New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Huge leap in graphics performance

post #1 of 11
8/27/04 at 10:26am
Thread Starter 
I have a 5690 and last night upgraded the video card.

Prior to upgrading the video from the one that was in the 5690 when I first purchased it, I ran a computer game (EQ2 character creation disk) while running FRAPS in the background and recorded the FPS to be 41 at the first screen once you run the program. I was using this value as my baseline to determine any performance gains once I upgraded the video card driver.

Without uninstalling the stock driver, I downloaded the Sager ATI V8.0 video card, extracted the file, and double-clicked the "SETUP" icon, and the new video card appeared to install correctly. I rebooted, ran EQ2, and got 41 fps and saw no performance gain from before.

Then I modded the ATI Cat 4.8 driver, and again without uninstalling the current video driver, I doubleclicked the SETUP icon for the modded ATI Cat 4.8 driver, installed it and rebooted. I ran EQ2 and got a FPS of 42, an increase of only 1 FPS from before.

Then I thought somewhere I read that you should uninstall any previous video card driver before installing a new driver. So I went to Add/Remove Programs, selected the ATI Display Driver, uninstalled it, and rebooted. I then double-clicked the SETUP icon for the modded ATI Cat 4.8 driver, installed it, rebooted, and EQ2 would not start at all. Next, without uninstalling the ATI Cat 4.8 driver, I double-clicked the SETUP icon for the ATI v8.0 driver, installed it, and rebooted. Then when I opening EQ2 I got an AMAZING 61 FPS, a huge leap from 41 FPS. The graphics were much more stunning than before and I was ecstatic!

But, I still wanted to get the ATI Cat 4.8 to work, so I uninstalled the ATI v8.0 completely, rebooted, doubleclicked the SETUP icon for the ATI Cat 4.8 and installed the driver, AND opened the WMD folder and installed that, AND opened the Control Panel folder and installed that (I had not done this previously). EQ2 started this time, but I was back to the dismal 41 FPS.

Since then I have been unable to replicate what I did to get to 61 FPS and the amazing graphics. Anyone have any idea? Was the order of uninstallation/installation wrong? What about DirectX ?? Do I need to unistall that and in what order do I need to install things? Maybe I have some setting in the ATI control panel set incorrectly?

Thanks for your comments.
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 11
8/27/04 at 1:41pm
Uhm, huh?

First, you did not upgrade the videocard...you upgraded the videocard drivers--in fact, several times.

Getting this out of the way--no, you cannot uninstall DirectX (well, you can, but it is a major pain the butt).

You should know that when you uninstall drivers in add/remove, it does not completely uninstall everything. Certain files are left behind unless you manually delete them or use something like driver cleaner.

So, it appears that some combination of remaining files and driver files yielded the positive results. By further monkeying around with things, you added/removed some files but not others..my guess is, if your results were indeed true (and I don't doubt you, I just wonder if the fps were reported incorrectly--I am sure you saw what you saw), that you need to start completely clean and repeat your steps.

To do this, download all the files you need (the original and the new drivers, the modder tool, etc).

Use add/remove and kill everything ATI related.

Download DriverCleaner from http://www.driverheaven.net/

Run that to clean out the remaining debris.

Re-load the original drivers, then duplicate what you did last night.

Good luck
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 11
8/27/04 at 2:39pm
Thread Starter 
Yea I didn't meant upgrading the video card, was talking about the driver.

Here's a question: when I install a new Ati v8.0 driver, there are two .inf files to choose from: c2_14930.inf and cx_14930.inf. Which one do I choose?
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 11
8/27/04 at 4:01pm
c2_14930.inf is for 2000 or is cx_14930.inf for XP?
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 11
10/30/04 at 5:43pm
Gerryf... U mentioned DirectX... I had a question I have an old 8887 I use as well it has DirectX 9.0c running. Are all versions of the Radeom Mobilitys (Mine being 9000) compatible. Or better put, do older v-cards like mine support or work with the newer versions of DirectX or do I need to uninstall and install an older version?
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 11
10/30/04 at 9:07pm
Wow, you brought this thread back from the dead !

To put it simply, older videocards work with later versions of directx--they just don't support all of its features. It will not hurt to upgrade, and it may even help on those features that are supported.

Specifically, in your case, the mobility 9000 (despite its name) supports directx 8, not 9.

At one point, ATI was naming it's card families based on directx support (radeon 7000 was a directx 7 card, radeon8000 family was a directx 8 card), but then radeon through a curve when it launched the 9000 line. The lowest end directx 9 card was the 9200.
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 11
12/28/04 at 9:10pm
@timxxl

Did you mod those drivers yourself? or where they already modded.
Reply
Reply
post #8 of 11
12/30/04 at 2:32am
Quote:
Originally Posted by gerryf
Wow, you brought this thread back from the dead !

To put it simply, older videocards work with later versions of directx--they just don't support all of its features. It will not hurt to upgrade, and it may even help on those features that are supported.

Specifically, in your case, the mobility 9000 (despite its name) supports directx 8, not 9.

At one point, ATI was naming it's card families based on directx support (radeon 7000 was a directx 7 card, radeon8000 family was a directx 8 card), but then radeon through a curve when it launched the 9000 line. The lowest end directx 9 card was the 9200.
You are incorrect, the 9200 is NOT a directx 9 chip, but still just directx 8.1. the lowest #for dx9 radeon chips are the 9500 and up.

Their sad excuse for using the 9000 name for a dx8.1 chip was that it had some of the dx9 features, which was mainly nothing more than the fullstream tech for cleaning up streaming videos. In actuality the 9000 is a single texture version of the 8500 but with some engine enhancements and core speed increase.
Reply
Reply
post #9 of 11
12/30/04 at 6:01pm
Thread Starter 
They were already modded.
Reply
Reply
post #10 of 11
1/2/05 at 2:55pm
Have you managed to re-create that wonder driver you discovered yet?
Reply
Reply
post #11 of 11
1/2/05 at 3:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ramazz
You are incorrect, the 9200 is NOT a directx 9 chip, but still just directx 8.1. the lowest #for dx9 radeon chips are the 9500 and up.

Their sad excuse for using the 9000 name for a dx8.1 chip was that it had some of the dx9 features, which was mainly nothing more than the fullstream tech for cleaning up streaming videos. In actuality the 9000 is a single texture version of the 8500 but with some engine enhancements and core speed increase.

That is exactly what I said.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Drivers