BFG:
Right, so if Epox ignored the spec externally then isn't it all the more likely that they also ignored the spec internally where nobody could visibly "see" it?
Hmmm, I retract my statement that Rogo has possessed you- he'd never say anything this totally illogical! In answer to your question, no I'd never assume because they put a capacitor too near the slot the wiring of the slot was wrong as well, why would I? Besides, it worked great with my nVidia and 3dfx based cards.
Same deal with UT. The only issue I've had was with the Catalyst 2.5s where the game wouldn't launch under OpenGL mode. All other drivers worked perfectly with it.
Hmmm, lucky you. Others don't necessarily share your charmed life though:
http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?s=968e4a420fc272e715a7f88a55080117&threadid=33680610&highlight=Unreal+Tournament
Unreal Tournament (not UT2003) performance or lack of it on the Radeons is well documented both in these forums and also elsewhere on the web, notably forums such as PlanetUnreal and Beyond Unreal. The main issues have been crashing and non-starting in D3D and texture errors and gradual FPS choking in OpenGl.
Yep, ATIs drivers kick butt...
You've never heard of nVidia cards with 2D image quality problems? Oh pu-lease.
No, I've never seen 100s of posts about people with GeForce cards having gray bars rolling across their screen like I have for the ATI 9X00 series.
That's like saying "I can't tell a difference between my GF2 MX and 9800 Pro when I run it at 320 x 240!".
I think there's a "little" difference between 11X8X32, highest detail levels, quality 4XAF that I run UT2003 at and 320X240, but if you don't, good for you.
IIRC you had some fear of running high detail settings on your Radeon so it's no surprise your CPU limited, low-detail settings on your 9700 Pro look the same on your slower 5800.
LOL, I would have run the 9700 at higher settings if it was powerful enough to do so. Of course, the fuzzy banding introduced by your "Performance" settings wasn't an option. The 5800 slower? I'll put it this way, the guy I sold the 9700Pro to hasn't even installed it, and has told me I could have it back if I like. It's not in my box, because there isn't enough difference to make the change worth my time.
Try running it at real detail settings and then get back to us.
Here we go again, for some reason you think the settings you run are the only "real" settings. Most people would say 4XAA 8XAF is a "real" setting, it's what all the reviewers use. I've posted lots of links to benchmarks that show a 5800 at Ultra speeds is in the same league as a 9700 Pro. All you can do is bleat,"Waaah. 8XAA! 16XAF! Performance mode! Ignore the banding and stuttering, these settings bolster my argument!"