nah that warpsearch article is old and doesnt really help the 640 thing out.

if you are talking benchmarks then I dont think so...

I got the same score with the 3.2's with dx8 and dx9 so I am guessing it will be the same case with the 3.4's.

The 3.4's beat the 3.2's no doubt but not by much...

I guess what I really wanted to know about dx9 and 3.4 drivers is if the graphics were better in games and if people, in general were not having the problems they normally would have with the 3.2 drivers and dx 9. In other words, is 3.4 solving the problems that people were having with dx9?

Thanks for your reply though.

Thanks to GSFerrari, Oberhammer, and TDD for your, as always
helpful assist.

You are right... They posted the 3.2 drivers but reverted back to the 2002/11 ones quickly. I deleted the 3.2 ones from my laptop and cannot get them anymore

Hey dpelchat - I dont quite understand...

You mean Sager had the modded 3.2's and then reverted to the older 6178 or whatever drivers?? This will be consistent with my observation because the Sager M9 drivers that I have are certainly NOT the catalyst 3.2...

Lemme run another driver install just to make sure...

sheesh Thats the 4th time in as many days that im changing drivers. I was just playing around with some really old ones (read OLD ) just to draw a comparison. Honestly - they all feel the same even as far as games are concerned...

I am firm in my statement that benchmark scores have little or nothing to do with your overall gaming experience - use what driver works for your games...

Some of us have been saying this all along...

Same goes for Windows "Updates" (I feel one really need to quote "updates" when used in the same sentance as Microsoft and/or Windows).

-myrkat

Well, after my last re-install, I used the April 2003 drivers from Sager (cat 3.2? who knows) and then installed DirectX 9.0a via web-update/install just a day or so ago (to test Freelancer w/o HT enabled).

The BAD: Freelancer still locks, but not until well into the game (it also has minimal replayability and I'm already bored with it, multiplayer sucks).

The GOOD: NO invisible ground in BF1942! I even checked on Bocage and it's all solid (every now-and-then, way off in the far distance, I'll see some transparent ground on the mountaintops, but that may be a fog/visibility thing - it's real far).

So far so good. No lockups in BF1942 (well, I only play DesertCombat 0.35, haven't tried regular BF1942).

Interesting, eh? However, just in case, I am readying myself for another re-format / re-install (haven't activated XP or my Office XP yet... 24 days / 42 uses left, respectively).

I'll go down to the wire (or install my non-activated versions that I "found")

-myrkat

The last time I downloaded them they were 6218 which is the 2002/11 driver that came on my CD.

UPDATED: They still are the 2002/11 drivers... I just downloaded them again.

That's exactly what happened... The 3.2 were on the site very briefly on the week of April 7 (my friend still has those drivers) but they went back to the 2002/11 version on April 14.

ALl of these drivers offer similar performance, but the Cat32 fixed some problems for me personnally (crashes in Indiana Jones demo, UT2003 to name two).

I even installed 3.4 this afternoon and couldn't find any performance improvement so I went back to 3.2 (and I don't have to live with the 640*480 problem )

Has anyone tried this for the Sager 3.4's?

CLICK HERE

Nope, not touching DX9 with a barge pole.


....and Oberhammer, can you kinda lighen up on the matrix mini vids, they arent exactly to kind to us stuck on narowband (IE: 56k)......