View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
ggrobot Elite Member
Joined: 28 May 2004 Posts: 46123
|
Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2004 2:57 am Post subject: ATI Catalyst 4.5 vs. 4.6 Performance Analysis [16155] |
|
|
The chaps over at
TweakTown have
compared the latest ATI Catalyst graphics card drivers against the previous 4.5 drivers using a Radeon X800 Pro. Here is a taster: of the day its nothing that you would really be able to notice in games - the difference in some games is only an FPS or two. installing the
Read more...
Source: GGMania headlines
GGMania.com - Daily Gaming and Tech news |
|
Back to top |
|
|
xxxx Elite Member
Joined: 07 Jun 2004 Posts: 1755 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2004 4:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
gimme a break.. this is purely a bug patch for their previous drivers and obviously so buggy they release em now every month. look at the results of testing, negligible difference, their overclocking/overdrive stuff is a crock. man i'm still using my drivers from 3/maybe 4 months ago and i still see no reason to get the latest.. if only ati users knew the feeling. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
El_Coyote Elite Member
Joined: 09 Jun 2004 Posts: 611
|
Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2004 7:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
its ati's policy to release drivers 10 times a year, not because they have to get bugfixes out |
|
Back to top |
|
|
xxxx Elite Member
Joined: 07 Jun 2004 Posts: 1755 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2004 8:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ya right. of course it's not just to fix bugfixes, that's why we see such enormous differences in speed from driver to driver. NOT. lol. well at least they can cheat in 3dmark and inflate their scores with each release. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
BLOODUK Junior Member
Joined: 08 Jun 2004 Posts: 121
|
Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2004 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ati loves 3dmark and they see there fanbase direction in 3dmark so thats why they went that direction i really hate 3dmark, driver makes should stick with GAMES only |
|
Back to top |
|
|
xxxx Elite Member
Joined: 07 Jun 2004 Posts: 1755 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2004 8:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
yup, i too always hated 3dmark. true performance results only come from game tests, period. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
madda Elite Member
Joined: 09 Jun 2004 Posts: 309 Location: UK
|
Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2004 10:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
xxxx wrote: | yup, i too always hated 3dmark. true performance results only come from game tests, period. |
very true, but 3d mark does provide some useful stats! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
xxxx Elite Member
Joined: 07 Jun 2004 Posts: 1755 Location: Canada
|
Posted: Mon Jun 14, 2004 10:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
on what? procedure calls not used in games? there has been developer after developer that has basically spat on 3dmark as a benchmark claiming the tests that are run are not real world tests. there is no better test than actual in-game tests. now if testers had a brain and tested with multiple grades of machines rather than testing with power horses that 3/4 of the gaming community doesn't have.. then we get even better results. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|