PDA

View Full Version : ATI Drivers The legend? The myth? The FUD? The truth?



jb
10-23-2002, 01:14 PM
Today I wanted to bend your ears on something that's been troubling me for some time now. And its the power of FUD. FUD was a term that came up in the early IBM days were they used Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt to hinder competition. Since they were founders of the modern PC market they challenged all the new competitors by attacking them and causing FUD in the consumers minds. For a variety of reasons this failed and IBM is no longer the leader of the PC technology. However these new companies picked up and started to use FUD in their own marketing campaigns so today is common practice. And no one company is above using parts of FUD in their PR work. They all do it. The problem is, like gossip it spreads like wildfire and often with out any facts to back it up. Message boards are common places to see this effect. You have one poster that takes part of an PR releases then uses it to back up their own favorite company and spreads the word. As that word spreads it gets slightly changed from one person to the next. And before you know it no longer accurate. But people don't understand it and take it as the gospel and tell their friends, families, clan mates, ect So lets take a look to see just how bad/good ATI's drivers are?


Most people have heard that ATI's cards are good but their drivers Sux0rs! And since it takes both to run correctly a lot of people stayed away from ATI products. Now in the past (2 years ago) that was very true. ATI's drivers at the launch of the original Radon did have a lot of issues. Most of them were corrected but it took some time. During that time lots of people complained about the quality of ATI's drivers. Then came the launch of the 8500. With Smooth Vision (one of its touted features not working), a bug/cheat that provided higher FPS in Q3 with a loss of IQ and a host of other issues, ATI had well deserved their reputation for bad drivers. Even the ID god JohnyC stated that he was disappointed in ATI's driver quality. We soon began to see a change in the ATI drivers. 2 weeks after the 8500 launch we saw drivers that had fixed Q3, Smooth Vision and a host of other issues. Funny thing is that some people out there (me included) had almost no issues with their 8500. Then about every 6 weeks we saw new drivers from ATI. With each release the list of problems got smaller as well as speed gains were reached. Most people had very few issues with the 8500 about 6 months after its launch. So did ATI finally fix its drivers?

Lets look at their launch of the R9000/R9700. At this launch we have very few issues. All features were working as advertised. Most old games worked great and there was very few issues. Over all most people were pleased with the R9700. So it look like ATI has done a lot better with their drivers. But some of the newer games did not run so well. For example Mafia, The Thing and 1941 all had lock up issues on the 9700. Gack, just when it looked like ATI had started to turn there driver rap around this stuff happens. So what's the deal'o?

The deal is that its part ATI's fault and part of the game developers fault. Huh, what? What do the developers of games have to do with it? Almost everything. Game developers are usually smaller groups of people that don't have access to each and every possible hardware or software configuration. So the pick the most common platform that's reliable and use that to do all development of their game. Since 51% of the market share is controlled by nV then its pretty easy to see why these developers use nV as their primary development platform. Here during the development of games they may find conditions where a bug occurs. When this happens they can contact nV and let them know about it and/or modify their code to work around it. No matter which they chose to do most time the public never sees these issues. Now in an ideal world developers will have boards from all video card companies and enough time to test each one of them. However in the real world developers have to meet ship date on a limited budget so this type of testing is rarely done. For example Epic on UT2k3 did have a beta R9700 board to do some testing on. But it was not until after the game had shipped until they got a real R9700 to test with. See where I am going here? If developers don't have the time or resources to test other cards then bugs don't get caught. Then they show up in the public and we have to wait for either the developer to fix it in a patch or new drivers from the video card company.

Another issues is that developers can use vendor specific instructions even though there are standard instructions to use. Case in point is the shinny water issue on NWN. NWN will show shinny water surfaces on all GF3/4 cards but any one on a 8500 or R9700 will not see these effects. Of course people blamed ATI for crappy drivers. The shinny water was created by using DX8 pixel shadders which both the 8500/R9700 support. So why then was it not working? After a few emails bounced around we found out the reason. NWN is an OpenGL game. The developers used GF3/4 to do all of the development. When it came time to code the shinny water they chose to use a custom NV OpenGL call that was not available to the other cards. Funny thing is there already a standard OpenGL call that does the same thing that the developers could have used to do the same effect which would have worked on all cards that support that feature of DX8. No reason was given on why they chose not to use the standard call. At that time nV was not allowing other vendors to use their calls unless they paid nV. Not exactly in the sprit of what OpenGL stands for. So how in the world is this ATI's fault? ATI's developer relations need to work even harder at their job. From what I hear their team is good and making strides to provide the interface between game developers and ATI. The lead developer in charge of DX at MS was quoted as saying that ATI has closed the gap in their minds of driver quality so that the difference between them an nV is too small to count.


