I think in DOS they act exactly the same as a AWE32. they supposedly have better sound quality but I don't know if this is all models or just the Gold version. The big draw is no hanging midi bug unlike the awe32 (and virtually all SB cards) but the downside is none of the awe64 cards have wavetable headers but you can use the external midi devices with it.

Thanks, I'm not really a fan of the sound these AWE cards have but I'll probably pick it up. 😁

In my opinion, no. The only AWE64 vs AWE32 advantage would be card size. Some AWE32's are full lenght cards.
The AWE64 Gold has an additional advantage regarding analog and digital output quality against the AWE32. Even so AWE64 Gold SnR is not impressive by any means.

Compatibility wise it should be good.

Indeed the SNR is significantly better on the 64, plus you can reverb the CQM FM if you'd like 😜

The real shitty part of the AWE64 is the RAM module proprietaryness if you value SF2 files, but then again the games that could use these aren't that worth it anyway (ff7 still sounds awful)

Nope.

The AWE64 is worse because the added polyphony is software pushed (which taxes old CPUs greatly-- the whole POINT of soundcards back then was to offload sound processing to a discreet card and NOT the CPU). The AWE64 still uses the same low-quality capacitors and honestly the gimmicks with the extra pricetag make it more disgusting. Ooooh, two gold plated RCA jacks and fake OPL3!

Maybe I'm being a little harsh, but there's really zero reason to get an AWE64 if you can get an AWE32 for infinitely less. In fact, an AWE32 would be easier to modify and uses the awesome philips amplifier and has (what seems to be) a better output.

So since you have to mod both cards regardless because of the low quality, the AWE32 makes more sense.

Yea grab it if you can get it cheap. It's a card many are chasing and will likely go up in value. But otherwise not really an improvement of what you currently got.

Also if you have a non-Pentium processor like a Cyrix6x86 or a K5, the "extra polyphony" software driver won't install anyhow

raymangold wrote:

The AWE64 still uses the same low-quality capacitors and honestly the gimmicks with the extra pricetag make it more disgusting.

I actually read something that Creative used capacitors with wrong values against whatwas advised to do in the datasheets of amplifiers on some SB16 cards.

Un-Creative Labs.

raymangold wrote:

Nope. […]
Show full quote

Nope.

The AWE64 is worse because the added polyphony is software pushed (which taxes old CPUs greatly-- the whole POINT of soundcards back then was to offload sound processing to a discreet card and NOT the CPU). The AWE64 still uses the same low-quality capacitors and honestly the gimmicks with the extra pricetag make it more disgusting. Ooooh, two gold plated RCA jacks and fake OPL3!

Maybe I'm being a little harsh, but there's really zero reason to get an AWE64 if you can get an AWE32 for infinitely less. In fact, an AWE32 would be easier to modify and uses the awesome philips amplifier and has (what seems to be) a better output.

So since you have to mod both cards regardless because of the low quality, the AWE32 makes more sense.

+1

raymangold wrote:

The AWE64 is worse because the added polyphony is software pushed

Is this an issue under DOS?

The Waveguide stuff is a Win32 device iirc.

carlostex wrote:

I actually read something that Creative used capacitors with wrong values against whatwas advised to do in the datasheets of amplifiers on some SB16 cards.

Un-Creative Labs.

Well, most companies don't use the lab-spec configuration in the datasheet because they are usually trying to 1) cut cost, and 2) manipulate the output for more or less bass, treble, mid-range, what-have-you. I wouldn't say it's the "wrong" values as they probably just have another goal in mind.

AWE32 cards are not full length. They are some inch shorter, so that full length cards support present in older cases doesn't help and they bend under their weight.

leileilol wrote:

Indeed the SNR is significantly better on the 64, plus you can reverb the CQM FM if you'd like 😜

The real shitty part of the AWE64 is the RAM module proprietaryness if you value SF2 files, but then again the games that could use these aren't that worth it anyway (ff7 still sounds awful)

AWE64's proprietary RAMs is not a big issue, since SIMMCONN is still available (an adapter which enables you to use 72 pin standard SIMMs).

tayyare wrote:

AWE64's proprietary RAMs is not a big issue, since SIMMCONN is still available (an adapter which enables you to use 72 pin standard SIMMs).

Exactly. I would say that it's indeed the other way around - the AWE64 is cheap and easy to max out, while the 30-pin SIMMs that you need for the AWE32 are getting more rare and more expensive for 16MB modules (at least in my experience anyway).

For post 95 Dos-games, I would say that the AWE64 is a better match.
It all depends on the games it self..

If you have games that can handle AWE for music, then go for the 64.
If you'r games all need OPL, then go for a 32, with the OPL chip.

It all depends. And if you choose the 64, then go for the gold version.
As a real OPL chip beats the 64 simulatng OPL at any time.
Personally, I have setteled on the CT3900 in my dedicated DOS-Rig, as it has an real OPL-Chip.

My fastest Win98-Box have no ISA slot, wich have resulted in the SB-Live.
It does emulate SB16, yes, on the other hand, this box is no dedicated DOS-machine.
This machine should only run DOS-games such as Doom. (EMM386 and General Midi games)

leileilol wrote:

Also if you have a non-Pentium processor like a Cyrix6x86 or a K5, the "extra polyphony" software driver won't install anyhow

Sounds like something in need of a quick patch 😀

brostenen wrote:

For post 95 Dos-games, I would say that the AWE64 is a better match. It all depends on the games it self.. […]
Show full quote

For post 95 Dos-games, I would say that the AWE64 is a better match.
It all depends on the games it self..

If you have games that can handle AWE for music, then go for the 64.
If you'r games all need OPL, then go for a 32, with the OPL chip.

It all depends. And if you choose the 64, then go for the gold version.
As a real OPL chip beats the 64 simulatng OPL at any time.
Personally, I have setteled on the CT3900 in my dedicated DOS-Rig, as it has an real OPL-Chip.

My fastest Win98-Box have no ISA slot, wich have resulted in the SB-Live.
It does emulate SB16, yes, on the other hand, this box is no dedicated DOS-machine.
This machine should only run DOS-games such as Doom. (EMM386 and General Midi games)

The AWE32 with OPL3 is actually a completely different card than the AWE32 CQM cards. For some reason the AWE32 with OPL3 cards have *the* flattest sounding OPL3 in the entire universe. I was meaning to figure out what was causing it, and may pursue that some day.

dexter311 wrote:

tayyare wrote:

AWE64's proprietary RAMs is not a big issue, since SIMMCONN is still available (an adapter which enables you to use 72 pin standard SIMMs).

Exactly. I would say that it's indeed the other way around - the AWE64 is cheap and easy to max out, while the 30-pin SIMMs that you need for the AWE32 are getting more rare and more expensive for 16MB modules (at least in my experience anyway).

That's not that true, either... 😀 OWC still has them brand new for 9.29 USD each (well, at least if you live in US and not paying much for shipment, anyway: shipment 27.58 USD to Turkey for 4 sticks 😊 ).

http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Other%20World% … uting/30PS16MB/