• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Omega Vs. Catalyst... What is the performance difference?

G

Griffen

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 23, 2002
Messages
459
I'm assuming that the cat's will run faster based on the fact that omega drivers have many more IQ tweaks. Is this really true?

Also any general comparison between cat's and omega drivers is welcome in this thread.

I just got my 9800Pro AIW to work. With the rig in my sig I got a 3dmark03 score of roughly 5800 (with latest omega's 4.1), Somehow I thought i would have gotten a higher score.
 
That certainly is a particularly mediocre score, for a 9800Pro on an overclocked AMD system. Did you have the graphics card settings to maximum performance, or did you just use the default driver setting of balanced?

By the way, I've read the entertainment PC roundup in the February issue of Computer Shopper magazine. One of those systems had an Athlon64 FX-51 processor and a Radeon 9800Pro card - and that system scored only 1600-something in that test, which seemed very low at first glance. But then, I've read that mag's Web site on how they tested, it turned out that they had run those 3DMark2003 tests at 1600x1200 resolution, 32-bit color, and a 60Hz refresh rate (the latter due to the LCD flat-panel monitor on that and other entertainment PCs they've tested; with CRT monitors, the test was run at a 75Hz refresh rate) - and with 4x AA and 4x AF enabled, to boot.
 
The setting is on balanced. What changes take effect if I move it to performance?
 
i too would like to know the difference. do the omega drivers totally ignore the "quality" settings (16xAF 8xAA) and just try and get more out of the "performance settings"? cause sometimes it's nice to know you've got every setting possible maxed and you're still sportin 60fps ;)
 
I'd like to know the difference....

wow quakecon 2003? Did you play Doom 3 multiplayer? :D
 
I saw an article somwhere that compared the ATi, Omega, and DNA drivers in the standard gauntlet of benchmarks. The Omega's were the best out of every test, while the ATi's were the middle, and DNA the last (DNA forces VSync off, and has been suspected to be a tampered copy of Omega's). So Omega's are better than the vanilla ATi's, and don't turn off any IQ settings as far as I know.
 
The greatest benefit in using the Omega Drivers is that they allow for overclocking without flashing the bios of my 9500pro, which is locked. Becuase of this id say they provide better perfomance :D
 
Omega's install radclocker - anyone can do that. You don't have to flash a bios to OC a radeon.

I like Omega's because they seem to run a little faster, and I just feel better knowing someone has looked over ATi's shoulder and tossed the junk I don't need...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top