New ATi drivers...

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
17,549
15,634
146
Best suggestion is to run a benchmark like 3dmark05 and tell us what you got. If your having driver problems it should become readily apparent with a low score. Your X800XT should probably score somewhere around 5000 give or take a couple of hundred points (someone else with an X800XT chime in here please with the correct score)
 

J S Jackson

Member
Dec 18, 2004
30
0
0
Just curious. You have a nice system there. Why in the world are you using a crappy monitor to look at the output of that system? CRTs are dirt cheap right now. You could have a real nice 19" or 21" that will do 85hz at 1600x1200.

 

Spamdini

Senior member
May 24, 2004
354
0
0
because i dotn have money for a new monitor and i got the one i have for 50 dollars CDN and its in tip top shape. its definetly something i want to do in the future but right now im very busy with other things and i just simply cant afford it. (computer parts are not as dirt cheap here as they are in the US btw)

i did the 3dmark05 again and got 5581.
 

Pete

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
4,953
0
0
Listen, your framerate will drop because of one thing or another. It's inevitable. 50fps as a minimum framerate is great, as most people shoot for 60fps as an average framerate.

Take a look at Anandtech's HL2 roundup, and you'll see that the X800XT is fast enough to push 60fps average in most games at even 1600x1200 4xAA. As you're stuck at 1024x768 due to your monitor, I'd just crank the AA to 6x and the AF to 16x and just enjoy the card. Your CPU is most likely to be the bottleneck in HL2, especially at a relatively low res of 1024x768 with a video card designed for 1600x1200. If you don't have a Soundblaster Audigy in there to share some of the load, your framerates will take a slightly greater hit.

There are many factors that limit performance, but it boils down to this with high-end components like yours. At lower resolutions--usually up to 1024x768--the CPU is holding things back, as most decent video cards can throw out more than enough rendered pixels to give you close to 60fps. At higher resolutions, and with AA, and with more intense graphical effects (HDR, bloom, pixel shaders in general), the bottleneck shifts to the video card, and the CPU begins to wait for the GPU to crank out 1600x1200 pixels with various levels of "shading" and sampling applied.

With your setup, I'd set every game (except maybe Doom 3) to 1024x768 with 6xAA and 16xAF, and max out the in-game settings. In the vast majority of cases, your CPU will be the "bottleneck," but a 3500+ A64 is fast enough that you won't be complaining. It's that simple. If you want 100fps all the time, that probably won't happen, as computers are multi-tasking machines and game developers code games, not mission-critical apps. You can maximize your chances of hitting 100fps by disabling AA and AF, tho I don't think it'd be worth trading that eye candy for a few fps more. (BTW, as I said, I'd max AA and AF in HL2, and switch to Reflect All. You can tone down the AA in CSS if you're more concerned with framerates than eye candy.)

CSS isn't just contingent on your system, tho. It's possible (heck, probable) that the server isn't updating the game at more than 50fps, especially when you've got a lot of other players on your screen that the server has to update you about, so your video card dipping down to that on occasion may not really cramp your AWPing more than Valve's questionable netcode (gg Valve ;)). I don't know how much bandwidth CSS servers require, but I'm guessing they don't send 100 updates a second to 20 people at once.

Are you worried about seeing 50fps because you actually feel the game get slower and it hurts your ability to deagle snipe someone from across the map, or just b/c you think it's slow?
 

Spamdini

Senior member
May 24, 2004
354
0
0
THAT is a VERY informative post ty very much, im worried about 50 fps because i can SEE a difference between 100 and 50, AND because im worried that 50 is low for my hardware so wtf is wrong with it.

so your suggestion would be ultimately to buy a new monitor lieka 19"?
 

Pete

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
4,953
0
0
Well, all a new monitor will do is raise the resolution you can use at a comfortable refresh rate, and all a higher resolution will due us put more stress on the video card, and all that will do is potentially lower your framerate.

There's nothing wrong with your hardware. You have a very fast machine, and it can play basically any game out there at 10x7 res with 6x16 AAxAF. But games aren't perfectly optimized, *especially* online ones, so there are times when your framerate will dip. 50fps is a pretty high minimum, even for me--and I'm pickier about framerate than most people. I'm just not sure it's realistic to expect higher than a 50fps minimum with one of the newest, prettiest games on the market.

