot ?
    >
    > Paul


    Wow, Paul, this is an unexpected reply as I pulled my post within
    minutes of posting and therefore did not expect this to exist? You are
    on the ball, mate :)

    No, Paul, I haven't. I simply followed the manual instructions for
    single gfx card use. It had crossed my mind. Upon first reading the MB
    specs I was under the impression that I had 2 PCI-E x16 slots.
    The manual describes it as: "2 x PCI Express 2.0 x16, support ATI
    CrossFireX Technology(@ dual x8 speed)" So, is each PCI-E slot x16 or,
    x8? I guess the latter.

    As it is, I did put my Creative soundcard in the barely visible PCI
    slot. While playing Grid the fans howled. This reduced greatly when I
    pushed a 10mm wood chip between the two cards.

    I will search the Net to see if anyone else has tried the first slot
    under single gfx card use.

    BTW, as you suggested, after spending £480 on the upgrade I cannot say
    that my apps show any speed improvement. Maybe the exception is Google
    SketchUp?

    Thank you Paul,

    ....Ray.
     
    RayL12, Feb 9, 2011
    #3
  4. RayL12

    Paul Guest

    RayL12 wrote:
    > On 06/02/2011 20:43, Paul wrote:
    >> RayL12 wrote:
    >>>
    >>> Well, am I upset!
    >>>
    >>> I upgraded my system at the expense of £480. One of the reasons for
    >>> doing so was because my Creative Xfi was up against my gfx card fan.
    >>>
    >>> So I decided upon an ATX board(M4A89GTD Pro) with 2 PCI-E slots
    >>> thinking I could use the first in order to keep a PCI slot clear.
    >>>
    >>> Comments on-line were all positive.
    >>>
    >>> So, how disappointing to find that it was designed to use the 2nd PCIE
    >>> slot in single gfx card mode and a riser card in the first!? The
    >>> Geforce GTX 460 covers both remaining PCI slots completely.
    >>>
    >>> What is it with these designers?? Surely they know that a gfx card is
    >>> potentially going to cover the PCI slots?
    >>>
    >>> I'm struggling to find a work-around and a flying lead-out is all I
    >>> can think of. Ofcourse, this will mean the Xfi card sits outside the PC?
    >>>
    >>> If anyone has any ideas I'd be grateful.
    >>>
    >>> Cheers...
    >>>
    >>> ...Ray.

    >>
    >> Have you tested the video card in the white slot ?
    >>
    >> Paul

    >
    > Wow, Paul, this is an unexpected reply as I pulled my post within
    > minutes of posting and therefore did not expect this to exist? You are
    > on the ball, mate :)
    >
    > No, Paul, I haven't. I simply followed the manual instructions for
    > single gfx card use. It had crossed my mind. Upon first reading the MB
    > specs I was under the impression that I had 2 PCI-E x16 slots.
    > The manual describes it as: "2 x PCI Express 2.0 x16, support ATI
    > CrossFireX Technology(@ dual x8 speed)" So, is each PCI-E slot x16 or,
    > x8? I guess the latter.
    >
    > As it is, I did put my Creative soundcard in the barely visible PCI
    > slot. While playing Grid the fans howled. This reduced greatly when I
    > pushed a 10mm wood chip between the two cards.
    >
    > I will search the Net to see if anyone else has tried the first slot
    > under single gfx card use.
    >
    > BTW, as you suggested, after spending £480 on the upgrade I cannot say
    > that my apps show any speed improvement. Maybe the exception is Google
    > SketchUp?
    >
    > Thank you Paul,
    >
    > ...Ray.
    >


    Well, I can't guarantee it'll work, but my suspicion is, when you
    stick your video card in the first slot, it'll run at x8. And if
    both the video card and chipset are Revision 2 type, then each lane
    is 500MB/sec. So that gives you 4GB/sec of PCI Express bandwidth.
    That should work well with your video card.

    Some experiments were done years ago, to measure the effect
    of restricting PCI Express bandwidth. It was done, by placing cello
    tape over the contacts on the card, to simulate different lane wiring.
    The video card supports operation all the way down to x1 rate.

    SPECviewperf shows a strong dependency.

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sli-coming,927-9.html

    This game didn't have as strong a dependency. But it also
    isn't the best game for such a test.

    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sli-coming,927-10.html

    I'd love to see those experiments repeated with modern
    hardware, but no computer site has been the least curious
    about how PCI Express bandwidth helps. Those taping
    experiments should be repeated.

