ATI 7.2 drivers are released

Yeah I'm the first to get it posted a gold star for me ! ! !

32bit
http://ati.amd.com/support/drivers/v...n-vista32.html

64bit
http://ati.amd.com/support/drivers/v...n-vista64.html

Not that the ATI people need new drivers as bad as the nVidia people

So is it possible to install the driver without the Catalyst Control Center
stuff? Thank you.

"Dale White" <dale.white@NOinsightbb.NOcom> wrote in message
news:NM2dnXWaXL31O0HYnZ2dnUVZ_sGqnZ2d@insightbb.co m...
> Yeah I'm the first to get it posted a gold star for me ! ! !
>
> 32bit
> http://ati.amd.com/support/drivers/v...n-vista32.html
>
> 64bit
> http://ati.amd.com/support/drivers/v...n-vista64.html
>
> Not that the ATI people need new drivers as bad as the nVidia people
>

Choose Custom install. Then you can uncheck the CCC.

--
Jane, not plain 64 bit enabled :-)
Batteries not included. Braincell on vacation ;-)
"nick" <nick@google.com> wrote in message
news:uZL4d5gVHHA.1200@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Thank you , Byron. If one wants to get the driver only is that a seperate
> download, which I cannot find or is that option presented during
> installation of the Catalyst package. Thank you
>
> "Byron Hinson" <byron@activewin.com> wrote in message
> news:4DFCDEA4-6039-4C17-99B3-FED1BD29F7DA@microsoft.com...
>> Yeah thankfully
>>
>> --
>> Byron Hinson
>> ActiveWin Windows Site: http://www.activewin.com
>> Photos: http://www.byronhinson.com
>>
>>
>> "nick" <nick@google.com> wrote in message
>> news:OznFGogVHHA.392@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>> So is it possible to install the driver without the Catalyst Control
>>> Center stuff? Thank you.
>>>
>>> "Dale White" <dale.white@NOinsightbb.NOcom> wrote in message
>>> news:NM2dnXWaXL31O0HYnZ2dnUVZ_sGqnZ2d@insightbb.co m...
>>>> Yeah I'm the first to get it posted a gold star for me ! ! !
>>>>
>>>> 32bit
>>>> http://ati.amd.com/support/drivers/v...n-vista32.html
>>>>
>>>> 64bit
>>>> http://ati.amd.com/support/drivers/v...n-vista64.html
>>>>
>>>> Not that the ATI people need new drivers as bad as the nVidia people
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 20:54:08 -0000, "gram" <me@wasd.com> wrote:

>yipeeeee
>
>"Dale White" <dale.white@NOinsightbb.NOcom> wrote in message
>news:NM2dnXWaXL31O0HYnZ2dnUVZ_sGqnZ2d@insightbb.c om...
>> Yeah I'm the first to get it posted a gold star for me ! ! !
>>
>> 32bit
>> http://ati.amd.com/support/drivers/v...n-vista32.html
>>
>> 64bit
>> http://ati.amd.com/support/drivers/v...n-vista64.html
>>
>> Not that the ATI people need new drivers as bad as the nVidia people
>>

Quick question. With Xp installing newer Ati drivers one could use
Drive Cleaner to cleanup old drivers. Is this still required with
Vista?

I'm going to say no, since the Vista drivers offer you an Upgrade function.
I believe that unless you're just having an odd problem, then you should be
fine with the upgrading of the drivers instead of the un-install, re-install
approach.

"Bill Davis Jr" <me@home.ocm> wrote in message
news:bfsrt2tq47i8o03u3d2913i8s7n3fpumid@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 20:54:08 -0000, "gram" <me@wasd.com> wrote:
>
>>yipeeeee
>>
>>"Dale White" <dale.white@NOinsightbb.NOcom> wrote in message
>>news:NM2dnXWaXL31O0HYnZ2dnUVZ_sGqnZ2d@insightbb. com...
>>> Yeah I'm the first to get it posted a gold star for me ! ! !
>>>
>>> 32bit
>>> http://ati.amd.com/support/drivers/v...n-vista32.html
>>>
>>> 64bit
>>> http://ati.amd.com/support/drivers/v...n-vista64.html
>>>
>>> Not that the ATI people need new drivers as bad as the nVidia people
>>>
>
> Quick question. With Xp installing newer Ati drivers one could use
> Drive Cleaner to cleanup old drivers. Is this still required with
> Vista?

