![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
4.9 Beta Catalyst Drivers Out. (For Doom 3)
- Thread starter datamage
- Start date
gregr said:I just downloaded these and installed them and they made my fps much worse for some reasonMy 1024x768 high detail went from 31 fps with the omega 3.7's to 24 fps with the cat 3.9b. I reinstalled the omega 3.7's and my framerates went right back up. Anyone know why this would happen?
From my understanding the beta is more of a hotfix than a full on display driver (as it does say HOTFIX). Since I wasn't instructed to unistall the 4.7 cat I just ran it and it installed over them. I am having no probs. But you going from omega drivers...that could be the problem. Or I could be wrong.
arentol said:
If you can now play "XTPE/16x12/*** maybe 2xAA***/Ultra Quality" on a
...then somebody on a higher spec should be able to turn 4xAA on...so what you're saying about needing a " They would need a 4ghz/3900+ CPU" isn' true, necessarily...unless you meant for full FPS, then OK. But if you meant 40+FPS would be possible on current machines at these settings then that's fully playable...
Lot of betas from ATi this week.
The important thing to remember is that Catalyst betas 4.8 are for FarCry, 4.9 are for Doom3. That is until ATi crams it all into one non-beta driver sometime in the future.
The 4.8's have DX9.0b PVS 2.0b (instead of just regular 2.0 support) which is proving to have a small but decent speed boost in Farcry, just like Nvidia on their 3.0 and DX9.0c.
The 4.9's are aimed at speeding up Doom3 and OpenGL (rumored to be emulating Nvidias cards in certain areas)
Anyone want to bet there will be a beta 4.10 set with (hopefully) the release of HL2 next month? I don't like the idea of having two beta sets, but then again how many people will be playing both games at the same time.
The important thing to remember is that Catalyst betas 4.8 are for FarCry, 4.9 are for Doom3. That is until ATi crams it all into one non-beta driver sometime in the future.
The 4.8's have DX9.0b PVS 2.0b (instead of just regular 2.0 support) which is proving to have a small but decent speed boost in Farcry, just like Nvidia on their 3.0 and DX9.0c.
The 4.9's are aimed at speeding up Doom3 and OpenGL (rumored to be emulating Nvidias cards in certain areas)
Anyone want to bet there will be a beta 4.10 set with (hopefully) the release of HL2 next month? I don't like the idea of having two beta sets, but then again how many people will be playing both games at the same time.
ZenOps said:
It's cool that they are getting the drivers out there...but I really think it should be a little more organized...for being one of the two bests vid card companies in the world, they sure are getting sloppy with drivers these couple of weeks...I guess it's all that competition nv is throwing thier way...I love to watch multi-billion dollar companies freak out...the most interesting things happen...
The Batman
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2004
- Messages
- 1,531
So what's the final verdict guys? Good? Bad? Whoppie Goldberg?
Wich0 said:
hmmpf...well ok I take it back...I thought the ATi cards were available from ATi themselves...after checking their website I see that's not true...so no big deal there...
And yeah, I say nice things about ATi all the time...thanks for asking...
Godmachine
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2003
- Messages
- 10,472
Well i got a nice increase on my AIW 9800 pro but i don't play games on that system much ( i got a 8fps increase!) i have a gaming system with a 6800 gt and it still wipes the floor with my AIW
Lol I installed the drivers on one of my machines with a 9800pro and it picked up 8fps. Now mind you, I dont have doom3 yet just the alpha leak but hey ! was nice to see. Takeing a educated guess I would think within a couple months of ati getting the opengl code out along with optimizations should greatly close the performance lead that nvidia currently is enjoying in opengl games.
Greetings all. I'm a Sapphire 9500 128MB non-pro user that learned about getting the card to run like a 9700 Pro with the cracked drivers and using Radeonator 2.0 to overclock the card. My cards run 324 core and 297 memory on two different cards, though one gets artifacts when I use the cracked drivers and try to record TV using a tuner card.
My main wish when I installed Doom 3 was to run it on my 17" Sony Widescreen LCD with decent framerates. But after playing through several levels of the game, I can say that combat is AWEFUL using a custom resolution of 1280 x 768 in the .cfg file for the game. It looks wonderfun just walking around, but get an action scene and wam... it's hard to know where the enemy is with the jumpy screen, etc.
Knowing there were 4.9's out there, I first ran timedemos on my system using the cracked 4.7's Catalyst drivers. My system specs are a Shuttle SB61G2, Intel 2.4c CPU running at 3.06 GHz, 512MB (2x256) GEIL "Golden Dragon" PC3500 Dual Channel memory, system is running at 255MHz FSB, the Ram is running using the PC320 setting in the BIOS. I also have a Seagate 200GB HD, the aforementioned video card, and onboard sound and networking.
(note: I have seta image_cacheMegs set to "96" and image_cacheMinK set to "500")
Both benchmarks were run using Medium Settings with no AA or filtering under advanced options.
Cracked 4.7 Catalyst -
1280 x 768 - 26.5 fps
1024 x 768 - 32.1 fps
800 x 600 - 43.1 fps
640 x 480 - 49.2 fps
Cat 4.9 Beta NOT CRACKED -
1280 x 768 - 28.5 fps
1024 x 768 - 19.4 fps
800 x 600 - 29.6 fps
640 x 480 - 39.6 fps
Obviously my fill rates are down with the non-cracked drivers, but what I can't understand is why the custom resolution (1280 x 768) is actually faster with the non-cracked drivers, while every other resolution is clearly slower. I ran all the 4.9 benchmarks twice to confirm my numbers, and the settings are EXACTLY what they were with the 4.7 drivers.