    If you're gaming, a little narrower bus probably won't hurt that much.
    If we use the top end SPECViewPerf as an example, maybe 4%
    lower frame rate. It's really hard to guess.

    Paul
     
    Paul, Feb 10, 2011
    #4
  5. RayL12

    RayL12 Guest

    On 10/02/2011 00:00, Paul wrote:
    > RayL12 wrote:
    >> On 06/02/2011 20:43, Paul wrote:
    >>> RayL12 wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> Well, am I upset!
    >>>>
    >>>> I upgraded my system at the expense of £480. One of the reasons for
    >>>> doing so was because my Creative Xfi was up against my gfx card fan.
    >>>>
    >>>> So I decided upon an ATX board(M4A89GTD Pro) with 2 PCI-E slots
    >>>> thinking I could use the first in order to keep a PCI slot clear.
    >>>>
    >>>> Comments on-line were all positive.
    >>>>
    >>>> So, how disappointing to find that it was designed to use the 2nd PCIE
    >>>> slot in single gfx card mode and a riser card in the first!? The
    >>>> Geforce GTX 460 covers both remaining PCI slots completely.
    >>>>
    >>>> What is it with these designers?? Surely they know that a gfx card is
    >>>> potentially going to cover the PCI slots?
    >>>>
    >>>> I'm struggling to find a work-around and a flying lead-out is all I
    >>>> can think of. Ofcourse, this will mean the Xfi card sits outside the
    >>>> PC?
    >>>>
    >>>> If anyone has any ideas I'd be grateful.
    >>>>
    >>>> Cheers...
    >>>>
    >>>> ...Ray.
    >>>
    >>> Have you tested the video card in the white slot ?
    >>>
    >>> Paul

    >>
    >> Wow, Paul, this is an unexpected reply as I pulled my post within
    >> minutes of posting and therefore did not expect this to exist? You are
    >> on the ball, mate :)
    >>
    >> No, Paul, I haven't. I simply followed the manual instructions for
    >> single gfx card use. It had crossed my mind. Upon first reading the MB
    >> specs I was under the impression that I had 2 PCI-E x16 slots.
    >> The manual describes it as: "2 x PCI Express 2.0 x16, support ATI
    >> CrossFireX Technology(@ dual x8 speed)" So, is each PCI-E slot x16 or,
    >> x8? I guess the latter.
    >>
    >> As it is, I did put my Creative soundcard in the barely visible PCI
    >> slot. While playing Grid the fans howled. This reduced greatly when I
    >> pushed a 10mm wood chip between the two cards.
    >>
    >> I will search the Net to see if anyone else has tried the first slot
    >> under single gfx card use.
    >>
    >> BTW, as you suggested, after spending £480 on the upgrade I cannot say
    >> that my apps show any speed improvement. Maybe the exception is Google
    >> SketchUp?
    >>
    >> Thank you Paul,
    >>
    >> ...Ray.
    >>

    >
    > Well, I can't guarantee it'll work, but my suspicion is, when you
    > stick your video card in the first slot, it'll run at x8. And if
    > both the video card and chipset are Revision 2 type, then each lane
    > is 500MB/sec. So that gives you 4GB/sec of PCI Express bandwidth.
    > That should work well with your video card.
    >
    > Some experiments were done years ago, to measure the effect
    > of restricting PCI Express bandwidth. It was done, by placing cello
    > tape over the contacts on the card, to simulate different lane wiring.
    > The video card supports operation all the way down to x1 rate.
    >
    > SPECviewperf shows a strong dependency.
    >
    > http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sli-coming,927-9.html
    >
    > This game didn't have as strong a dependency. But it also
    > isn't the best game for such a test.
    >
    > http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/sli-coming,927-10.html
    >
    > I'd love to see those experiments repeated with modern
    > hardware, but no computer site has been the least curious
    > about how PCI Express bandwidth helps. Those taping
    > experiments should be repeated.
    >
    > If you're gaming, a little narrower bus probably won't hurt that much.
    > If we use the top end SPECViewPerf as an example, maybe 4%
    > lower frame rate. It's really hard to guess.
    >
    > Paul


    Once again, Paul, I thank you for your knowledge,research and, time in
    answering.

    As you stated, it seems that the number of lanes makes little difference
    to throughput? I think I will give the No.1 slot a try. Is it worth it
    to you if I d/l Viewperf and send you the results for each slot?