But, like I said, if you want max framerates, start ditching some eye candy. First drop AA, then model and shadow quality, and keep lowering in-game settings until your framerates suit you. If you're still dipping to 50fps or so with everything at low (read: ugly), then odds are your CPU is limiting you. In that case, either buy a faster CPU (seems a bit of a waste) or add an Audigy 2. The Audigy will probably help in all recent games, but it may help in HL2 more than most b/c it'll free up CPU cycles for your system to spend on physics (or whatever the slowest part of HL2's assembly line is).

Personally, I woudn't sacrifice the eye candy for a few more frames, but your priority may be different. I'd try dropping AA to none, model quality to medium, and shadows to low.

BTW, technically you *feel* the difference with lower framerates in an interactive game, in that you notice a lag between your (mouse) input and the onscreen rendering of that input. 50fps is more than fluid enough for full-frame video to *look* smooth (for the most part), but even that high a framerate translates to slightly chunky control when you're whipping a character around 180 degrees in a gunfight. 50fps means you move 3 degrees per frame, whereas 100fps means 1.5 degrees per frame, meaning finer control.

Edit: You can see the performance hit of AA and AF at various resolutions here. Note that the three cards tested--all slower than your X800XT at HL2--take virtually no performance hit with AA and AF at 10x7. The performance drops more with higher resolutions, meaning the bottleneck shifts from the CPU to the GPU.
 

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
17,549
15,634
146
BTW

Your 3dmark score is great (mines 1620). I agree with what pete said. I think this just how your system responds to the game
 

st1x

Junior Member
Jan 21, 2005
5
0
0
Sup Guys,

Well Spamdini, hope it makes you feel better, but you're not alone :)....

I just traded my 6800ultra for an x800xt PE, and I'm having the exact same problem.

I used to run my source at 1280*960 with a constant 100fps, although I didn't get my fps through image quality settings but rather in-game console settings...like for example I turned off the cl_physpropsenable thing and that gave me a considerable boost.

Now I'm using tha exact same cfg and the 4.12 catalyst drivers and the moment I get into combat I'm screwed as my fps drop as low as 40 even some times.

Now being able to kill some1 when your crosshair takes 3-4 seconds to get back in normal shape ain't one of my specialties so usually I just die...

My 3Dmark05 goes up to 6000 points but that doesn't help me now does it....
I'm starting to wonder whether it has to do with the pixelshader 2.0 version on the ati cards ?

I'm almost ready to run back to the store and get another ultra, but I can't believe I read so many reviews and heard so many people say that the ax800xt was the way to go, it shouldn't be giving me these results....

Ow btw...Spamdini, for those fps tweaks u can find them on the clanbase hl2 forums

www.clanbase.Com



I run a p4 2.8@3.5, 1gb pc3200, asus ax800xt PE, asus P4P800 deluxe
 

st1x

Junior Member
Jan 21, 2005
5
0
0
Ok I'm a little furhter in my quest to find how to get this card to work optimally...

I've installed the 4.12 omega driver instead of the regular 4.12 and it's given me a considerable boost already...

I'm running my monitor at 160hz which also helped a bit...

try downloading nvrefreshtool, it helps u unlock potentiel frequencies your monitor can run on...
 

Aries64

Golden Member
Jul 30, 2004
1,030
0
0
Originally posted by: Spamdini
k first the reason i asked if upping my res would help is because i am new to all this and i read something about not pushing the high end video cards enough causing them to run at less than par so sorry for trying to clarify.

i am running the newest ATi drivers. and i was running the 4.12 ones yesterday.
and yes i ran driver cleaner before installing new ones.

Spamdini - I don't know why you are only able to get 60Hz at that resolution. Silly question, but does your CRT support higher than 60Hz? Your X800 XT supports much higher resolutions a at much higher refresh rates than 60Hz so I'm thinking drivers.

Since you have a fresh XP install and you are running the latest drivers you may want to try the latest Omega drivers. They are based on the Catalyst 5.1 set but unlike the standard ATI drivers that are frequently tweaked for benchmarks (Nvidia does this too) the Omegas' are tweaked for game performance. You can get the Omegas' here:

http://www.omegadrivers.net/

Pete gave some very good advice. However, I want to add that when people say that a $200 or any decent video card should get you nearly the same frame rates at 1024x768? that is BS. BIG TIME. While two generations back now my 256MB and 128MB ATI 9800 Pros are still decent cards - some would say good cards, but they only do 39 FPS at 1280x1024 in Halo (compared to my X800 XT PE, which does 85+). This is with everything turned on (EXCEPT AA and AF) and set to "High". By default AA and AF are turned-off as they make NO VISUAL DIFFERENCE but result in a HUGE FRAMERATE HIT.

If you feel like it, after you get your issues solved borrow a lower-end "decent" $200.00 card and timedemo your games against your X800 XT at various resolutions. You will notice that even at lower resolutions the X800 XT will smoke the "decent" card every time. I ran my 256MB 9800 Pro in my current system before upgrading to my X800 XT PE while using Catalyst 4.9 for testing both cards.

EDIT: I am waiting for an <8ms 19" LCD that will do 1600x1200 or higher at 85+ Hz!
 

Gamingphreek

Lifer
Mar 31, 2003
11,679
0
81
Originally posted by: st1x
Ok I'm a little furhter in my quest to find how to get this card to work optimally...

I've installed the 4.12 omega driver instead of the regular 4.12 and it's given me a considerable boost already...

I'm running my monitor at 160hz which also helped a bit...

try downloading nvrefreshtool, it helps u unlock potentiel frequencies your monitor can run on...
I HIGHLY doubt you are running at a refresh rate of 160.That will give absolutely no framerate boost. All that does is tell you how fast your monitor refreshes the picture on the screen. Nothing to do with framerate unless you are using VSYNC.


Also why in the hell did you do this:
I just traded my 6800ultra for an x800xt PE, and I'm having the exact same problem.
The 6800 might have been 2-3% slower overall but has more features, etc...

I've installed the 4.12 omega driver instead of the regular 4.12 and it's given me a considerable boost already...
Why are you using drivers from december? We 5.2 Catalysts out, now soon to be 5.3... why dont you use one of those which are much much better.

My 3Dmark05 goes up to 6000 points but that doesn't help me now does it....
I'm starting to wonder whether it has to do with the pixelshader 2.0 version on the ati cards ?
Dont worry about 3dMark. If your games run or dont run should be your mark. 3dMark is all bragging rights, especially with all the optimizations done. Whatever issues you are having has absolutely nothing to do with what Pixel Shader version you are using.

By default AA and AF are turned-off as they make NO VISUAL DIFFERENCE but result in a HUGE FRAMERATE HIT.
What are you talking about. AA and AF most certainly does something.

As for your problems it seems like you just need to do a fresh install and do everything in order the way you are supposed to. This is not a hardware error, do not take this the wrong way but, it is a user error. Just do a reinstall and start over that way we can rule out a whole mess of stuff. After you do that before you install anything post back you could post back and we (forum members) could guide you through what to set up and what not to, and how. That way if it still doesn't work we can then rule out any possibility of user error.

-Kevin
 

st1x

Junior Member
Jan 21, 2005
5
0
0
By default AA and AF are turned-off as they make NO VISUAL DIFFERENCE but result in a HUGE FRAMERATE HIT.
What are you talking about. AA and AF most certainly does something.



I didn't say that...u took it out of some1 elses post lol

I did a fresh install...and I guess I swapped the 6800 because of the ATI hype going on :|
I'm using the 4.12 omega drivers...BECAUSE OMEGA DIDN'T MAKE THE 5 SERIES YET ???(at least not on their site...I saw the 5.1 on the guru3d site but wasnt sure...)

Maybe I'll trade it again later...but for now I'm quite ok I think...

 

Aries64

Golden Member
Jul 30, 2004
1,030
0
0
Originally posted by: Gamingphreek

By default AA and AF are turned-off as they make NO VISUAL DIFFERENCE but result in a HUGE FRAMERATE HIT.
...What are you talking about. AA and AF most certainly does something.

-Kevin

Kevin - I respect your opinion however you obviously either didn't read my post completely, didn't understand it, or don't play Halo. If you do play Halo and have tweaked the settings in the ATI or Omega control panel you should know that AA and AF are disabled by default, and that if you enable them and restart the game you will see no visual difference in the game but will suffer a big performance hit. I know others with similar hardware that will confirm this.