Discussion in 'Windows Desktop Systems' started by sidefx, May 22, 2005.
Is there a difference in performance or quality of images?
Omega gives you the power to turn up your card to it's fullest. But it can also be dangerous as you can cook your GPU. Unless you want a few more FPS at the possible expence of your card use the ATI drivers, I have used both and saw only 2-4 FPS increase by OCing the piss out of my card and I almost cooked it. I use ATI's drivers as I don't feel the need to OC anymore than ATI will allow.
There is one other side benefit, some cards can be unlocked by using the Omega drivers.
Your 9550 card *most likely* has a 64 bit memory interface. You will get better performance by using a 128Mb interface card. Or a 256.
The two times I loaded Omega drivers my video quality in games went down. There was no measurable speed increase either.
All the Omega's are is the ATI driver with some of the default parameters changed.
If you want to overclock you can just use Radlinker. I have it installed and it is coexisting nicely even with the new Catalyst Control Center.
My 9550 is 128mb card.
I would use the omega drivers. They are the only you can use ATi's AI feature without downloading the nasty control center that they offer. Omega's drivers do help performence in many ways; if you goto the sire they have some benchmarks and image comparisons. And what leejand said was right, Omegas are really just more flexable then the ATi drivers. I would use them over the offical cat drivers
You can get a non-control center version. I use that one, I dont like the control center that much.
Display Driver, Control Panel, WDM Integrated Driver
Display Driver, CATALYST Control Center, WDM Integrated Driver
You cant use the AI feature without have the control center...I know you dont have to have it, but its the only way to use the AI feature
Ah ok, what is this AI feature?
its something ATi made to sort of auto-adjust your settings to help your gfx run better when your frame rate drops, im not sure how well it works, but on low-end cards it might do some good
The only reason why I would use Omega drivers is: if I had a ATI Mobility GPU... or maybe if I had a softmodded card (ok that makes 2 reasons ). In any other case I don't see an advantage.
I notice a difference with Omega, but then again I've got the 9600XT.
The action seems smoother. If y'all want me to do the benchmarks, I will do em for the sake of discussion. I do agree the difference is small, but significant for my rig and card.
"Results may vary" is perhaps a good way to describe the performance differences between the standard ATI catalyst and the omega driver(s).