Still after i installed the new ATI 7.2 drivers i can't play Quake 4 or Doom
3. They are so slow even in low quality. But, i can play Half Life 2 and
Counterstrike well at 1024* (still far from XP gaming experience).
Is this diference because of the OpenGL required for Quake & Doom?
Can i do anything to improve this?

PC: (P4 at 3.0, MB P4P800, 2GB DDR, Asus Radeon AX800 256MB, Vista 32-bit)
Thanks

"Dale White" wrote:
> Yeah I'm the first to get it posted a gold star for me ! ! !
>
> 32bit
> http://ati.amd.com/support/drivers/v...n-vista32.html
>
> 64bit
> http://ati.amd.com/support/drivers/v...n-vista64.html
>
> Not that the ATI people need new drivers as bad as the nVidia people

Well, get rid of that crappy Intel CPU and get yourself a kicking AMD system

Just kidding, Yes there is a nice difference between OpenGL and Direct3d
games. If I recall my facts right, ATI said that the 7.1 drivers and
probably the 7.2 drivers are not going to have much by way of refinements in
OpenGL. the main focus was to give support for openGL and make it stable

With that said, I ran a series of benchmarks with the 7.1 drivers and the
7.2 drivers with Doom 3 (patch 1.31) and FEAR

Under Vista, OpenGL games seem to be a fair amount slower, and the newer 7.2
drivers actually seem to be worse than the 7.1 drivers.

Doom 3 with Ultra high settings
Under Xp I got 131-135fps with the 7.1s. I got 128fps with 7.2
Under Vista32, I got 110fps with 7.1 and now 85 with 7.2
Under Vista64, I got 105fps with 7.1 and now 85 with 7.2.

If I drop down to High settings I get around 110-115fps under Vista32&64

Fear with Max settings, no softshadows
Under XP, Fear gets around 140-145 with both 7.1 and 7.2
Under Vista32, FEAR gets around 131 with both 7.1 and 7.2
Under Vista64, FEAR gets around 139 with both 7.1 and 7.2

Doom3 seems to also be a little wierd at times under Vista. Sometimes I run
the bencmark with setting on Ultra high and I'll get 50-55ps, if I set the
quailty to high, run the benchmarks, and then set back to Ultra, the number
goes back up to 85. This happened under both 7.1 and 7.2.

Under XP, I never have a problem when I start out on Ultra High.

So it might be a while before the OpenGL stff gets worked out.


"Filipe" <Filipe@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:EA3A5033-D687-4004-9875-D637DB2781BC@microsoft.com...
> Still after i installed the new ATI 7.2 drivers i can't play Quake 4 or
> Doom
> 3. They are so slow even in low quality. But, i can play Half Life 2 and
> Counterstrike well at 1024* (still far from XP gaming experience).
> Is this diference because of the OpenGL required for Quake & Doom?
> Can i do anything to improve this?
>
> PC: (P4 at 3.0, MB P4P800, 2GB DDR, Asus Radeon AX800 256MB, Vista 32-bit)
> Thanks
>
> "Dale White" wrote:
>> Yeah I'm the first to get it posted a gold star for me ! ! !
>>
>> 32bit
>> http://ati.amd.com/support/drivers/v...n-vista32.html
>>
>> 64bit
>> http://ati.amd.com/support/drivers/v...n-vista64.html
>>
>> Not that the ATI people need new drivers as bad as the nVidia people
>

