Hello,
 
Is it true that Internal audio interfaces are faster and better quality?
 
Any reason to get internal over external and vice versa?
 
Thank You,
Adam

What are you referring to?  The Internal PC sound card VS external?  or some type of PCIe recording interface VS external?

oh im talking about PCIe internal audio interface (studio quality) vs the USB ones.

Without getting into splitting hairs over **** .vs **** . I think they're both ok. External interfaces are easier to hook up and move between computers. The Apollo Twin usb 3 is a good example of pristine quality on an external interface. Most internals are limited in how many connections you can have unless you try to use light pipe or have a break out box. The external ones can have 26 or more inputs of various types. 
 
External interfaces have been the most popular. Plug it in and go.

Internal interfaces have become rare. This is for a few reasons, one of them being the insides of a PC is a hostile environment where noise can be an issue. The other issue is you then need a break out box for the front or some messy thing with a bunch of cables sitting on your desk, Much better to put it in one small box away from RF noise.  Also unless your using something like over 24 audio inputs, USB 2 is plenty capable of handling that amount of DATA. USB is what 90% of the interfaces use so you have a lot more choices when shopping. Here's my little info document on shopping for an interface. 
 
http://www.cactusmusic.ca/Recording.htm#AI Shopping List
 
 

AdamGrossmanLG
Is it true that Internal audio interfaces are faster and better quality?
 
Any reason to get internal over external and vice versa?

To achieve higher fidelity (lower noise-floor), you want the A/D D/A converters outside of the computer.
The lowest noise-floor I've seen with A/D D/A inside the box is about -103dB.
 
PCIe cards allow using very small ASIO buffer sizes (some go as low as 16-samples)... for ultra low round-trip latency.
That said, the best USB-2 audio interfaces (ie: RME Fireface UFX) go down to a 48-sample ASIO buffer size.
 
With latest generation PCs, we now have full support for "PCIe via Thunderbolt".
Thunderbolt provides (external) access to the PCIe bus.
Thus, the latest Thunderbolt audio interfaces are external... but provide PCIe level performance (for ultra low latency).  
 
More important than internal vs. external is the quality of the audio interface and its driver.
 
 

I agree totally with Jim Roseberry on his answer. 
 
You should be going the route of an external audio I/O

External is the way to go. As a point of interest, my (internal) E-MU 1212m achieved an SNR of 117dB, so I don't think there are necessarily any problems with itb converters even though common sense says taking them out is a good idea.

Sanderxpander
External is the way to go. As a point of interest, my (internal) E-MU 1212m achieved an SNR of 117dB, so I don't think there are necessarily any problems with itb converters even though common sense says taking them out is a good idea.

Did you actually measure the average noise-floor of the 1212m?  
The 1820m (which uses external A/D D/A has a measurable noise-floor of -117dB).
Aside from the 1820m, I've not seen any audio sub $1000 audio interface with noise-floor below -114dB.
In fact, most audio interfaces between $1000-$1500 don't quite make it to -117dB.
And these are all using external converters...
 

No I relied on external reports (not the vendors, which claim I think 120dB). I remember because I specifically bought it with that spec in mind. I can probably find it online. I actually upgraded to the 1820M for the extra inputs later on.

Of course the 1212m is very bare in the sense that it doesn't provide mic preamps or phantom power, that probably helps.