Finally some of the fault lies in the link from the keyboard to the screen (ie that is the user). For what ever reason ATI cards have more issues when they are installed on top of a system that has had an nV card in it before. Normally a clean install is the best way. However that's not an option for some people. Now should you have to wipe a system clean when installing a video card? Well for me I have found that when I change video cards that only time were I will reformat is going from one core vendor to another (ie from 3dfx to nV, from nV to ATI, from S3 to Kyro2, ect). If you changing to just a new card from the same core vendor then its not that big of a deal. Some time even running the un-install will still leave remains of that card on your system that could cause issues on the new card. A lot of users that had issues with ATI never did a clean install and so they are not starting clean. Also ATI's drivers could not have been installed correctly. People may have download the wrong one or installed it correctly. Also people could have gone in and over clock other parts of their systems which may cause a bit more un-stability. There are a ton of things that could happen with users PCs that may help to cause issues.


Bottom line is that ATI still needs to work on somethings. One of them being driver relations. If they can get more developers using their cards then more things will be fixed before they are ever released and labeled as driver bugs. ATI also need to still improve on their driver process. There is no way in heck those first drivers for the 8500 should have ever been released. Who ever was heading up the quality group at that time was sound asleep. Finally ATI needs to work more on their driver image. The bad rap they have now is not relevant to their current work. Changing that rap will take work on their part as well as helping to educate the end user. Everyone has different experiences with drivers. Just because someone's says it worked/broke their system does not mean that is the norm. It means its was there experience. I have really had very few driver issues every with any of may cards. Yes I have had some things I had to tweak and a few bugs, but in the long run all drivers seem to have worked well for me. I am not trying to say ATI drivers are great. The are really good but not perfect. At this point I see no reason why you wound not want to get an ATI card if it provided is the best fit for your needs at that time.

Classic[COWA]
10-23-2002, 03:23 PM
Thank you for your insight; very educational.

Blitzkrieg
10-24-2002, 10:18 AM
Nice Joe very nice. My brain hurts.

Vik
10-24-2002, 10:34 AM
Damn, that's a long article..

gj

TheClient
10-24-2002, 02:15 PM
All I can say is: ATI had their chance. They can't get their cards into the development houses, which is their fault.

Games that have had probs:
1. bf1942
2. ut2k3
3. mafia
4. nwn

I just can't call that acceptable.

Von Burgenstein
10-24-2002, 03:04 PM
i have ati radeon 8500 and have had no problems with UT2k3, NWN, or BF1942

EviLC4
10-26-2002, 05:57 PM
Originally posted by jb
At this point I see no reason why you wound not want to get an ATI card if it provided is the best fit for your needs at that time.

I see no need that ATI can fill that nVidia can't. But there is one need that nVidia can give you that ATI can't, NO DRIVER PROBLEMS!

The bottom line is that one (ATI) will give you POTENTIAL problems, where as the other (nVidia) won't. Which one does logic dictate you should buy?

hehehehe, LOL!

Thnx

Xenophobia
10-26-2002, 06:12 PM
I have a gf3 and a radeon 9700 ( one at each of my parents houses =D) And i would have to say that the 9700 works a lot better for ME... I dont know how you guys feel about them, but to me its whatever card works the best for you... stick with it, there's no point in debating over which card is better than the next because speed wise ATI wins right now and nVidia has better drivers... but to me if I find one driver that works great for ATI... whats the difference about getting a new one?

jb
10-28-2002, 04:03 PM
Originally posted by EviLC4


I see no need that ATI can fill that nVidia can't. But there is one need that nVidia can give you that ATI can't, NO DRIVER PROBLEMS!

