|
Author
|
Topic: Radeon 8500
|
Hawk
General
|
posted 10-29- 09:25 PM
   
Tried a Radeon 8500 today and I am amazed that they can build a card compatible with almost nothing.Tried it in FS2002; blue flashing textures like everyone else is reporting. Tried it in SDOE; over saturated colors, animated props did not show up, blocky clouds, et. Tried it in IL2 and it looked good but, sometimes the plane had vanishing parts. Tried it B-17II; it looked gorgeous except for the strange parts seen through other parts. I did not try it anymore, I jerked it out! Paul www.rcwarbirds.com IP: Logged |
Spanky the Mad Dog
Pilot
|
posted 10-30- 12:20 AM
No offence at all, but I don't know why people even bother with ATI cards.
I've only used the older rage 2s and crap but they always have bad driver support and I always read in readmes how they might have artifacts and such. They just have a really bad track record. Also they cheated in benchmarking. In the drivers for the card they made it detect if you were playing quake and if so automaticly lowered the quality of video to attain higher FPS. We all know Quake 3 is THE main benchmarking tool right  Its all over the tech sites.
http://arstechnica.com/archive/newspro/news-archive-21-10-2001.html Second story down. ATI Radeon 8500 and Cheating in Benchmarks. IP: Logged |
nealg
Pilot
|
posted 10-30- 01:15 AM
I think I have to agree with Spanky, based solely on recent tech reports and not from first hand knowledge as I have never used one.Nvidia may go around getting free testing with all their reference driver releases, but at least it seems they are working on drivers; ATI has a fairly poor rep on driver support. It would seem, as I have seen reported ( I think I read something at Sharky's or Thresh's site ) that if Nvidia could equal or best the 8500 with a GF3 just by tweaking the drivers, and get performance boosts out of TNT2's and GF2's as well, that ATI would be wise to take a page from the Nvidia book and devote more time to driver development. I realize there may be many reasons why they aren't, including money, and they are starting from way behind - but it seems they are serious about providing competition, and this is one area that Nvidia can stay ahead with and take more time in hardware development. That can only hurt ATI in the long run, and it is good for all if they can stay in the market. Benchmarks are one thing, but it still comes down to the user - after one experience like that above, how likely are you to rush right out and buy ATI's next newest bestest card? Isn't it Once Bitten, Twice Shy? Or is that one too old to use any more?
------------------
nealg=FC= IP: Logged |
robert s
Pilot
|
posted 10-30- 05:09 PM
I would tend to agree with the once bitten rule too. I have an ATI Radeon AIW and although it does a fantastic job on 2D and video capture, it lacks a bit on games. SDOE has some odd ground texturing, WW2F has weird props, EAW fog is wrong, and GPL is all screwed up. However, there alot of other games that okay such as USAF, AoE, Train Sim, and NHL 02. Go figure. Also the Radeon doesn't support capturing the windows media encoder ASF or the directshow format, which is a big hassle. However, in general I have been "satisfied" with the AIW, but I will be more cautious in the future with ATI. Earlier this year it would take four weeks for a tech e-mail response. Lately (August) they have been down to a couple of days, but they still have a dismal record of support. IP: Logged |
Lothar
Pilot
|
posted 10-30- 05:27 PM
My ATI TV-Wonder is OK for video capture, but it's timed VCR mode has never worked, it always crashed the computer. Also, any uninstallation and reinstallation will pretty much hose your install, and you have to reinstall windows to get the TV Wonder working again. I'd avoid ATI.IP: Logged | |
FSIC Messageboard
UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! 