    ....Ray.

    --
    Learn why we are suffering..
    www.zeitgeistthefilm.com/
     
    RayL12, Feb 10, 2011
    #5
  6. RayL12

    Paul Guest

    RayL12 wrote:

    >
    > As you stated, it seems that the number of lanes makes little difference
    > to throughput? I think I will give the No.1 slot a try. Is it worth it
    > to you if I d/l Viewperf and send you the results for each slot?
    >
    > ...Ray.
    >


    Only if you're curious.

    The last time I ran that, I wasn't too impressed with it (SPECviewperf).
    Mainly, because it seemed to be dominated by CPU activity. I couldn't
    convince myself, it was really stressing the video card. Mind you,
    I tested on a pretty low end card.

    Some benchmarks leave me with a warmer feeling than others. That
    one didn't really impress me. So if you run it, it'll mainly be,
    just to see what kind of a benchmark it is.

    Paul
     
    Paul, Feb 10, 2011
    #6
  7. RayL12

    RayL12 Guest

    On 10/02/2011 20:06, Paul wrote:
    > RayL12 wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> As you stated, it seems that the number of lanes makes little
    >> difference to throughput? I think I will give the No.1 slot a try. Is
    >> it worth it to you if I d/l Viewperf and send you the results for each
    >> slot?
    >>
    >> ...Ray.
    >>

    >
    > Only if you're curious.
    >
    > The last time I ran that, I wasn't too impressed with it (SPECviewperf).
    > Mainly, because it seemed to be dominated by CPU activity. I couldn't
    > convince myself, it was really stressing the video card. Mind you,
    > I tested on a pretty low end card.
    >
    > Some benchmarks leave me with a warmer feeling than others. That
    > one didn't really impress me. So if you run it, it'll mainly be,
    > just to see what kind of a benchmark it is.
    >
    > Paul


    OK, SPECviewperf is out. But if I am to change slots I may as well do
    some tests. Have you a benchmarking software suggestion?

    ....Ray.

    --
    Learn why we are suffering..
    www.zeitgeistthefilm.com/
     
    RayL12, Feb 10, 2011
    #7
  8. RayL12

    Paul Guest

    RayL12 wrote:
    > On 10/02/2011 20:06, Paul wrote:
    >> RayL12 wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> As you stated, it seems that the number of lanes makes little
    >>> difference to throughput? I think I will give the No.1 slot a try. Is
    >>> it worth it to you if I d/l Viewperf and send you the results for each
    >>> slot?
    >>>
    >>> ...Ray.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Only if you're curious.
    >>
    >> The last time I ran that, I wasn't too impressed with it (SPECviewperf).
    >> Mainly, because it seemed to be dominated by CPU activity. I couldn't
    >> convince myself, it was really stressing the video card. Mind you,
    >> I tested on a pretty low end card.
    >>
    >> Some benchmarks leave me with a warmer feeling than others. That
    >> one didn't really impress me. So if you run it, it'll mainly be,
    >> just to see what kind of a benchmark it is.
    >>
    >> Paul

    >
    > OK, SPECviewperf is out. But if I am to change slots I may as well do
    > some tests. Have you a benchmarking software suggestion?
    >
    > ...Ray.
    >


    3Dmark 2001 SE Build 330 is a 41MB download. I like this for
    low end cards, but it doesn't use some of the latest DirectX
    features in its benchmark tests.

    http://majorgeeks.com/3Dmark_d99.html

    3DMark2006 is more up to date with current technology, but it is a
    584MB download. That might be a better match to your card
    (no "999 frames per second" runs).

    http://majorgeeks.com/3DMark06_d4935.html

    Those are not perfect benchmarks either. But for the purposes you're
    putting them to (ratio comparison, using identical hardware), most
    of their sins will not be an issue. That should make a good enough test.

    With regard to SPECviewperf, it might be best used on "certified" OpenGL
    cards. Those are the cards that Nvidia and ATI charge an arm and leg
    for, and the driver is "unleashed" for OpenGL work with hundreds of thousands
    of objects. Apparently, you can try to do OpenGL with desktop cards,
    but at some small number of objects, they tend to bog down. And
    this is presumably a function of something in the driver.

    When I was watching SPECviewperf on my system, it almost looked like it
    was computing the image on the CPU, and just copying it to the frame
    buffer (and there was an OpenGL driver file for the video card). That's
    because the jerky rendering it was doing - the long delay between frames,
    at least to me, seemed to be a computing delay, rather than a GPU delay.