Dale, don't you really mean a AMD kicking Conroe Duo?
ChrisC
"Dale "Mad_Murdock" White" <dale.white@NOinsightbb.NOcom> wrote in message
news:deCdnYUQqYGklULYnZ2dnUVZ_qmpnZ2d@insightbb.co m...
> Well, get rid of that crappy Intel CPU and get yourself a kicking AMD
> system
>
> Just kidding, Yes there is a nice difference between OpenGL and Direct3d
> games. If I recall my facts right, ATI said that the 7.1 drivers and
> probably the 7.2 drivers are not going to have much by way of refinements
> in
> OpenGL. the main focus was to give support for openGL and make it stable
>
> With that said, I ran a series of benchmarks with the 7.1 drivers and the
> 7.2 drivers with Doom 3 (patch 1.31) and FEAR
>
> Under Vista, OpenGL games seem to be a fair amount slower, and the newer
> 7.2 drivers actually seem to be worse than the 7.1 drivers.
>
> Doom 3 with Ultra high settings
> Under Xp I got 131-135fps with the 7.1s. I got 128fps with 7.2
> Under Vista32, I got 110fps with 7.1 and now 85 with 7.2
> Under Vista64, I got 105fps with 7.1 and now 85 with 7.2.
>
> If I drop down to High settings I get around 110-115fps under Vista32&64
>
> Fear with Max settings, no softshadows
> Under XP, Fear gets around 140-145 with both 7.1 and 7.2
> Under Vista32, FEAR gets around 131 with both 7.1 and 7.2
> Under Vista64, FEAR gets around 139 with both 7.1 and 7.2
>
> Doom3 seems to also be a little wierd at times under Vista. Sometimes I
> run the bencmark with setting on Ultra high and I'll get 50-55ps, if I set
> the quailty to high, run the benchmarks, and then set back to Ultra, the
> number goes back up to 85. This happened under both 7.1 and 7.2.
>
> Under XP, I never have a problem when I start out on Ultra High.
>
> So it might be a while before the OpenGL stff gets worked out.
>
>
> "Filipe" <Filipe@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:EA3A5033-D687-4004-9875-D637DB2781BC@microsoft.com...
>> Still after i installed the new ATI 7.2 drivers i can't play Quake 4 or
>> Doom
>> 3. They are so slow even in low quality. But, i can play Half Life 2 and
>> Counterstrike well at 1024* (still far from XP gaming experience).
>> Is this diference because of the OpenGL required for Quake & Doom?
>> Can i do anything to improve this?
>>
>> PC: (P4 at 3.0, MB P4P800, 2GB DDR, Asus Radeon AX800 256MB, Vista
>> 32-bit)
>> Thanks
>>
>> "Dale White" wrote:
>>> Yeah I'm the first to get it posted a gold star for me ! ! !
>>>
>>> 32bit
>>> http://ati.amd.com/support/drivers/v...n-vista32.html
>>>
>>> 64bit
>>> http://ati.amd.com/support/drivers/v...n-vista64.html
>>>
>>> Not that the ATI people need new drivers as bad as the nVidia people
>>
>

Oh, almost forgot. A new kick-ass Video Card, and thats is just about 600€
more... so is it necessary to make the math? :-\

"Filipe" wrote:

