Catalyst performance progression with 2900XT.

[dennilfloss]

Here's an interesting German review of the recent drivers.

http://www.computerbase.de/art...richt_ati_catalyst_79/

Me likes this pic.

http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/d.../catalystsoblivion.png

Anyone can tell me if that improvement would also work on a 1900XTX@1920x1200? I'm still using 6.12 and have installed Oblivion yet.

 

[StopSign]

What "progression"? The drivers aren't even in chronological order. Especially that Oblivion picture. 7.6 was worse than 7.5; 7.7 was worse than 7.6. 7.9 finally brings a big improvement. What's there to like?

Unless you're just being sarcastic...

 

[AVP]

Well that huge bump in fps with 4/16 from 7.7-7.8 is something to like, a lot. Ignoring the 2fps difference in the top chart and between the 7.8-7.9, the drivers are gotten a lot better.

 

[Matt2]

IMO the drivers haven't progressed at all.

We've gone through four driver revisions since the launch of the 2900XT and overall, performance increases are too little. I mean come on, there's probably an average increase of a whole five FPS.

If someone can dig up a review that tests the progression of Nvidia G80 drivers from November to now, I can almost guarantee that the gains will look monstrous compared to what ATI is doing with 2900XT performance.

 

[geokilla]

Matt, it's like what you said. The current G80 drivers' gains will look monstrous compared to ATI's 2900XT, but don't forget they had almost a year now to fix and improve their drivers. ATI had only about 4 months so far.

Edit: G80 Driver comparison. That's the link for 3 G80 drivers, Forceware 158.18, 162.22, and 163.44.

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: geokilla
Matt, it's like what you said. The current G80 drivers' gains will look monstrous compared to ATI's 2900XT, but don't forget they had almost a year now to fix and improve their drivers. ATI had only about 4 months so far.

Edit: G80 Driver comparison. That's the link for 3 G80 drivers, Forceware 158.18, 162.22, and 163.44.

It's true that Nvidia has had a lot longer, but just look at the numbers between the five Catalyst drivers since 2900XT came onto the scene.

All I am seeing is extreme inconsistencies. Most games show no difference AT ALL, some games are faster with 7.9, some faster with 7.8, some faster with 7.7, others 7.6. Bioshock and Call of Juarez are fastest with the launch drivers 7.5.

What a freakin joke.

About the only thing good I can say about ATI's driver team after experiencing the drivers and now seeing this review is at least they can make drivers that dont crash.

 

[Sylvanas]

This is good news, hope the trend continues- I am sure once UT3 and Crysis arrive there will be a slew of Driver releases and Beta's from both teams trying for DX10 supremecy- something we have little idea of atm.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: Matt2
IMO the drivers haven't progressed at all.

We've gone through four driver revisions since the launch of the 2900XT and overall, performance increases are too little. I mean come on, there's probably an average increase of a whole five FPS.

If someone can dig up a review that tests the progression of Nvidia G80 drivers from November to now, I can almost guarantee that the gains will look monstrous compared to what ATI is doing with 2900XT performance.

Not to mention your AMD based PC compared to top end C2D rigs, your resolution choice of 1920x1200 and running the latest games. That will grind things to a halt fast. Try a lower resolution and see. Sure you won't be native, but common...even the 8800GTX doesn't have perfect performance in DX10 games we have seen so far at that resolution. Not with everything maxed out.

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: Matt2
IMO the drivers haven't progressed at all.

We've gone through four driver revisions since the launch of the 2900XT and overall, performance increases are too little. I mean come on, there's probably an average increase of a whole five FPS.

If someone can dig up a review that tests the progression of Nvidia G80 drivers from November to now, I can almost guarantee that the gains will look monstrous compared to what ATI is doing with 2900XT performance.

Not to mention your AMD based PC compared to top end C2D rigs, your resolution choice of 1920x1200 and running the latest games. That will grind things to a halt fast. Try a lower resolution and see. Sure you won't be native, but common...even the 8800GTX doesn't have perfect performance in DX10 games we have seen so far at that resolution. Not with everything maxed out.

