Catalyst 3.10 newer than 3.9 ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter J.Clarke
  • Start date Start date
J

J.Clarke

Wanted to download drives for my new 9800XT.
The site I downloaded from, listed Catalyst 3.10 as being newer than
Catalyst 3.9
Can this be true?
Click to expand...

Well, now, usually revision ten of something is newer than revision
nine. But neither ATI nor Omega have a released 3.10 driver, so
whatever you're looking at that purports to be 3.10 is very suspicious.
Could be a pirated beta or could be an earlier driver with a virus
attached or could be something totally bogus.
 
Wanted to download drives for my new 9800XT.
The site I downloaded from, listed Catalyst 3.10 as being newer than
Catalyst 3.9
Can this be true?
 
f00ge said:
Wanted to download drives for my new 9800XT.
The site I downloaded from, listed Catalyst 3.10 as being newer than
Catalyst 3.9
Can this be true?
Click to expand...

No. I suggest you download them from www.ATI.com

3.9 is the latest version
 
f00ge said:
Wanted to download drives for my new 9800XT.
The site I downloaded from, listed Catalyst 3.10 as being newer than
Catalyst 3.9
Can this be true?
Click to expand...

website??? Can't be the ati.com website...

RD
 
Well the hotfixed 3.9's ARE the 3.10 without the WHQL label.
So yes the 3.10s have been out.
Click to expand...

I see. So why are they called "3.9" on both the ATI and Omega sites?
Perhaps you know something ATI doesn't?
 
f00ge said:
Wanted to download drives for my new 9800XT.
The site I downloaded from, listed Catalyst 3.10 as being newer than
Catalyst 3.9
Can this be true?
Click to expand...

Good question. Personally, I think the next version should be called 3.9x
or 4.0. If 3.10 were to be the next version, it implies that the previous
versions are numbered 3.01 through 3.09.
 
shhh you'll only make sense and confuse ATI

Tim said:
Good question. Personally, I think the next version should be called 3.9x
or 4.0. If 3.10 were to be the next version, it implies that the previous
versions are numbered 3.01 through 3.09.
Click to expand...
 
shhh you'll only make sense and confuse ATI
Click to expand...

LOL...this made me laugh..

He's right actually....for anyone who calls themself a technology
company, ATI should be aware of how the decimal system works. I will
be quite frankly a bit surprised if they come out with the 3.10s, as
3.10 only implies 3.1. That means we'll be going back in time, woohoo!


***
....the Phoenix shall rise...
 
Tim said:
Good question. Personally, I think the next version should be called 3.9x
or 4.0. If 3.10 were to be the next version, it implies that the previous
versions are numbered 3.01 through 3.09.
Click to expand...
This used to confuse me too. But in the computer biz version numbers
are NOT decimals even though they contain decimal points. I've worked
for a number of companies and used a lot of SW and practically everyone
uses an integer notation with a decimal point as a separator.

Thus, you'll see 3.0 3.1 ... 3.9, 3.10, 3.11

minor versions will add another level; e.g

3.9.1, 3.9.2 ..... 3.9.9, 3.9.10

Think of it as outline numbering if that's easier to understand.

/dan
 
" Well, now, usually revision ten of something is newer than revision nine.
"


A *rev 3.10* would be newer than a *rev 3.09*.
A *rev 3.9* should technically be the same as a *rev 3.90*.
 
LOL...this made me laugh..

He's right actually....for anyone who calls themself a technology
company, ATI should be aware of how the decimal system works. I will
be quite frankly a bit surprised if they come out with the 3.10s, as
3.10 only implies 3.1. That means we'll be going back in time, woohoo!


***
....the Phoenix shall rise...
Click to expand...
It's base12
 
It's base12
Click to expand...

Wtf are you talking about?
The decimal system is base 10. 3.9 sure looks like decimal to me.
Hexedecimal is base 16. Binary is base 2.
What is base 12?
Are you an actual representative of ATI clarifying our thoughts on the
matter?


***
....the Phoenix shall rise...
 
Wtf are you talking about?
The decimal system is base 10. 3.9 sure looks like decimal to me.
Hexedecimal is base 16. Binary is base 2.
What is base 12?
Are you an actual representative of ATI clarifying our thoughts on the
matter?


***
....the Phoenix shall rise...
Click to expand...

No it was just a joke, just adding a little more absurdity to the
discussion.
 
Well the hotfixed 3.9's ARE the 3.10 without the WHQL label.
So yes the 3.10s have been out.

3."9"
3."10" is how you read it.
 
No it was just a joke, just adding a little more absurdity to the
discussion.
Click to expand...

oh! LOL..
well sorry for biting your head off...
today's been a terrible day...glad its ended now...


***
....the Phoenix shall rise...
 
Back
Top