ATI Op-driver comparison (NGO, DNA, Omega,etc)

dragonS

Hello guru3d ppl',

I just wrote an article that you guys may be interested in. It is a benchmark comparison between Catalyst 7.2, and the following drivers : NGO, DNA, Omega, and DHZer0point.

Here is the link:

http://www.firingsquad.com/matrix/bl...DRIVER_ROUNDUP

I wrote this article out of curiosity but also because I'm in a contest to win a Firing Squad editor writing contract. Part of the reason why I posted here is because I want to generate some traffic to my article (thus improving my chance of winning this round of the contest), but I also support the 3rd party optimized driver community, and I am open to any feedback on my article. You can tell me it sucks or its great or you think my benchmarks are crap or whatever. I haven't written too many articles. Hopefully its alright.

Thanks and thanks to any people who may have worked on the above mentioned drivers.

Amilo-D · **Memory**: 4GB Corsair 4-4-4-11

Interesting.. According to my personal experience (with my radeon x1950pro) DNA-ATI was a bit faster than standard Catalyst in 3dmark05.

You also didnt test the very popular XG-Warcat drivers. Other than that, very interesting article and very nice job! More people should do such testings

EDIT: I just noticed you compared 7.1 version of DNA-ATI. 7.2 was a lot faster than 7.1 from looks of things.

dukedave5200 · 03-20-2007, 05:04 | posts: 2,881 | Location: Central PA | User is Offline

It sucks and your benchmarks are crap!

You said we could say that... Hope it's helpful.

j/k

The content of your artical seems good. I only had time to read about 1/4 of it. But the formatting seems off. Line breaks and etc...

Dublin_Gunner · 03-20-2007, 08:51 | posts: 3,173 | Location: Dublin, Ireland | User is Offline

While the article is mostly well written, I cant help but feel that your results are way off the scale for most users these days.

I dont mean to slate the test platform, I know not everyone can afford the latest and greatest.

But, the 7.2 drivers (and drivers based off them) offer very little with regard to the older X series cards, and havent done so since early 6.X drivers (if not earlier).

Also, only 512mb ram really limiting your testing, as you resorted to using 2 year old (and older) benchmarks on brand new drivers.

Not to take away from your testing methology, or the work that you quite obviously put into the article; I do feel is bares very little significance to the majority of enthusiasts.

All in all though, good work. Ity takes time and effort to do something like that, so fair play.

Hopefully you'll get to update the testbed and apps, and you'll go and do another article, and I'll definitely read it!

Best of luck in the competition m8.

Once again, sorry if it sounds like I'm slating you, honestly, I'm not.

SkaarjMaster · 03-20-2007, 10:59 | posts: 147 | Location: Tampa, FL | User is Offline

So does this mean the DHZeroPoint drivers are fastest for the system used and similar systems? I have a similar system and the only major difference is 2GB of system RAM. I wonder if that would make a difference? Hmmmmmmmm.....