The performance of my indivdual rig is not of consequence in this discussion. Look at the review in the OP. It's in German, but you all you need to do is look at the graphs.

ATI driver performance is all over the place. There's no reason that Bioshock should run faster on launch drivers that came out months before the game compared to brand new drivers that were released a couple weeks after Bioshock was on shelves. Same thing goes for Call of Juarez.

Like I said above, there is no consistency from the Catalyst team. They increase performance slightly in one game and they break it in another.

I could forgive them if we were talking about beta drivers that were geared towards one particular game, but we're talking about official drivers that we have to live with for a month.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: Matt2

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd

Originally posted by: Matt2
IMO the drivers haven't progressed at all.

We've gone through four driver revisions since the launch of the 2900XT and overall, performance increases are too little. I mean come on, there's probably an average increase of a whole five FPS.

If someone can dig up a review that tests the progression of Nvidia G80 drivers from November to now, I can almost guarantee that the gains will look monstrous compared to what ATI is doing with 2900XT performance.

Not to mention your AMD based PC compared to top end C2D rigs, your resolution choice of 1920x1200 and running the latest games. That will grind things to a halt fast. Try a lower resolution and see. Sure you won't be native, but common...even the 8800GTX doesn't have perfect performance in DX10 games we have seen so far at that resolution. Not with everything maxed out.

The performance of my indivdual rig is not of consequence in this discussion. Look at the review in the OP. It's in German, but you all you need to do is look at the graphs.

ATI driver performance is all over the place. There's no reason that Bioshock should run faster on launch drivers that came out months before the game compared to brand new drivers that were released a couple weeks after Bioshock was on shelves. Same thing goes for Call of Juarez.

Like I said above, there is no consistency from the Catalyst team. They increase performance slightly in one game and they break it in another.

I could forgive them if we were talking about beta drivers that were geared towards one particular game, but we're talking about official drivers that we have to live with for a month.

Well, every thread related to ATI seems to have you talking about poor performance. That's why I kinda targeted that situation here. Sorry. This is how I feel though, personally I don't have any issues as I run a lower resolution. It's just a simple fact that no card today can handle these new games at 1920x1200 on anything but the fastest PC you can get. It sucks I know.

 

[bryanW1995]

matt, you need to give me your 2900xt so that I can test it for you. you can use your old 1900xtx, or I'll give you my x1950xt in return. I will thrash that card as much as possible and hopefully find any/all faults with it. I'll send it back to you as soon as my 2950 pro arrives in Q1

 

[ronnn]

Originally posted by: Matt2
IMO the drivers haven't progressed at all.

Well certainly not what actual reviewers say. The results you are getting are not substantiated by any reputable site so why not admit you made a bad buy and get a Nvidia card? Than life would be better here and better for yourself.

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: ronnn

Originally posted by: Matt2
IMO the drivers haven't progressed at all.

Well certainly not what actual reviewers say. The results you are getting are not substantiated by any reputable site so why not admit you made a bad buy and get a Nvidia card? Than life would be better here and better for yourself.

Well looking at the article in the OP, it only looks like the drivers have progressed in certain games and in widely varying degree. It looks like in many games they have actually regressed.

If you're trying to refute that claim then I think it is you who needs to provide some evidence.

 

[cmdrdredd]

they say 1xAA. How do I enable 1xAA?

None of the games that did drop slightly are unplayable.

The launch drivers, if you play Bioshock with them. Give corruption in the textures and are missing polys all over. Not displaying them obviously makes it run faster.

 

[Matt2]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
they say 1xAA. How do I enable 1xAA?

None of the games that did drop slightly are unplayable.

The launch drivers, if you play Bioshock with them. Give corruption in the textures and are missing polys all over. Not displaying them obviously makes it run faster.

I think they mean no aa and no af.

So do 7.6 and 7.7 cause the texture corruption? Cause those are faster too.