X1950 AGP Cat Drivers 3DMark05 & FRAPS

[Reece]

Hi, some interesting results doing a test with 4 catalyst "driver only" versions using 3DMark05, the tests were done with exactly the same setup & sequence excluding the initial version.

My Specs:
Video Card is an AGP HIS ATI X1950 Pro Turbo IceQ 512mb.
2 Gig DDR400 PC3200 Ram
AMD Athlon 64 3700+
Asus A8V Deluxe motherboard

The steps:
1) Uninstall current driver then reboot.
2) Install via setup a selected Catalyst driver then reboot.
3) Setup Screen size, monitor freq (1152x864 75hz) then reboot.
4) run ATI Tray Tools with set profile.
5) Run 3DMark05 bench test.

The results:
Cat 6.9 - Came with card - 9617
Cat 6.12 - file size 11.9mb - 9597
Cat 7.1 - file size 12.2mb - 9553
Cat 7.3 - file size 10.3mb - 9592
Cat 7.7 - file size 14.4mb - 9512
Cat 7.8 - file size 14.6mb - 6191
Cat 7.10 - filesize 15.6mb - 9576
Omega 3.8.413 (7.09.1) - 9556 with fast write enabled 9575

Interesting that all steps were exactly the same only the driver was changed, I won't be using Cat 7.8 thats for sure!

NOTE: While the setup is the same, if anyone requests it, I can do a bench on other Cat versions.

[danlisa]

Reece, I'd be interested in a comparitive test using the Omega Drivers. As they are designed to be a slimmed/optimised replacement for CAT, I wonder if there will be any marked improvement.

[Chock]

I've just put the latest Cat driver and control Center on, and I'm not impressed with it either, for two reasons.

First it seems to be far more choppy even with all the whistles and bells turned off, second, when I download it from ATI, and installed it, it also installed the dreaded Steam without my say so (which I subsequently immediately removed). I found that so annoying that I decided I'm not going to get another ATI card when I upgrade (which I'll be doing shortly).

Chock

[Reece]

I have heard that the 7.9 & latest 7.10 are bad but I haven't tried them, will do if I get a request.
@ Dan, I haven't tried these at all, I could give them a go but not sure which ones to test here, could do some tests, but I'll wait first to see if anymore tests are requested for other Cat drivers, the reason being that it may change registry etc effecting the results from that point on.

[SUBMAN1]

I'm running 7.10 and have no issues. Not sure what people are talking about. 7.10 clears up some bugs.

-S

[AVGWarhawk]

I attempted to install 7.10 and when I went to fire up SH4 it said the 3D engine would not start. -shrug-

[FIREWALL]

Can anyone tell me the comparative nvidia card to the x1950.

[antikristuseke]

3dmark05 doesnt really represent real world results all that well and if memory serves me correctly 7.8 cat drivers were allready oriented towards the 2x00 series cards and due to drastic diferences in architecture between the current and previous generation cards performance will not be on par.

[Reece]

3dmark05 doesnt really represent real world results

You may be right but it's one of the most recognized & certainly a place to start, I will try a few more out including 7.10.

Edit: Updated with a few more, can anyone suggest a version & point to download of Omega drivers, Thanks.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Reece

You may be right but it's one of the most recognized & certainly a place to start, I will try a few more out including 7.10.

Edit: Updated with a few more, can anyone suggest a version & point to download of Omega drivers, Thanks.

THat's a major improvement with 7.10. Seems that, coupled with bug fixes for games like BioShock and all is good.

Can I ask why you are using 2005 rev of 3DMark? Use the 2006 version and re-test. 2006 gets into much more detail.

-S

[Reece]

Can I ask why you are using 2005 rev of 3DMark? Use the 2006 version and re-test. 2006 gets into much more detail.

Cos I would have to part with more crust for the next version, someone said it's almost the same so I haven't bothered, plus my machine is getting old so for tests like this it'll suffice.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Reece

Cos I would have to part with more crust for the next version, someone said it's almost the same so I haven't bothered, plus my machine is getting old so for tests like this it'll suffice.

It's night and day between 2005 and 2006. Yes, the movies are based on the same ideas, but the 2006 has a ton ton ton more detail. Also, it supports HDR, and since you have a 1950, you do have HDR support. This is not being tested in 2005. Just an idea.

-S

[Reece]

I hear a lot about HDR, what is it & does my card (AGP) & DX9 work with it?
Advise most welcome.
Thanks

[FIREWALL]

Hi All

I will ask again.

What nvidia card is in the same level as the X1950 ?

Thx to all

[Chock]

I hear a lot about HDR, what is it & does my card (AGP) & DX9 work with it?
Advise most welcome.
Thanks

In pictures terms, HDR is High Dynamic Range. This is something that digital photographers are getting into since the past two iterations of Photoshop have been capable of dealing with High Dynamic Range images. Effectively, what they are is an amalgum of several images in an attempt to emulate how the human eye perceives something, and are hopefully going to combine with L.A.B. colour and HD TVs at some point in the future and make TV images look a lot better as the colours will approach the gamut range that the human eye can process.

For example: if you take a glass ashtray and put it on a desk, and then look at it, you will notice that your eye does not take it all in at once, but instead will jump its focus around, taking in perhaps the glass of the ashtray, then maybe the cigarette butts in it, then perhaps the shadow of it on the desktop and the way the light diffuses as it hits the desk having shone through the glass (normally you wouldn't notice your eye doing that unless you actually think about it while looking). What this means in photography terms is that a single exposure cannot truly emulate how the eye sees something like that because the eye interprets several 'snapshots' in rapid succession. So, in an attempt to emulate this, a High Dynamic Range image is made up of several exposures, then combined to create a kind of 'super real' picture. So in our example, you might take an exposure for the glass ashtray, one for the shadows and table surface, and perhaps one for the butts in the ashtray, then combine them using the utility in Photoshop (or any other processing software capable of doing it for that matter).

If you see some spectacularly impressive shots on photo sites such as image bank and others who sell pics for use in publications, the chances are some of them will be HDR images. However, I have not come across that many people who are using it outside that genre. And if anyone should, it would be me, since I am an Adobe-certified trainer for Photoshop and teach advanced courses in it! Expect it to come into play more when HD television technology filters down to mass use, the technology becomes cheaper. And when the screens get better than they currently are and can rival the colour spread of conventional CRT tubes.

Your graphics card (if it is a newish one) probably does support it, but if you use a TFT monitor you probably won't see a lot of benefit from it.

Chock