Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Hardware and Software => Topic started by: streakeagle on October 20, 2003, 01:33:17 PM
-
It seems ATI is admitting there is some sort of problem.
from http://www.rage3d.com :
Chris Hook, ATI's mobile and integrated public relations manager has obtained a more technical rebuttal on Catalyst 3.8 causing hardware monitor failures.
Over last few days I have seen many posts talking about this issue, it seems it is a common theory, picked up from one place and keep being circulated.
"Instead of reading the refresh rates from the PRIMARY display INF files, it is reading the SECONDARY display INF refresh rates. "
In XP and 2K, we don't have access to monitor INF information in our driver component that manages display capability. We have never used monitor information. We rely on EDID data or user override information to determine monitor capability. Even though OS may use the monitor information to expose high refresh rate based on monitor INF content, driver always restricts the actual refresh rate going to the monitor based on EDID or the user override. i.e. user may be able to select from OS controlled monitor page (in advanced property pages) a high refresh rate but internally driver will restrict the refresh rate going to the monitor based on EDID information or user override information. If user set the override information incorrectly then incompatible signals would sent to the monitor.
In 9x, we can access monitor INF information but due to issues with how OS maps the INF to a monitor, we had disabled reading the monitor INF via registry. Unless someone changes the registry setting for this in 9x, they would not run into any monitor INF related issues.
I think the issue is very real but not sure what the cause is. I know ATI is spending a great deal of time looking into it but as of yet haven't found the cause if it is in Catalyst 3.8. We will be sure to follow this story closely.
It is interesting that this rumor claims the problem is only a function of the 2nd display and does not affect Win9x. I personally have had several graphics problems since trying Cat 3.8 and I use Win98SE. The CPU and motherboard indicate normal temperatures, yet my graphics crash or start showing weird colors until I shut down and cool down. This has happened in various games including the most stable one I have ever had: Aces High
My card is not overclocked and still has the factory bios, so I don't think whatever is happening has damaged my card or my monitor, but I am going to revert back to Cat 3.7 and see if I can duplicate the problem to eliminate "coincidence".
I apologize if my situation is purely coincidental and the above quote turns out to be a false rumor, but this ignoring this "rumor" could do us gamers more harm than good.
ATI would never publicly admit to their drivers are potentially damaging people's hardware without solid proof. Why accept any unnecessary liability? But if the above statement is true, they are doing so! They must have some strong evidence that there really is a problem. In the mean time, everyone may have been discounting honest reports as being merely rumor.
If someone in a theater shouts "Fire!", which course of action is smarter:
1. Waiting for an "official" alarm and/or seeing the fire yourself.
or
2. Evacuating the theater until the "rumor" has been proven false.
After living in a Navy barracks that had 3 or 4 false fire alarms every week, no one would even bother to leave their rooms... but we all at least stuck our heads out the door to see if we smelled any smoke.
I don't recall ever seeing a rumors spread about ATI putting out a driver that kills hardware (though that might be a clever tactic for a competitor). I have stuck my head out the door to see if there is smoke, perhaps anyone else who doesn't have money to burn should consider doing so as well.
-
Been using Cat 3.8 since the day it was released and ZERO problems.
Thats not a rumour its fact.
-
This is not indicative of the problem at all streak. ATI's drivers have had the ability to override the refresh rates for quite some time. It is the reason they do not need a refresh fixer like NVidia drvers needed.
Again, this is not substantiating the rumors, it is merely restating what ATI has been doing for a rather long time in the drivers.
I am watching this as well, so please stop posting about these rumors. They are still unsubstantiated.