As it stands, I am probably stuck running Doom 3 at 640 x 480 using Cat 4.7 drivers to get a decent frame rate until cracked 4.9's are available that I assume will improve my numbers. Thoughs and assistance is appreciated.
My main wish when I installed Doom 3 was to run it on my 17" Sony Widescreen LCD with decent framerates. But after playing through several levels of the game, I can say that combat is AWEFUL using a custom resolution of 1280 x 768 in the .cfg file for the game. It looks wonderfun just walking around, but get an action scene and wam... it's hard to know where the enemy is with the jumpy screen, etc.
Knowing there were 4.9's out there, I first ran timedemos on my system using the cracked 4.7's Catalyst drivers. My system specs are a Shuttle SB61G2, Intel 2.4c CPU running at 3.06 GHz, 512MB (2x256) GEIL "Golden Dragon" PC3500 Dual Channel memory, system is running at 255MHz FSB, the Ram is running using the PC320 setting in the BIOS. I also have a Seagate 200GB HD, the aforementioned video card, and onboard sound and networking.
(note: I have seta image_cacheMegs set to "96" and image_cacheMinK set to "500")
Both benchmarks were run using Medium Settings with no AA or filtering under advanced options.
Cracked 4.7 Catalyst -
1280 x 768 - 26.5 fps
1024 x 768 - 32.1 fps
800 x 600 - 43.1 fps
640 x 480 - 49.2 fps
Cat 4.9 Beta NOT CRACKED -
1280 x 768 - 28.5 fps
1024 x 768 - 19.4 fps
800 x 600 - 29.6 fps
640 x 480 - 39.6 fps
Obviously my fill rates are down with the non-cracked drivers, but what I can't understand is why the custom resolution (1280 x 768) is actually faster with the non-cracked drivers, while every other resolution is clearly slower. I ran all the 4.9 benchmarks twice to confirm my numbers, and the settings are EXACTLY what they were with the 4.7 drivers.
As it stands, I am probably stuck running Doom 3 at 640 x 480 using Cat 4.7 drivers to get a decent frame rate until cracked 4.9's are available that I assume will improve my numbers. Thoughs and assistance is appreciated.
I'm generally a lurker but now seems to be a good time to post something, sorry if it was posted before, didn't pick it out of anyone's posts.
Bug #1 with the driver (optimization perhaps?)
Doom3 - Shadows are no longer rendered by the player's model or weapons.
- I am aware this is a beta driver, but is anyone else experiencing this, or other quirky things?
Radeon 9800 Pro @ stock
Catalyst 4.7 with 4.9 Hotfix installed overtop
Bug #1 with the driver (optimization perhaps?)
Doom3 - Shadows are no longer rendered by the player's model or weapons.
- I am aware this is a beta driver, but is anyone else experiencing this, or other quirky things?
Radeon 9800 Pro @ stock
Catalyst 4.7 with 4.9 Hotfix installed overtop
Zwitterion
Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2002
- Messages
- 938
I've been running D3 on Ultra, too. I hope these drivers give me a lil more boost.
rancor said:
False: I was seeing my shadows earlier today just fine, updated to the 4.9 hotfix and now they're gone in single player. I was just trying multiplayer out with a friend and noticed that the shadows periodically return when they shouldn't seem to and arn't like they were before.
vodkajello
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2004
- Messages
- 87
So the Cat 4.9 betas are the ones that were used in the id/Hard benchmarks already?
The ones that are meant to show improvements are the ones that the review condems as being too slow and needing re-engineering?
Just want to make sure I got this straight.
Keep going ATI you showed a few FPS gain for the review and I'm sure you can come very close to the nvidia boards with the next release! Pretty quick reaction and a solid piece of rushed engineering. I'm sure optimizing the ogl driver isn't like tieing our shoes, and they showed a pretty good performance gain in a very short amount of time.
I'm willing to bet that they'll be within about 5% of the nvidia boards within 4-8 weeks.
Nothing like some good competition to light a fire under a company.
The ones that are meant to show improvements are the ones that the review condems as being too slow and needing re-engineering?
Just want to make sure I got this straight.
Keep going ATI you showed a few FPS gain for the review and I'm sure you can come very close to the nvidia boards with the next release! Pretty quick reaction and a solid piece of rushed engineering. I'm sure optimizing the ogl driver isn't like tieing our shoes, and they showed a pretty good performance gain in a very short amount of time.
I'm willing to bet that they'll be within about 5% of the nvidia boards within 4-8 weeks.
Nothing like some good competition to light a fire under a company.
Just as a report, I didn't get any actual FPS down but the 4.9 set did improve my framerates noticably. I'm running a 9600Pro 128, when I built my system last winter I went with a cheaper card intending to upgrade oh ... right about now so the 6800 is on its way, but the 9600 does actually play the game ... just not very well. 640x480, low quality, with the high-quality special effects off makes it playable, except when I've got a ton of hellspawn around. Still looks better than anything else out there hehe
so the 6800 is on its way, but the 9600 does actually play the game ... just not very well. 640x480, low quality, with the high-quality special effects off makes it playable, except when I've got a ton of hellspawn around. Still looks better than anything else out there hehe