> I see, so the only help you guys can give me is buy another motherboard,
> another processor and memory... ohh about 700€, thats nice :'(
>
> "Dale "Mad_Murdock" White" wrote:
>
> >
> > yeah but his Intel doesn't work well, and my AMD does, so I figured I would
> > say it. If I had a Core 2 duo, I would have said get rid of that crappy P4
> > and get a Conroe. The key is, no matter they have, find a different product
> > to say
> >
> >
> >
> > "Chris" <cuke2u@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:3F90DF0B-B216-4A72-B9F9-F7337A75A0FB@microsoft.com...
> > > Dale, don't you really mean a AMD kicking Conroe Duo?
> > > ChrisC
> > > "Dale "Mad_Murdock" White" <dale.white@NOinsightbb.NOcom> wrote in message
> > > news:deCdnYUQqYGklULYnZ2dnUVZ_qmpnZ2d@insightbb.co m...
> > >> Well, get rid of that crappy Intel CPU and get yourself a kicking AMD
> > >> system
> > >>
> > >> Just kidding, Yes there is a nice difference between OpenGL and Direct3d
> > >> games. If I recall my facts right, ATI said that the 7.1 drivers and
> > >> probably the 7.2 drivers are not going to have much by way of refinements
> > >> in
> > >> OpenGL. the main focus was to give support for openGL and make it stable
> > >>
> > >> With that said, I ran a series of benchmarks with the 7.1 drivers and the
> > >> 7.2 drivers with Doom 3 (patch 1.31) and FEAR
> > >>
> > >> Under Vista, OpenGL games seem to be a fair amount slower, and the newer
> > >> 7.2 drivers actually seem to be worse than the 7.1 drivers.
> > >>
> > >> Doom 3 with Ultra high settings
> > >> Under Xp I got 131-135fps with the 7.1s. I got 128fps with 7.2
> > >> Under Vista32, I got 110fps with 7.1 and now 85 with 7.2
> > >> Under Vista64, I got 105fps with 7.1 and now 85 with 7.2.
> > >>
> > >> If I drop down to High settings I get around 110-115fps under Vista32&64
> > >>
> > >> Fear with Max settings, no softshadows
> > >> Under XP, Fear gets around 140-145 with both 7.1 and 7.2
> > >> Under Vista32, FEAR gets around 131 with both 7.1 and 7.2
> > >> Under Vista64, FEAR gets around 139 with both 7.1 and 7.2
> > >>
> > >> Doom3 seems to also be a little wierd at times under Vista. Sometimes I
> > >> run the bencmark with setting on Ultra high and I'll get 50-55ps, if I
> > >> set the quailty to high, run the benchmarks, and then set back to Ultra,
> > >> the number goes back up to 85. This happened under both 7.1 and 7.2.
> > >>
> > >> Under XP, I never have a problem when I start out on Ultra High.
> > >>
> > >> So it might be a while before the OpenGL stff gets worked out.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> "Filipe" <Filipe@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
> > >> news:EA3A5033-D687-4004-9875-D637DB2781BC@microsoft.com...
> > >>> Still after i installed the new ATI 7.2 drivers i can't play Quake 4 or
> > >>> Doom
> > >>> 3. They are so slow even in low quality. But, i can play Half Life 2 and
> > >>> Counterstrike well at 1024* (still far from XP gaming experience).
> > >>> Is this diference because of the OpenGL required for Quake & Doom?
> > >>> Can i do anything to improve this?
> > >>>
> > >>> PC: (P4 at 3.0, MB P4P800, 2GB DDR, Asus Radeon AX800 256MB, Vista
> > >>> 32-bit)
> > >>> Thanks
> > >>>
> > >>> "Dale White" wrote:
> > >>>> Yeah I'm the first to get it posted a gold star for me ! ! !
> > >>>>
> > >>>> 32bit
> > >>>> http://ati.amd.com/support/drivers/v...n-vista32.html
> > >>>>
> > >>>> 64bit
> > >>>> http://ati.amd.com/support/drivers/v...n-vista64.html
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Not that the ATI people need new drivers as bad as the nVidia people
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >
> >
> >

Well, since you mentioned it, I figured I would install doom3 on the GF's
system and see how it runs. It's a AMD 3800+, 2GB of ram, and a ATI X850
card. Vista32 running the 7.1 drivers. It's also a dual boot system and
here's what I saw with Doom3

Under XP,at 1024x768 on high, No shadows it got a score of 87.
Under Vista, same settings, it's highest score was 65. With shadows on, the
score was 52.

What is the benchmark scores you are seeing under Doom3.

Also, is your memory 2x1GB or 4x512MB ? I noticed on alot of AMd system,
when you run 4 chips, it drops the memory speed down to 333 or 266. You have
to go in and set memory speed to manual and make sure it's 400. Originally I
ran the test at 333 and I couldn't score abouve a 55. if your memory speeds
are wrong, it possible that's your big problem.

I have a 3rd home system, that is a AMD 3400+ with a basic nVidia 6600, with
1GB of ram and Vista64 and it even managed to score a 54. So if you system
is scoring less than a 60, then I'd imagine there is something wrong. One
thing you could try is it log-in under a different account, turn off all
the windows Themes, and run the benchmark again.