Really? How about the absolute highest perfromance from a video card today? Two chocies GF4 ti4600 or the R9700. We both know its really no contest in the perfromace let alone feature set. Then what about low end? You have the GF4 Mx line vrs the R9000. Again R9000 is pretty much the top in perfromance and with features. No one in the right mind should get a DX7 card like the GF4 Mx but lots will and this will keep us stuck with DX7 games instead of fully DX8 games that use vertex/pixel shaders. Finally the middle market has an opening. Right now a GF4 Ti4200 is the best you can get for the price/performance. That may change when the 9500 come out. And all of this will change if/when we see the nV30 this year. But for now if you want a high or low end solution, ATI has a much better product.






The bottom line is that one (ATI) will give you POTENTIAL problems, where as the other (nVidia) won't. Which one does logic dictate you should buy?

Times are changing. MS top DX guru has left MS to work for ATI to help their developer relations. I would soon expect to see some developers switching to ATI given that the 9700 is the fastest more feature rich card for the moment. Taken from a 9700 Review that showed up on a sight called NVnews.com


...the product and drivers proved to be very stable and always performed exceptional...

For those that dont know it NVNews is the leading Web sitte for NV based cards. The fact that they reveiwed an R9700 and found no driver issues being such die hard nV fans allone speaks about the quality of ATI drivers. Like I said things have gotten better for ATI and I see no reason not to get an ATI card if it fit the itch you have.

EviLC4
10-28-2002, 04:30 PM
What good does speed and performance do when your drivers suck and you can't get it to work. Also I'm not totally satisfied that that any ATI is faster than the ti4600. And even if it is the next comparable nVidia card I'm sure is right around the corner. I'll trade waiting alittle bit for a good driver thats not going to cause me problems.

I'm sorry to say that my opinon is that ATI cards are not as stable, or work right out of the box as consistantly as nVidia. I would say thats the bottom line. Also you seem to be somewhat knowlegible about drivers, comps, hardware, Ect. What about people who are not? ATI is selling these cards right off the store shelf. If I buy something off a store shelf it better work right out of the box. If it don't, well lets just say thats not a selling point, it's a piece of junk, plain and simple, no FUD! Companies thats send products to store shelfs, that dont work right becasue they are rushing the card to beat the competitor deserve the reputation they get, it's called buisness.

Thnx

jb
10-30-2002, 10:06 AM
Also I'm not totally satisfied that that any ATI is faster than the ti4600.

Ahhh then step into my dojo of education :)

Here are some of the most recent reviews:
http://www.guru3d.com/review/sapphire/radeon9700pro/

"You can expect the highest level of performance and features to date, you play all games in 1600x1200x32 without a doubt and you are able to play the games with features like 6X AA and 16x Anisotropic filtering while maintaining very good framerates in 1024x768x32. Everything was stable and the games I tested did not have any issues, razor sharp image quality"


http://www.subzerotech.com/index.php?module=sz_reviews_display&id=71&page=6

"ATi's Radeon 9700 Pro video card is definitely worth the upgrade, it won't boost your performance by a little bit but instead it will change the way you play games. After upgrading to this card from a ti4200 I thought there was no difference. There really isn't a noticeable difference from a GF4 ti upgrade but when you start maxing out the settings, turning up the resolution and turning on some AA you will never go back to any other video card. My games now are being ran at a minimum 1024x768 resolution with max settings on the video options and a minimum of 2AA, superb graphics at excellent speeds. Of course there's always a catch, the hefty price tag. "


http://www.explosivelabs.com/reviews/ati_radeon9700-128mb/pg5.shtml

"As was expected, the ATI Radeon 9700 Pro topped the competition by a considerable amount in all of the benchmarks that were performed on our test bed. ATI has finally put out a card that surpasses the likes of nVidia's. ATI has done a remarkable job with R300 in terms of image quality, especially with antialiasing enabled. It's something you have to experience first hand before you fully understand."


http://www.penstarsys.com/Reviews/video/ati/sapp_r9700p/sapp_r300_7.htm

"Games are another area where ATI has had problems. With the latest Catalyst drivers (7.77 based), I have experienced no problems whatsoever with any game or application I have loaded or played. Everything I have thrown at it just plain works, and works very well. I have seen no strange graphical glitches, instability, or ugliness with a wide variety of 3D applications. These include Giants, all Quake based games, racing titles, Dungeon Siege, Neverwinter Nights, Battlefield 1942 (though some versions of the Catalyst drivers needs patched to get it to work), and many more. The 7.77 based drivers are pretty fantastic, and they do increase performance overall by a small margin. ATI has really improved dramatically with their drivers.

