Looking Back: ATI's Catalyst Drivers Exposed
by Ryan Smith on December 11, 2005 3:22 PM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Conclusion
So, now that we have gone through 6 applications and 12 drivers, what have we learned? Not much, if we want to talk about consistency.
In general, there was one significant performance improvement across all games via the driver, and this was the move from the Catalyst 3.00 drivers to the 3.04 drivers. Otherwise, for anyone who would have been expecting multiple across - the-board improvements, this would be a disappointment.
Breaking down the changes by game, we see an interesting trend among what games had the greatest performance improvement. Jedi Academy, UT2004, and really every non-modern/next-gen game saw no significant performance improvements to which we can isolate to just the driver offering targeting optimizations, and there was only the one aforementioned general improvement. However, with our next-gen benchmarks, Halo and 3dMark, we saw a similar constant performance improvement among the two, unlike with the other games.
There is also a consistent performance improvement among most of the titles we used that was isolated to when we enabled AA/AF, which is a positive sign to see given just how important AA/AF has become. With the latest cards now capable of running practically everything at a high resolution with AA/AF, it looks like ATI made a good bet in deciding to put some of their time in these kinds of optimizations.
Getting back to the original question then, are drivers all they're cracked up to be? Yes and no. If the 9700 Pro is an accurate indicator, than other cards certainly have the possibility of seeing performance improvements due to drivers, but out of 3 years of drivers, we only saw one general performance improvement, so it seems unreasonable to expect that any given driver will offer a massive performance boost across the board, or even that most titles will be significantly faster in the future. However, if you're going to be playing next-generation games that will be pushing the latest features of your hardware to its limits, then it seems likely that you'll find higher performance as time goes on, but again, this will be mostly in small increments, and not a night-and-day difference among a related set of drivers.
As for the future, the Radeon 9700 Pro is by no means a crystal ball in to ATI's plans, but it does give us some places to look. We've already seen ATI squeeze out a general performance improvement for OpenGL titles for their new X1000-series, and it seems likely that their memory controller is still open enough that there could be one more of those improvements. Past that, it seems almost a given that we'll see future performance improvements on the most feature-intensive titles, likely no further game-specific changes on lighter games, and plenty of bug fixes along the way.
So, now that we have gone through 6 applications and 12 drivers, what have we learned? Not much, if we want to talk about consistency.
In general, there was one significant performance improvement across all games via the driver, and this was the move from the Catalyst 3.00 drivers to the 3.04 drivers. Otherwise, for anyone who would have been expecting multiple across - the-board improvements, this would be a disappointment.
Breaking down the changes by game, we see an interesting trend among what games had the greatest performance improvement. Jedi Academy, UT2004, and really every non-modern/next-gen game saw no significant performance improvements to which we can isolate to just the driver offering targeting optimizations, and there was only the one aforementioned general improvement. However, with our next-gen benchmarks, Halo and 3dMark, we saw a similar constant performance improvement among the two, unlike with the other games.
There is also a consistent performance improvement among most of the titles we used that was isolated to when we enabled AA/AF, which is a positive sign to see given just how important AA/AF has become. With the latest cards now capable of running practically everything at a high resolution with AA/AF, it looks like ATI made a good bet in deciding to put some of their time in these kinds of optimizations.
Getting back to the original question then, are drivers all they're cracked up to be? Yes and no. If the 9700 Pro is an accurate indicator, than other cards certainly have the possibility of seeing performance improvements due to drivers, but out of 3 years of drivers, we only saw one general performance improvement, so it seems unreasonable to expect that any given driver will offer a massive performance boost across the board, or even that most titles will be significantly faster in the future. However, if you're going to be playing next-generation games that will be pushing the latest features of your hardware to its limits, then it seems likely that you'll find higher performance as time goes on, but again, this will be mostly in small increments, and not a night-and-day difference among a related set of drivers.
As for the future, the Radeon 9700 Pro is by no means a crystal ball in to ATI's plans, but it does give us some places to look. We've already seen ATI squeeze out a general performance improvement for OpenGL titles for their new X1000-series, and it seems likely that their memory controller is still open enough that there could be one more of those improvements. Past that, it seems almost a given that we'll see future performance improvements on the most feature-intensive titles, likely no further game-specific changes on lighter games, and plenty of bug fixes along the way.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
58 Comments
View All Comments
WileCoyote - Monday, December 12, 2005 - link
Easy, ATI was a Halo for PC launch partner. This was before the "Best Played with ATI" or "Insist on NVidia" days but ATI was the graphics card sponsor for the game. So they had a committment to Bungie/Microsoft.... not really to the customer. I'm not complaining because they're businesses and they want to make money. I just consider it cheating. Halo benchmark explained. Next?GameManK - Monday, December 12, 2005 - link
well done, but it did feel like a bit of a waste of time readingsomething like farcry or half life 2 i think would be a more useful test
Googer - Monday, December 12, 2005 - link
Nice article, it must have taken a lot of time and effort to do this. Ryan how long did it take you to do all of these driver installs (then reboot) and benchmark them 72 Time?Thanks for the effort!
Googer - Monday, December 12, 2005 - link
Could you also test 3rd party drivers like Omega and others I have forgotten about? Then could you compaire them to Stock ATI drivers?nullpointerus - Monday, December 12, 2005 - link
Aren't the Omega drivers just a mix of different official ATI driver files?Humble Magii - Monday, December 12, 2005 - link
Seriously another craptastic article on drivers? Guys please sit down and think before you post an article and give it actual thought maybe ask some people around you god forbid.This site is sucking huge.
If you are going to do an article such as this use both competitors and go through each revision or at least a major revision to the drivers on each core and card.
Again stop posting worthless articles someone at Anandtech please take control and scrutinize what your people write and do before posting. Don't they have a set process there?
Cygni - Tuesday, December 13, 2005 - link
"If you're disappointed with the free entertainment on this site, fine, write about it on your shitty Angelfire Dragonball Z site or send AIM messages to the other Korn fanclub members."Cygni - Tuesday, December 13, 2005 - link
Ok, so what ive learned is you are reading a site that you think is "sucking huge", pretty making you a retard.Please sit down and think before you write such a fucking pointless post. God forbid there are people out there who are actually interested in video card driver performance.
Do you have any idea how long it takes to run through these tests? "Oh, just do both companys! And do all their cards! And do every CPU/motherboard/memory/timings setting too!... oh, and give it to me for free!"
What a joke dude. Go find your cave asshole, or go to some other hardware website.
VIAN - Sunday, December 11, 2005 - link
Is this article that important? I didn't think there was enough content in the article to make it worth reading. Plus, the way you built it up in the introduction seemed to give less meaning to the article when we found that there wasn't that much of an increase in half the games you tested. It also seemed like most of the big performance boosting optimizations took place within the first few drivers for the R300. To prove your point, it might have been better to make a shorter article covering various games, but use only 2 drivers, the current and the earliest.And where's that long lost image quality article we were promised about a year ago?
Jedi2155 - Monday, December 12, 2005 - link
But then, it wouldn't show the slight improvements of the driversets like the 3.00 tothe 3.04.