Omega drivers - Aquamark performance drop

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bill L
  • Start date Start date
B

Bill L

Hi all

Finally decided to find out what all the fuss is about re: Omega ATI drivers
Vs. ATI's. Anyhow downloaded and installed the Omega's latest (ATI Cat. 4.3)
and have noticed a drop of 5000 points in Aquamark (down to 30,000 from
35,000).

I don't usually get too bothered about a few hundred points difference
between driver versions but 5000 seems outside the variability one would
expect.

BTW apart from the above the install of the Omega drivers was very smooth
but I don't notice any significant differences between the Omega and ATI
drivers.

So anyone else noticed a loss in performance (at least in one benchmark)
with Omega drivers?

TIA

BillL

Sys spec/config
AMD XP1700+ TB(B) @ 2.1 GHz (10.5 x 200 1.55v)
Gigabyte GA-7N400 Pro (Using on-board audio & NIC)
1 GB RAM (2 x 512 MB DIMM's) PC3200
Sapphire 9700 (non-pro) (128MB)

GlobalWin 802 ATX Midi Case
Antec TruePower 330 Watt PSU

Primary IDE Channel
1 x 120 GB Maxtor ATA133 (Master)
1 x 40 GB IBM ATA66 (slave)

Secondary IDE Channel
Liteon 40x12x48x CDRW (Master)
Liteon 16x DVD (Slave)

OtherHW
HP 940C USB Printer
Epson R300 Photo
Cannon LiDE30 USB Scanner
Belkin 7 Port USB HUB
Hauppauge WinTV PCI

OS: WinXP Pro SP1
 
Hi all

Finally decided to find out what all the fuss is about re: Omega ATI drivers
Vs. ATI's. Anyhow downloaded and installed the Omega's latest (ATI Cat. 4.3)
and have noticed a drop of 5000 points in Aquamark (down to 30,000 from
35,000).

I don't usually get too bothered about a few hundred points difference
between driver versions but 5000 seems outside the variability one would
expect.

BTW apart from the above the install of the Omega drivers was very smooth
but I don't notice any significant differences between the Omega and ATI
drivers.

So anyone else noticed a loss in performance (at least in one benchmark)
with Omega drivers?
Click to expand...

I only look at benchmarks as a rough guide. The trick is to use your
eyes. How smooth is 3D motion and how good is the detail in the
textures.

As for ease of installation. Why don't ATI hire Omega? Between the two
of them they could make an even better driver.
--

Julian Richards
computer "at" richardsuk.f9.co.uk

XP Home
L7S7A2 motherboard
Powercolor 9800 SE 8 pipelines with Omega drivers
1 GB RAM
10 GB + 80 GB HDs
CD+DVD/CDRW drives
 
Hi all

Finally decided to find out what all the fuss is about re:
Omega ATI drivers Vs. ATI's. Anyhow downloaded and
installed the Omega's latest (ATI Cat. 4.3) and have
noticed a drop of 5000 points in Aquamark (down to 30,000
from 35,000).

I don't usually get too bothered about a few hundred points
difference between driver versions but 5000 seems outside
the variability one would expect.
Click to expand...

The guy who does the Omegas states they are about visuals not
performance, and do not expect them to perform as well in
benchmarks as the vanilla Cats.

What you don't say is what previous drivers your comparing
them too, as some others have posted a performance loss in
3dmark with the vanilla 4.3's compared to 4.2, so it's hard
to know if 5000 is a reasonable drop when switching to
Omegas.

It might be worth posing the question to the Omega guy.
 
Lithurge said:
The guy who does the Omegas states they are about visuals not
performance, and do not expect them to perform as well in
benchmarks as the vanilla Cats.

What you don't say is what previous drivers your comparing
them too, as some others have posted a performance loss in
3dmark with the vanilla 4.3's compared to 4.2, so it's hard
to know if 5000 is a reasonable drop when switching to
Omegas.

It might be worth posing the question to the Omega guy.
Click to expand...

Yes, using Vanilla 4.2's before so I could be guilty of comparing apples to
pears I guess? Anyhow haven't really tried any games yet apart from the
UT2004 demo which plays as smoothly as it did with the 4.2's.

Now Aquamark that's a crap game ... talk about *scripted* ;o)

BillL
 
Back
Top