1. #1
    How are they?---The question we always ask!
    Share this post

  2. #2
    pourshot's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,024
    Looks ok so far, perfomance is the same as the 5.4
    Share this post

  3. #3
    Udidtoo's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    1,747
    With identical settings as the 5.4

    Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
    5180,145236,10,85,35.666

    5.4 was 33.7...something something

    Used Fraps from the 5 second mark to 2.30 minutes in BD. That triple 6 came up often in many repeated attempts which means either they are very stable or, its the end of the world as we know it. That would be a shame as I was really looking forward to BoB.
    Share this post

  4. #4
    wow, I'm on 5.3's, they seem to be just fine, I guess the eternal question, how is perfect? I'm gonna have to hear some great stuff to bother changing, 5.3's still very good.
    Share this post

  5. #5
    All the 5.x have been good.
    But on my Radeon 9800, the 5.5s certainly give the best frame rates, least stutter, and the antialiasing looks better on the same settings.
    Share this post

  6. #6
    jurinko's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    794
    5.3 is much smoother here on 9800p
    Share this post

  7. #7
    -HH-Quazi's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    5,927
    Well, I am not believing this. And I don't know if it has anything to do with me using the CCC for the first time. But I have just installed the 5.5's with the CCC, set the CCC up with the same settings I always use in the old Control Panel which is 6X AA & 8X AF, MipMap @ High Quality. Trueform @ Application Preference, Vertical Sync off, and I am using Catalyst AI set to Advanced, FastWrites on, and all of this using Perfect Landscape.

    Now with that information given, with the 5.4's and the old Control Panel my BD track numbers looked like this: Min.=14 Max.=92 Avg.=36.887 With the 5.5's and the CCC my BD Track numbers looks like this: Min.=14 Max.=93 Avg.=41.033 This is a 4.146 fps increase in the BD Track, which if you think about it is pretty substancial. And to think that the video card drivers did this for me. I know there are m8's paying $$$ on upgrades and would be excited about an increase like that in running the BD Track. Because that much of an increase in the BD Track translates to a little larger increase in regular mission play across the board. And to think that it didn't cost me a dime to get that increase. Thank you ATI and all the beta testers. I believe I am going to be a lifer.

    Just another reason I will stay with ATI. Seems as though every month I get a fr increase in the BD Track just by updating the drivers. But this is the largest increase I have ever got by using newly released drivers. AWESOME!!!
    Share this post

  8. #8
    Do the 5.5's solve the ME-262 problem with weird colors on the screen?
    Share this post

  9. #9
    I moved from the Cat 5.3 to the 5.5 and can't see the frame gain being more than a couple. I use a mission I built using the Tarawa map to check framerates. In "perfect" detail setting, I find the huge coral reef of the Tarawa map puts severe demands on graphics processing. The FB/AEP/PF programming seems very CPU-intensive and my processor is falling off the end of the capability scale. I tried various setup changes for video with no significant improvement in the Cat 5.5 over the Cat 5.3 drivers. On the plus side, no anomolies or artifacts...but then I didn't have any before the 5.5 anyway.
    Share this post

  10. #10
    Quazi, all I can say is WOW!!! Does NASA borrow your PC? That is good stuff. Can you elaborate a bit more on your settings? I just bought an Ultra for my 3.4Ghz but still have a 9800XT for my 3.0Ghz PC. I wonder how you do it? I can't get AF to do nothing for me, soon as I turn it on it's allways "bye bye framerates" Your performance with BD is great. You running Open GL or Direct X? Please give up some of your secrets.
    Share this post