The Radeon 9700 Pro brings many, many advantages to the table. It has outstanding speed and quality in many applications at many resolutions. It has the best 3D quality that I have yet experienced (load up Morrowind and play it at high res with AA and AF enabled, and you will see what I mean). It has one of the most powerful and flexible AF and AA engines to date. It supports dual monitors, each running on a 400 MHz DAC. The latest drivers are of good quality, with a very easy and intuitive control panel. ATI is hitting on all cylinders with this product, and they know it. They also know that they have an uphill battle in terms of market and mindshare against NVIDIA. The Radeon 9700 Pro is a potent weapon for ATI to bring to the dance."

And thats just the first I found. To see a comeplete list of all the reviews go here:
http://www.8dimensional.com/ATi_Radeon_9700.html
http://www.8dimensional.com/ATi_Radeon_9000.html

I also left out the 9000 as it is more of the same thing.


But I if you look at just these clips you can see that things are changing for the better. I have yet to find a single review where they have had driver issues that have effected their game play. This time around things are working right out of the box. I dont doubt that you have had some bad experinces with ATI cards. And thats fine. I am saying that now things are different. It looks like the review sites also agree..

Melkor
10-30-2002, 05:29 PM
I agree that the ATI card has better specs, and is currently the top card to buy. But if the people who make games make them on Nvidia cards, I'm sure as hell gonna play them on an NVidia machine.

And until ATI can consistently do good, rather than one good card, I will stick to NVidia. My G4 4600 runs every game I've tried at max res with all vid options on max...no problems. NWN looks amazing.

For now, I stay true to NV

TheClient
10-30-2002, 11:36 PM
Here's the deal: I am an avid Nvidia ho, but I'm not blinded by the light completely. The Radeon 9700 is up to 3x as fast as a 4600 in some situations. It's hands down faster. PERIOD. You can't debate this fact.

The main question w/ ATI is their drivers. They said they'd unveil a unified driver architecture w/ the 9700 they didn't. They have been good w/ updating their drivers to address the issues, I agree. But the issue is really that the issues should have never cropped up in the first place. JB Cries Wolf because ATI didn't get the proper testing by the developers. But really, whose fault is this? He says the UT people only had a beta board to work with. This can stem from two reasons:
1.) ATI rushed their product to market and failed to give developers and adequate time to update their games.
2.)UT 2k3 came out too early to get a fair look at the Radeon.

If the second is true, as many would like to believe, the fault still lies with ATI. In fact, My friend got his radeon the first week of Sept. at which point the UT 2k3 demo was already out. UT 2k3 finally went gold on Sept. 20 of 2002, roughly two weeks after the radeon 9700 release date. Obviously ATI had final radeon 9700 boards a month prior to this date, that they could have given to Epic. So, the total time for Epic to incorporate into their game would have been roughly 1.5 months, plenty of time. The simple fact of the matter is that ATI failed to work closely with developers to get their products working correctly. They only fix a problem once people start whining, instead of putting in the "ounce of prevention," ATI prefers the proverbial "pound of cure."

Another reason JB cries wolf is due to the fact that Nvidia had the only cards being tested by Epic and most other developers at time. This is not the developer's fault. The majority of the market uses Nvidia cards for testing why? Because were the fastest and most widely installed video cards in people's systems. And why is this the case? Nvidia dominates the developers because it produced a superior product for a long period of time witih a unified, consistent, frequently updated, driver architecture; because Nvidia worked with developers from the start unlike ATI who was solely concerned with the OEM market, because that was where the money was. In short, ATI's past transgressions are the cause of its current woes. Because ATI chose to release a half-assed set of drivers for quake, because the older radeons were plagued with issues, and because ATI did not care about developers in the past, they have suffered the ostracization of the developers, who they never cared about before. By the same token, they suffered the ostracization of the power users, who have been let down time and time again by ATI with empty driver promise after empty driver promise. So, even if JB is correct and ATI has changed their ways and it is the developers fault for not including ATI, why should we believe them? They messed up in the past. Much like the boy who cried wolf, no one should trust them anymore.

jb
10-31-2002, 09:42 AM
Client,



They said they'd unveil a unified driver architecture w/ the 9700 they didn't.