    At work, we had a high end workstation, with just about the most expensive
    video card you could put in it, and on complex objects (designs that take
    7 hours to load from a network database), the rotation of the final object
    was relatively smooth (the frame rate was somewhere between 20Hz and
    30Hz or so). You could tell the machine was struggling though...
    SPECviewperf looked nothing like that.

    Paul
     
    Paul, Feb 11, 2011
    #8
  9. RayL12

    RayL12 Guest

    On 11/02/2011 01:06, Paul wrote:

    >
    > 3DMark2006 is more up to date with current technology, but it is a
    > 584MB download. That might be a better match to your card
    > (no "999 frames per second" runs).
    >
    > http://majorgeeks.com/3DMark06_d4935.html
    >
    > Those are not perfect benchmarks either. But for the purposes you're
    > putting them to (ratio comparison, using identical hardware), most
    > of their sins will not be an issue. That should make a good enough test.


    OK, Paul. It is a 25min d/l from the fastest choice site of Australia.
    The MajorGeeks site was 1.5 days. Bless them!

    Here is an issue that puts doubt in my mind. when I put all the new
    hardware in the PC, I ran the old system boot. I was warned that it
    would never be accepted by the new hardware; or visa versa.

    And in the first case Win XP64 did not quite get to the desktop. How
    ever, after running in Safe mode (I did nothing in Safe mode: it
    wouldn't let me :) ) and then restarting, I did get it to start in
    Normal mode. From here I removed what previous drivers I could using
    Driver Cleaner Pro and installed the ones from the new install discs.

    And, everything appears fine? This saved me from days(weeks) of re
    installing applications to the tune of 29Gbs.

    Do you think there could be underlying problems? Old mobo M3N78-VM;
    new M4A89GTD Pro. Both Asus.

    Thanks again, Paul...

    ....Ray.
     
    RayL12, Feb 11, 2011
    #9
  10. RayL12

    Paul Guest

    RayL12 wrote:
    > On 11/02/2011 01:06, Paul wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> 3DMark2006 is more up to date with current technology, but it is a
    >> 584MB download. That might be a better match to your card
    >> (no "999 frames per second" runs).
    >>
    >> http://majorgeeks.com/3DMark06_d4935.html
    >>
    >> Those are not perfect benchmarks either. But for the purposes you're
    >> putting them to (ratio comparison, using identical hardware), most
    >> of their sins will not be an issue. That should make a good enough test.

    >
    > OK, Paul. It is a 25min d/l from the fastest choice site of Australia.
    > The MajorGeeks site was 1.5 days. Bless them!
    >
    > Here is an issue that puts doubt in my mind. when I put all the new
    > hardware in the PC, I ran the old system boot. I was warned that it
    > would never be accepted by the new hardware; or visa versa.
    >
    > And in the first case Win XP64 did not quite get to the desktop. How
    > ever, after running in Safe mode (I did nothing in Safe mode: it
    > wouldn't let me :) ) and then restarting, I did get it to start in
    > Normal mode. From here I removed what previous drivers I could using
    > Driver Cleaner Pro and installed the ones from the new install discs.
    >
    > And, everything appears fine? This saved me from days(weeks) of re
    > installing applications to the tune of 29Gbs.
    >
    > Do you think there could be underlying problems? Old mobo M3N78-VM; new
    > M4A89GTD Pro. Both Asus.
    >
    > Thanks again, Paul...
    >
    > ...Ray.


    You can move an OS from one system to another, as long as there is a
    driver for the disk interface.

    Some boards, have classical emulation of IDE (even when using a SATA port),
    and the driver loaded for the port is actually a Microsoft driver. If two
    boards use that same, Microsoft driver, then you can move a system over.

    The second option, is a "bounce" install. Plug a card into the old PC (I use
    an Ultra133 TX2 from Promise for that). Install the driver, and move the disk
    over to the removable card, and make sure it can boot from the add-in card. Then,
    shut down for the last time, move the card over to the other PC, and try to boot.
    Since the driver was already there, it should work. Then, if you want to set the
    new motherboard to AHCI or whatever, it's easy to install the driver for the
    new hardware, without upsetting the driver for the Ultra133 that is being used
    to host the system at the moment. When the new driver is in place, move the
    drive over to the motherboard disk interface and try to boot. Finally, pull the
    Ultra133 card out of the system. By using an add-in card, you can transition
    the system with better odds of having a working driver while you do it.

