1. This forum section is a read-only archive which contains old newsgroup posts. If you wish to post a query, please do so in one of our main forum sections (here). This way you will get a faster, better response from the members on Motherboard Point.

Was looking to switch to ATI, biut it seems they still haven't figured how to write good drivers...

Discussion in 'Nvidia' started by not me, Oct 13, 2003.

  1. not me

    not me Guest

    Still interested in switching over due to Nvidia's lack of following DX9
    protocols. But I just noticed that ATI has dropped the ball with their new
    Cat 3.8's...at least that's what I am seeing on their group.

    Just not sure what I want to do now...
     
    not me, Oct 13, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. not me

    John Guest

    I've just changed over myself. ATI made some major changes on the 3.8's and
    when major changes take place its inevitable that there will be a few probs.
    Just use the 3.7's. I've had no problems at all with them.

    As a programmer myself I know how easy it is to cure one problem and
    inadvertently generate another. :)) After all Nvidia are on versions 51xx of
    their drivers and due to specific peculiar circumstances of certain systems some
    users still have problems with certain programs. It applies to everyone who
    writes software with no exceptions (except MS who just get blue ones <g>)

    Regards

    John
     
    John, Oct 13, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. not me

    magnulus Guest

    I've been down both roads. I'm going back to my NVidia card.
    I tried going back to my Radeon 9700 Pro, but I got fed up with it. I'm
    happier with my GeForce FX 5900, even if it is going to be slower with a few
    games... by the time Half Life 2 comes out, hell could be frozen over
    anyways. For the games now, NVidia meets my expectations just fine.

    Problems I had with ATI cards:

    1) their unified drivers broke compatability and caused problems with a few
    games that their Radeon 8500 didn't have, and they've never fixed the
    problems.
    2) Some games just refuse to run at all
    3) MS Flight Simulator 2004 still has problems with ATI cards
    4) NVidia has a fixed aspect ratio timing, ATI cards do not (good for
    letterboxing on a non 4:3 display, such as LCD)
    5) ATI's Truform is broken on the newer cards, it cannot perform it in
    hardware, making the feature useless . That was a big selling point to me
    for the Radeon 8500. So sad Raven Shield was built up around this crap
    feature. They should have used regular high poly models.

    You see where I'm going. You could have the most kick-butt hardware in
    the world, but it doesn't mean anything if your drivers are hit and miss.
    Some people might not care if a 3-4 year old game doesn't run, or they don't
    play anything but the big-name action games that always work, but I do.
    The simple fact is that NVidia knows drivers, they take their drivers
    seriously, and they turn out consistent quality drivers. They are fixing to
    increase the performance with their FX cards and give them a bit of a speed
    boost with the Detonator 50, and frankly I won't care if an ATI card is
    faster in HL2, just as long as its playable on a Geforce. I only regret
    doubting them. My money is with NVidia.
     
    magnulus, Oct 14, 2003
    #3
  4. not me

    not me Guest

    Those are some good points. Thanks.
     
    not me, Oct 14, 2003
    #4
  5. not me

    Guest Guest

    I have a 9700 Pro after previously having a GF1,2,3&4 and haven't
    found ATI's drivers any worse than NVidia's. Both companys release
    drivers that fix some things and break others, and while I don't play
    many old games, the ones I do play work fine on ATI. One positive I
    have for ATI is that they have a web page for people to post problems
    with the drivers.
     
    Guest, Oct 14, 2003
    #5
  6. not me

    WyleCoyote Guest

    On Tue, 14 Oct 2003 07:12:14 +0100, spamtrap@localhost wrote:


    and NVidia's driver hell has been going on for how long now??? can
    anyone say 7 years or more ............
     
    WyleCoyote, Oct 14, 2003
    #6
  7. not me

    magnulus Guest

    NVidia cards are DX 9 parts, just that everybody decided to keep NVidia in
    the dark until the last minute. NVidia's cards will run DX 9 games, just
    that they may be slower in some cases than ATI unless programmers write
    special code for NVidia hardware and/or NVidia writes optimized drivers.
    Apparrently, Microsoft gave NVidia and ATI some rather vague specifications
    on what DX 9 would be like, they heard conflicting stories, and that's why
    you get ATI and NVidia both having different architectures. The DX 9
    standard just specifies that a card should have a high color depth, of about
    128-bits. ATI took a short cut and settled for 96 bits, whereas NVidia
    implemented 128-bits and a 64-bit setting.

