I can't find my soundcard

[camelNotation]

Recently I changed my motherboard from gigabye to a newer model of gigabyte brand.since then I have'nt been able to listen to any type of audio from wmd 9.0 but the video comes allright.went to device manager everything is okay but the error message says that either i dont have any soundcard installed or it's being used by another program.My soundcard was built-in.

[TallCool1]

Recently I changed my motherboard from gigabye to a newer model of gigabyte brand.since then I have'nt been able to listen to any type of audio from wmd 9.0 but the video comes allright.went to device manager everything is okay but the error message says that either i dont have any soundcard installed or it's being used by another program. My soundcard was built-in.

Motherboard model numbers would help (old and new), so we can tell whether it's a sound chip or AC '97 sound on board. Did you carry over your Windows install from the earlier MB, or install fresh? What version of Windows are you running?

[camelNotation]

" Motherboard model numbers would help (old and new), so we can tell whether it's a sound chip or AC '97 sound on board. Did you carry over your Windows install from the earlier MB, or install fresh? What version of Windows are you running "

the old model was GA 8IE 2004
don't know the new one.

they didn't reinstall or format just deleted some things.

I'm running windows xp pro sp1.2003 i guess.

[TallCool1]

the old model was GA 8IE 2004 -- don't know the new one.

Run AIDA32 to find the model number and report.

[camelNotation]

I checked my device manager.There's an exclamation mark in yellow for " C-Media AC97 Audio Device.

[TallCool1]

I checked my device manager.There's an exclamation mark in yellow for " C-Media AC97 Audio Device.

Your old board had AC '97 (Audio Codec '97) sound. So does your new board; unfortunately, they use 2 different codecs and drivers, hence the conflict. No one should ever use AC '97 if they can avoid it.

My recommendation, as always in a case like this, is to get a SoundBlaster Live! (or better) sound card. AC '97 is software-based sound, in other words: the CPU does all the work. Even the fastest processor is dragged down by this.

You can purchase an OEM-version SB Live! for around $30-35 -- it's the best bang-for-the-buck upgrade you can do for your system.

[camelNotation]

"the old model was GA 8IE 2004
don't know the new one."

sorry about the wrong information.The old one was 2003.The new one is ga8ie 2004/8ie2004 L

I tried running the driver cd delivered along with the new motherboard but in the audio folder , there are three choices like ADI,SIGMATEL,REALTEK..which one should I choose?my soundcard was built-in.not willing to buy a blaster.

[TallCool1]

I tried running the driver cd delivered along with the new motherboard but in the audio folder , there are three choices like ADI, SIGMATEL, REALTEK..which one should I choose? My soundcard was built-in.not willing to buy a blaster.

AC '97 is not a sound card; it's software. As I noted in my last message, AC '97 sound is like buying a Mercedes and tying a 50-pound lead weight to the back bumper, but to each his own...

According to the manual, it'a a Realtek codec.

[camelNotation]

I ran the realtek setup now there's something called AVRACK in my desktop which is something like a media player.Tried running a movie from there the video comes no audio error message says no audio hardware detected.I went to device manager and now there's no exclamation mark in ac97.still,no sound.should I uninstall something and reinstall again ?

[TallCool1]

I ran the realtek setup now there's something called AVRACK in my desktop which is something like a media player.Tried running a movie from there the video comes no audio error message says no audio hardware detected.I went to device manager and now there's no exclamation mark in ac97.still,no sound.should I uninstall something and reinstall again ?

Hmmm... The manual said Realtek ALC655 Codec, so that should work, unless there's more than one Realtek codec driver on the disc... make sure that the mute function isn't active and that the volume is turned up, as well.

[camelNotation]

ooh i got it fixed thankx a lot for the help.I'm using this built-in card but still I don't notice my process going slow !?

[caperjack]

some people like and use AC 97 with out much trouble ,depends on you ear i guess ,[except for a few clicks mine works ok ,some day I will have extra money and buy a blaster !!]

[TallCool1]

ooh i got it fixed thankx a lot for the help.I'm using this built-in card but still I don't notice my process going slow !?

Sound quality, for the most part, is not the issue. My point was that for the small increment in price, you get a good boost in performance. The less you burden the CPU, the better the performance. Since Windows is so dependent upon cooperative multitasking (as opposed to preemptive multitasking)*, the fewer processes contending for CPU resources, the better. This would be most noticed with gaming, of course, but there are a surprising number of cases where this comes in to play.

For example, you are playing an MP3 and a system sound chimes. Now, in addition to decompressing and decoding the music file on-the-fly from the hard drive and doing the digital-to-analog conversion and driving the output, the CPU has to do the same thing with a WAV file. You may (or may not) hear a glitch, but think about the resources being diverted from other tasks -- something's got to give. Even if, on average, AC '97 only takes 2% of the CPU time (for example), its peak load may be as high as 20% or more.

I am against WinModems for the same reason -- they are solely for the manufacturers' benefit, not yours. The price differential is minimal when you look at the overall cost of the system, but the performance gains are noticeable and worthwhile.

* Not exactly true. See my next message.

[caperjack]

Makes Sense,I have my windows sounds turned off !

[TallCool1]

Since Windows is so dependent upon cooperative multitasking (as opposed to preemptive multitasking), the fewer processes contending for CPU resources, the better.

Whoops, my bad. Cog-skip moment. Win32 does, in fact, do preemptive multitasking since NT. It's 16-bit Windows stuff that does cooperative multitasking, meaning that Win9x is a mixed bag at best, and that's why running 16-bit executables in an NT environment can sometimes cause problems -- and one of the reasons XP was so late.

The rest of my comments still hold true, however. See http://freewebhosting.hostdepartment.com/k/kadaitcha/compatibility.html

[philpotrebel]

My das computer had the same prob. make sure you have the drivers installed.

[camelNotation]

Whoops, my bad. Cog-skip moment. Win32 does, in fact, do preemptive multitasking since NT. It's 16-bit Windows stuff that does cooperative multitasking, meaning that Win9x is a mixed bag at best, and that's why running 16-bit executables in an NT environment can sometimes cause problems -- and one of the reasons XP was so late.

Well , what's the difference between co-operative multitasking and preemptive multitasking ?

4 bits = 1 nibble

What does it actually mean by a 16-bit application ? then there's 32bit/64bits...

[TallCool1]

What's the difference between co-operative multitasking and preemptive multitasking?

Cooperative multitasking is the environment in which programs hand off system control from one to the next. The worst problem with this is that if a program crashes, hangs, or is poorly written the entire system can crash or hang up with an exception error, another is that some programs are more cooperative and/or CPU intensive than others, leading to choppy sound, etc.

Preemptive multitasking is an environment in which task switching is controlled by the kernel, not the progams. In theory, this means less crashing, since the kernel can "switch away" from a misbehaving task -- but in practice (especially since Win9x is a mixture of 16- and 32-bit underpinnings) this is partly where BSoDs (Blue Screens of Death) come from. Win NT/XP is less prone to this, since the 16-bit parts of the code base are not present.

More detail is off-topic for this thread, but there's more on the Win32 API here: http://www.iseran.com/Win32/FAQ/faq.htm
and I am in the process of writing an essay called Windows Names and Versions which I will post to my site soon (before the first of the year -- it's almost done) along with most of my other writings.

[dakotawan]

not that this matters 6 years after the question, but for future browsers of this thread, restart the computer and go into the cmos setup and check to see if integrated audio is enabled. it's a motherboard setting so if you got a new motherboard and can't get any sound or find your sound card, it might not be enabled. if that doesn't work your mobo is defective and you should get a new one, or just take off the audio chip and solder on a new one.