    Also, before moving the system, you can remove any unnecessary drivers from
    Add/Remove. That would include the video driver (as you likely have a new
    video card). Don't reboot the system. Simply remove the drivers, and shut down
    the system. Then, you're ready to move the disk over to the new system.

    Somewhere in that mess, you should also have a backup of C:, in case your
    transition attempt fails. By keeping a clone around, you have a way to go backwards
    and try again. I made a mistake once, in one of my moves, and had to return to
    the backup, so it's a useful thing to have.

    On older OSes, you might have had tricks such as using regedit to delete
    everything under the Enum key. Alternately, on some of the older OSes,
    you could "create a profile" and empty it. On the newer OSes, all you seem
    to be able to do, is copy a profile, and select one at bootup time, which
    doesn't really help. The ability to create an empty profile on the other
    hand, cleans out the drivers, and allows the first boot on the new system
    to be a clean one. But the last one I did, I just made sure a compatible
    driver was present, and moved the thing anyway.

    I was using an OEM WinXP (the kind you can buy from places like Newegg),
    and strictly speaking, I shouldn't have been able to activate it on the
    new hardware. But I didn't even need to phone Microsoft to make the transition.
    Activating online works (perhaps because a fair number of components were
    the same, with regard to hardware). My change started out as a motherboard
    and video card change - it still needed to be activated, but the online
    activation worked.

    I've read of cases, where activation is so screwed up when you move the
    disk, that the machine freezes up and is useless. So that's the other
    extreme. Yet another reason to have a clone copy of the disk around.
    I think in my case, I was prompted to correct the activation issue,
    in the next 72 hours or something.

    Paul
     
    Paul, Feb 11, 2011
    #10
  11. RayL12

    RayL12 Guest

    Oh, yes, I always keep several mirrors. Vive Reflect! :)

    I did consider deleting Enum through Regedit but I bottled out.

    ....Ray.
     
    RayL12, Feb 11, 2011
    #11
  12. RayL12

    Tyrone Guest

    Hi Ray,

    There are several options to look at. The M4A89GTD Pro that you are using
    comes with 5.1 channel DTS on-board audio or 8 channel HD audio - So you
    could use that.
    You could also look at using a USB based sound solution depending if you use
    headphones a lot. You might even be able to use the PCIe slot above the GTX
    460 if you want a card based sound option.

    Two of the options I have provided will cost additional money. On board
    audio is quite good these days and beat lower end dedicated sound cards.
    If you decided to use the on board audio, you could also sell your existing
    sound card to reduce the overall total spent? Hope this helps.

    Cheers,
    Tyrone

    "RayL12" wrote in message news:iimsca$6pa$-september.org...


    Well, am I upset!

    I upgraded my system at the expense of £480. One of the reasons for
    doing so was because my Creative Xfi was up against my gfx card fan.

    So I decided upon an ATX board(M4A89GTD Pro) with 2 PCI-E slots
    thinking I could use the first in order to keep a PCI slot clear.

    Comments on-line were all positive.

    So, how disappointing to find that it was designed to use the 2nd PCIE
    slot in single gfx card mode and a riser card in the first!? The Geforce
    GTX 460 covers both remaining PCI slots completely.

    What is it with these designers?? Surely they know that a gfx card is
    potentially going to cover the PCI slots?

    I'm struggling to find a work-around and a flying lead-out is all I
    can think of. Ofcourse, this will mean the Xfi card sits outside the PC?

    If anyone has any ideas I'd be grateful.

    Cheers...

    ....Ray.






    --
    Learn why we are suffering..
    www.zeitgeistthefilm.com/
     
    Tyrone, Feb 20, 2011
    #12
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. OldNick

    XP driver for Diamond soundcard.

    OldNick, Jul 5, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,142
    OldNick
    Jul 6, 2003
  2. keanu

    soundcard drivers

    keanu, Jul 18, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    4,702
    Shep©
    Jul 18, 2003
  3. Mr. Bob

    MMJB soundcard help needed

    Mr. Bob, Aug 4, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    673
    Mr. Bob
    Aug 4, 2003
  4. takitimu

    Please..High End Multi Output Soundcard advice..

    takitimu, Aug 30, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    561
    takitimu
    Aug 30, 2003
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,158
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page