"Filipe" <Filipe@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:50479A0B-75EC-414F-89F0-710A8B45B0A7@microsoft.com...
> Oh, almost forgot. A new kick-ass Video Card, and thats is just about 600?
> more... so is it necessary to make the math? :-\
>
> "Filipe" wrote:
>
>> I see, so the only help you guys can give me is buy another motherboard,
>> another processor and memory... ohh about 700?, thats nice :'(
>>
>> "Dale "Mad_Murdock" White" wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > yeah but his Intel doesn't work well, and my AMD does, so I figured I
>> > would
>> > say it. If I had a Core 2 duo, I would have said get rid of that crappy
>> > P4
>> > and get a Conroe. The key is, no matter they have, find a different
>> > product
>> > to say
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > "Chris" <cuke2u@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> > news:3F90DF0B-B216-4A72-B9F9-F7337A75A0FB@microsoft.com...
>> > > Dale, don't you really mean a AMD kicking Conroe Duo?
>> > > ChrisC
>> > > "Dale "Mad_Murdock" White" <dale.white@NOinsightbb.NOcom> wrote in
>> > > message
>> > > news:deCdnYUQqYGklULYnZ2dnUVZ_qmpnZ2d@insightbb.co m...
>> > >> Well, get rid of that crappy Intel CPU and get yourself a kicking
>> > >> AMD
>> > >> system
>> > >>
>> > >> Just kidding, Yes there is a nice difference between OpenGL and
>> > >> Direct3d
>> > >> games. If I recall my facts right, ATI said that the 7.1 drivers and
>> > >> probably the 7.2 drivers are not going to have much by way of
>> > >> refinements
>> > >> in
>> > >> OpenGL. the main focus was to give support for openGL and make it
>> > >> stable
>> > >>
>> > >> With that said, I ran a series of benchmarks with the 7.1 drivers
>> > >> and the
>> > >> 7.2 drivers with Doom 3 (patch 1.31) and FEAR
>> > >>
>> > >> Under Vista, OpenGL games seem to be a fair amount slower, and the
>> > >> newer
>> > >> 7.2 drivers actually seem to be worse than the 7.1 drivers.
>> > >>
>> > >> Doom 3 with Ultra high settings
>> > >> Under Xp I got 131-135fps with the 7.1s. I got 128fps with 7.2
>> > >> Under Vista32, I got 110fps with 7.1 and now 85 with 7.2
>> > >> Under Vista64, I got 105fps with 7.1 and now 85 with 7.2.
>> > >>
>> > >> If I drop down to High settings I get around 110-115fps under
>> > >> Vista32&64
>> > >>
>> > >> Fear with Max settings, no softshadows
>> > >> Under XP, Fear gets around 140-145 with both 7.1 and 7.2
>> > >> Under Vista32, FEAR gets around 131 with both 7.1 and 7.2
>> > >> Under Vista64, FEAR gets around 139 with both 7.1 and 7.2
>> > >>
>> > >> Doom3 seems to also be a little wierd at times under Vista.
>> > >> Sometimes I
>> > >> run the bencmark with setting on Ultra high and I'll get 50-55ps, if
>> > >> I
>> > >> set the quailty to high, run the benchmarks, and then set back to
>> > >> Ultra,
>> > >> the number goes back up to 85. This happened under both 7.1 and 7.2.
>> > >>
>> > >> Under XP, I never have a problem when I start out on Ultra High.
>> > >>
>> > >> So it might be a while before the OpenGL stff gets worked out.
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> "Filipe" <Filipe@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
>> > >> news:EA3A5033-D687-4004-9875-D637DB2781BC@microsoft.com...
>> > >>> Still after i installed the new ATI 7.2 drivers i can't play Quake
>> > >>> 4 or
>> > >>> Doom
>> > >>> 3. They are so slow even in low quality. But, i can play Half Life
>> > >>> 2 and
>> > >>> Counterstrike well at 1024* (still far from XP gaming experience).
>> > >>> Is this diference because of the OpenGL required for Quake & Doom?
>> > >>> Can i do anything to improve this?
>> > >>>
>> > >>> PC: (P4 at 3.0, MB P4P800, 2GB DDR, Asus Radeon AX800 256MB, Vista
>> > >>> 32-bit)
>> > >>> Thanks
>> > >>>
>> > >>> "Dale White" wrote:
>> > >>>> Yeah I'm the first to get it posted a gold star for me ! ! !
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> 32bit
>> > >>>> http://ati.amd.com/support/drivers/v...n-vista32.html
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> 64bit
>> > >>>> http://ati.amd.com/support/drivers/v...n-vista64.html
>> > >>>>
>> > >>>> Not that the ATI people need new drivers as bad as the nVidia
>> > >>>> people
>> > >>>
>> > >>
>> > >
>> >
>> >