    And anyways, the only big name game that's going to have "issues" with
    NVidia hardware, Half Life 2, is unfinished vaporware at this point. Deus
    Ex 2, Thief III, Far Cry, Doom 3, etc., should all run fine on NVidia
    hardware. As I said before, Gabe Newell should juts keep his big mouth
    shut.
     
    magnulus, Oct 14, 2003
    #7
  8. not me

    Tim Miser Guest

    Never experience this before with any of the cat drivers. I also play a lot
    of old games like Viper Racing, Sports Car GT, Grand Prix Legends, CFS
    series, IL-2, F4, etc.
    I didn't have the flashing menu problem...I think it's resolution specific
    but it is fixed in the latest omega drivers available here:
    http://www.omegacorner.com/
     
    Tim Miser, Oct 15, 2003
    #8
  9. not me

    Lenny Guest

    Where did you hear that bullshit? It's not true.
    No, that's not true either. They have different architectures because the
    two companies are different, and made different decisions during
    development.
    And that's not true EITHER. 'Of about 128 bits'? WTF is that supposed to
    mean? Either it IS, or it ISN'T.

    DX9 states you need 24 bits minimum for red, green, blue and alpha channels
    for internal color precision, a demand ATi fulfils exactly as specified by
    Microsoft. They didn't take any shortcuts.
    Ahumm... Yeah. Riight. Dude, the 'issues' aren't due to Gabe Newell and his
    big mouth, or Half-Life 2 (which is hardly vaporware, since it's all over
    the net by now). The 'issues' are because of the GFFX slow DX9 pixel shading
    performance, any game that uses DX9 pixel shaders will experience the exact
    same thing. Actually, some software will have problems working at all since
    current Nvidia drivers do not expose floating-point rendering buffers under
    DX. Not sure about OGL.

    Don't you just love it when people speaks confidently about stuff they know
    absolutely *nothing* about? ;)
     
    Lenny, Oct 15, 2003
    #9
  10. not me

    Minotaur Guest

    Must be hell for nVidia, if they have to modify DirectX 9 files to get
    more performance for there hardware. Just installed the Cat 3.8 drivers,
    no DX modifications noticed or any visual quality reductions, all seems
    faster too!

    Funny, I thought nVidia was going in the opposite direction with there
    drivers. Have been on my leadtek 4600 in the other box :(

    --
    ______________________________________________________________________________________

    There is no such thing, at this date of the world’s history, in America,
    as an independent press. You know it and I know it… The business of the
    Journalist is to destroy truth; To lie outright; To pervert; To vilify;
    To fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for
    his daily bread. You know it and I know it and what folly is this
    toasting an independent press? We are the tools and vassals for rich men
    behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and
    we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and or lives are all the
    property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes.
    – John Swinton, former Chief of Staff, The New York Times, circa 1880
    ______________________________________________________________________________________
     
    Minotaur, Oct 16, 2003
    #10
  11. not me

    Nada Guest

    Besides, his mouth is busy eating burgers. His keyboard has to be a
    mess with all the dried up mayonese spread everywhere.
    Do you think Nvidia's GeForce 5 cards have less registers than Ati's
    current DX9 line of cards?
    Heck yeah, I do. I love it because technical SWAT troops like you
    kick the usenet office doors open after a riot and the thread
    continues.
     
    Nada, Oct 16, 2003
    #11
  12. not me

    Mike Lamb Guest

    Actually Lenny, magnulus is right on all counts
    except the 96 vrs 128 bit.
    And that 96 vrs 128 bit was actually 24 bit for
    Ati vrs 32 bit precision for nvidia.
    That was the DX9 coding precision that is built in
    the v cards, architecture for
    you since you questioned what he said.

    And yes, nvidia v cards runs the other DX9 games
    fine, except the vaporware HL2.
    Because of the 32 bit precision architecture,
    which would have been the logical
    way to have coded DX9 (following 8^ steps) games
    can be coded to address
    the issue. However they will be slightly slower
    because the precision is being
    converted to 24 bit.

    Do your Internet searches and try reading more of
    the reviewers websites on this
    since you seem to haven't a clue as to what is
    going on!

    Mike

    everybody decided to keep NVidia
    fulfils exactly as specified by
    shaders will experience the exact
    floating-point rendering buffers under
    confidently about stuff they know
     
    Mike Lamb, Oct 16, 2003
    #12
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.