And I for one am glad they did not. The 9700 is a radically different architecture then the other products there is very little that could be based off a unified driver code base. It became obvious that trying to make their drivers unified is the best way for such a new card. Just think about it. Its got a new AA/AF engine. New pixel engine. DX9 TnL engine. New HyperZ, ect....I also think unified concept is not the best method. However that is another debate...


He says the UT people only had a beta board to work with. This can stem from two reasons:

Now about Epic. I am under an NDA so I can not disclose all my info, but nV game them a LARGE sum of money to help in the development of UT2k3. Tim Sweeny said in VE interview 2 years ago that NV has become a critical partner for Epic. You did happen to notice the Logo when the game started right? I got a Tshirt when I was at Epic for UT2k3 with another large Logo of nV on it. Yes its advertising but it does show that money talks and developers listen. Also while at Epic they did have lots of input from ATI. In fact Epic gave to the mod developers (ie me) ATI 8500 as well as GF4 cards to those that needed them. So its not like ATI totally ignored them. Now why didn't ATI give them a retail board? I have no idea. The only thing I can think of is that they did not have many retail boards until they ramped up shipment. Remember we did see any real reviews on the 9700 till about a week before it showed up. Also Dan Vogule (Epic Employee) posted a bunch of info on how to tweak the R9700 including how to get the High Res texture to work form the original UT game as well as get the most out of it for UT2k3 on the Rage3D forums the first week it was out. So that tells me that he was working with ATI for a long time. BTW Dan is the one that does most of the graphics handling. He wrote the OpenGL Loki render for UT and was then hired by Epic. He's a neat guy.


nV controls only 51% of the video market. I agree that is an majority but that still leaves 49% of the people (a rather large number) that do not have nV products. If developers don't get a chance to test on other products then its THEIR fault. There is no written law that says companies has to supply hardware to a developer. Its done on a matter of trust and the relationship with that company. If a game does not run on your hardware. Then its stil unclear on whos fault it is. If the video card drivers follow to the very letter the specs of the API, then its the developers fault for not following the specs of the API. If however the video driver does not follow the specs then its the Video cards fault. Trying to prove which is the case is not easy at all.

Again case in point is the Shinny water issue with NWN. There is no reason why they had to use Custom NV OpenGL calls when the OpenGL1.2 and 1.3 spec support an vendor independent ARB call that does the same thing. Thus shinny water will not work on All Matrox, P10 and ATI cards. This is not the first time this happens nor will it be the last. DroneZ another OpenGL game that uses nV OpenGL calls when it does not have to. There there is the Vulpine Engine that does the same thing. See the issue here? Developers cater to the money that nV pays them instead of where the rest of the industry and standards are going. Remember its OpenGL not nVGL. Funny to note the company with the most custom OpenGL calls is, nV with over 18 last time I checked. This is one reason why nV is still not a voting member on the OpenGL board. Note ATI is.

Again I am not saying ATI is innocent here. They know they need to improve on these things. And from looking at some things they have. They just (well last month) had their developers Mojo seminar. Here they had a 3 day course on how to use the 9700 as well as gave out 9700 to all those developers that attend. They have started to sponsor developers (like NWO) to add content to their games. Look at Trufrom. Did you know that 20 games support this feature already? Including UT2k3? This tells me that ATI has started to make headway.

Kneecromancer
10-31-2002, 02:03 PM
*clears throat*

PHUK nvidia. i wasted $200 on there gi4200 128mb card, and have had nothing but problems ever since i installed it. MS-DOS prompt wouldnt even work! viva la voodoo

TheClient
10-31-2002, 06:11 PM
Indeed, the money talks. But why doesn't ATI have the money? Because of their past transgressions.