« previous next »
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Cataclyst vs Omega  (Read 512 times)

Offline Wilbus

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4472
Cataclyst vs Omega
« on: January 14, 2004, 09:40:25 AM »
Hey all, got a question. Tried out two different drivers for my Radeon 9700 non Pro (a year old by now) and ran it in 3D Mark 03.

First driver is the Cataclyst, tried both with 3.7, 3.9 and I'm now using 3.10.

The other driver was the Omega driver as everybody says it's the best and fastest.

When I run these two drivers in 3D Mark I get, with the Cataclyst 3.10 I get slight more than 4200 pointsa, which is afaik pretty good.

With the Omega drivers I get slightly more than 3000. That's 1000 points less.

Does these mean right away that the Omega drivers give worse FPS in games than the Cataclyst?


__________________
Logged
Rasmus "Wilbus" Mattsson

Liberating Livestock since 1998, recently returned from a 5 year Sheep-care training camp.

Offline straffo

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10029
Cataclyst vs Omega
« Reply #1 on: January 14, 2004, 09:53:03 AM »
hmmmpf ... last omega are supposed to be buld from catalyst 3.10 ...

It's a more than strange result
Logged

Offline bigUC

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 438
Cataclyst vs Omega
« Reply #2 on: January 14, 2004, 10:21:30 AM »
Omega drivers are supposed to give a better image quality through enabeling some hidden or hard-to-find optimizations in the original drivers (or disabeling other stuff). They do not give you more fps. I have never seen an omega driver that was faster than OEM with bells and whistles off.
Logged
Kurt is winking at U!

Offline Wilbus

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4472
Cataclyst vs Omega
« Reply #3 on: January 14, 2004, 11:37:11 AM »
Roger thanks.
Logged
Rasmus "Wilbus" Mattsson

Liberating Livestock since 1998, recently returned from a 5 year Sheep-care training camp.

Offline dracon

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 539
      • http://myweb.cableone.net/decon14/
Cataclyst vs Omega
« Reply #4 on: January 16, 2004, 03:25:12 PM »
Speed: Catalyst

Quality:  Omega's  They are just Cat's pre-tweaked without the need for tweaker proggies.  Use his Cat 10's, 3.10

Mark 3D......A game for those that can't fly SIMs.  Unless you set up Mark 3D as you would in AH and test drivers that way Mark 3D is garbage.

I have a 1.8 Ghz 512 M RDRAM ATI 9600XT.  Running AA x 4, AF x2, and VSYNC on.  Maps vary FPS but this weeks map is 36-45 runway.  50's airborn. 85 up or 45 degrees up.  AH-II same settings is about 1/2 of the above.

I have used Omegas drivers for both ATI and NVIDIA and love em'.  If you use a "tweaker" and mess with anything but AA,AF, VSYNC you screw up his configuration.  Reload the drivers.

GL on your choice...
Logged

Offline Wilbus

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4472
Cataclyst vs Omega
« Reply #5 on: January 16, 2004, 07:18:35 PM »
Thanks, Cataclyst for me, prefer speed, not much difference in looks anyway.
Logged
Rasmus "Wilbus" Mattsson

Liberating Livestock since 1998, recently returned from a 5 year Sheep-care training camp.

Offline av8or

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 347
Cataclyst vs Omega
« Reply #6 on: January 22, 2004, 08:02:58 PM »
hmm i have a similar set up AMD 1.8 gig 512 meg ram ati 9600XT and i am running catalyst 3.10 and show 60 fps in all flight
Logged

Offline aSTAR

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 250
DRIVERS OUT
« Reply #7 on: January 23, 2004, 09:00:55 AM »
Isn't the new Cat drivers out, Ver 4.1:confused:
Logged

Offline Dingbat

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1004
      • http://mysite.verizon.net/res0v1l1
Cataclyst vs Omega
« Reply #8 on: January 23, 2004, 03:24:03 PM »
yup, came out yesterday...
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »