Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

I'm done with ATI.

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
May 9, 2009 1:11:35 PM

I've always used nVidia cards. I switched to ATI a few months ago and that was a mistake...

I'm sick and tired of endless driver problems, especially getting the Vsync to work is always a pain. I had a workaround for that with XP; it was annoying but it worked.

I just installed Windows7RC 32bit version. I was hoping for this whole vsync mess to end... but no, it even got worse. :fou: 

Vsync doesn't work in Battlefield2 at all and the 3D Refresh Rate Overdrive tab is gone from the CCC. What a mess.

I know that Win7 RC is not a final product and the drivers didn't have a long time to mature, but FFS...

So, my 4850 is the first and the very last ATI graphics card. I'll stick with nVidia in the future.

More about : ati

a b U Graphics card
May 9, 2009 1:15:54 PM

Sounds like user error.
May 9, 2009 1:19:30 PM

jennyh said:
Sounds like user error.


?
Related resources
May 9, 2009 1:20:25 PM

Because you have some problems with ati doesn’t mean that ati is bad and nvidia is good.
May 9, 2009 1:33:35 PM

michaelmk86 said:
Because you have some problems with ati doesn’t mean that ati is bad and nvidia is good.


Well, I've never had any problems with nVidia cards. God only knows how many ATI drivers I tried to get that little f***ing thing working... I'm really pissed off today. :fou: 
May 9, 2009 2:09:10 PM

Its sounds also like when somebody has little problem with NVIDIA card drivers of certain model then they just say and assume that NVIDIA brand is bad and they will switch to ATI. Well, I am assure that many people also have similar problem with NVIDIA's drivers too so switching back to NVIDIA isn't always the best solution because you could encounter similar problem too with some NVIDIA cards. This can happen to any card, because it is not really the card's quality but the drivers, regardless to brand.

Anyway, if you think NVIDIA is the best brand and best suitable for you and that NVIDIA never cause you this problem then go ahead and stick with NVIDIA. No problem... :) 
May 9, 2009 3:43:54 PM

I used to be the owner of a MX4000, I guess if I were using the same logic as you I'd never use Nvidia again.

Fanboyism is retarded and this is no exception.
May 9, 2009 4:10:21 PM

Shut up, turboflame. Its not fanboyism. Its unbiased comparison. He had a hell lot of problems with ATI and did not with nvidia. And I agree to each and every word he says. I wish I had stuck with nvidia too.
May 9, 2009 4:23:13 PM

turboflame said:
Fanboyism is retarded and this is no exception.


Implying me fanboyism knowing that I've used products from both companies is retarded, my friend.

I just expressed my opinion about one of them after a few months of endless driver-related problems.

Let me say it again: It is a mess. I really don't think that having an option of enabling vsync is asking for too much... What a shitty product. :fou: 

May 9, 2009 4:55:07 PM

rags_20 said:
Shut up, turboflame. Its not fanboyism. Its unbiased comparison. He had a hell lot of problems with ATI and did not with nvidia. And I agree to each and every word he says. I wish I had stuck with nvidia too.


andyKCIUK said:
Implying me fanboyism knowing that I've used products from both companies is retarded, my friend.

I just expressed my opinion about one of them after a few months of endless driver-related problems.

Let me say it again: It is a mess. I really don't think that having an option of enabling vsync is asking for too much... What a shitty product. :fou: 


Saying "ATI lacks a feature or two I consider critical so I'm going to use Nvidia" is one thing, saying "ATI lacks a certain feature or two I consider critical so I'm going to use Nvidia, ATI sux and I'm never using them again" is fanboyism. Hell, the problem you're having is mainly caused by EA who decided not to have a vsync option in BF2, so are you never buying an EA product again as well?

Had either of you owned my MX4000 you would both be going on and on about how much Nvidia sux and how you'd never use them again. Vsync? psssh, I didn't even have pixel shaders or DX8 support. Yet I still bought a 7600GT down the road (which was an awesome card).
a b U Graphics card
May 9, 2009 4:56:19 PM

You've forgotton all about the Nvidia 'display driver is not responding' you used to get non stop with whatever nvidia's you had before and every time something goes wrong with the 4850 it's all because of crappy little ATI and their rubbish drivers.

Or maybe you had a GT, or perhaps three of them like I did. Every one of them had temps that you could fry an egg on and random reboots, but at least I had the sense to buy BFG and only have to wait 6 weeks on a replacement after the fans failed.

My point? For every person like you having ATI woes, there is another like me who had plenty of time and cards to get completely and utterly sick of Nvidia. Just ask the thousands of HP owners who can't get their dodgy nvidia notebook gpu's repaired or replaced.
a b U Graphics card
May 9, 2009 5:00:25 PM

Quote:
Saying "ATI lacks a feature or two I consider critical so I'm going to use Nvidia" is one thing, saying "ATI lacks a certain feature or two I consider critical so I'm going to use Nvidia, ATI sux and I'm never using them again" is fanboyism. Hell, the problem you're having is mainly caused by EA who decided not to have a vsync option in BF2, so are you never buying an EA product again as well?


Let's not forget the crunch point either, this horrendous oversight by ATI is on Windows 7, you know that OS that isn't even released yet.
May 9, 2009 5:11:29 PM

turboflame said:
Hell, the problem you're having is mainly caused by EA who decided not to have a vsync option in BF2, so are you never buying an EA product again as well?


That's the point, dude. I had a 7800gt and it was performing admirably in BF2. No vsync problems whatsoever. Well, the frame rate was low, so I went for an upgrade. I was just stupid to ignore thousands of posts on many forums where people were describing their problems with ATI drivers. It looks like ATI don't care/are not able to deliver a good product. They've been criticised for their drivers for as long as I can remember and it looks like nothing is going to change in that regard. Well, I've given them a chance... they won't get another one.
May 9, 2009 5:19:11 PM

jennyh said:
Let's not forget the crunch point either, this horrendous oversight by ATI is on Windows 7, you know that OS that isn't even released yet.


You're having a laugh, boy. Let me remind you that BF2 and XP are on the market for a bit longer... and if you read the OP again you're going to find a link to a rather old post describing a fix to the vsync problem. So things were not up to scratch back then either. One big effing mess...
a b U Graphics card
May 9, 2009 5:36:05 PM

Look, simmer down everyone. I see where the op is coming from. I'm a computer tech by trade, messed with windows since the days of windows 95, and now on vista. However, I've also got my degree and an apple certification. All that aside, I like ATI. I have had their older cards before they got amd and I was quite satisfied. The fact is though, if AMD/ATI are going to release a card out there, it could be the best product on planet earth, but if the drivers are at fault what good is your card?

Who here would go and buy the best card on the market right now, and then get it home and find the drivers won't allow you to do certain things, after you've laid say at least 100 bucks on the line. If I'm gonna put down 100-200 dollars on the table for a graphics card, I don't know about everyone else, but I expect a product that works as advertised. I have to work hard for my money personally. And so a hundred bucks is a big deal to me. If they are going to release it, it should work like they say it should, plain and simple. I know what getting the run around is first hand. At my job, we've got a 500-600 dollar printer from HP sitting, supposed to be wonderful, but you know what we got the thing in november or so, and and I've been fighting with them since january. I've been troubleshooting network issues, driver issues, replaced parts in the thing, sent them emails, called. The least they could do is send a tech to look at the thing or offer an exchange.

So to the op, I feel ya man. I am a computer tech, I know the frustration of fighting an issue, and then still not getting it to work and little help from the company. I don't care if their card is the best card there is, if their drivers won't support the features the op needs, he may as well have bought a card with drivers that will.
May 9, 2009 6:02:08 PM

I've went from a nvidia ti4600 to a ATI 9700 to a 1800xt to 3850 and now on a 4890 and not had a problem with any of my cards drivers, but now i just like ati better, im a firm believer that driver problems are 99% user error
May 9, 2009 6:11:24 PM

ohiou_grad_06 said:
Look, simmer down everyone. I see where the op is coming from. I'm a computer tech by trade, messed with windows since the days of windows 95, and now on vista. However, I've also got my degree and an apple certification. All that aside, I like ATI. I have had their older cards before they got amd and I was quite satisfied. The fact is though, if AMD/ATI are going to release a card out there, it could be the best product on planet earth, but if the drivers are at fault what good is your card?

Who here would go and buy the best card on the market right now, and then get it home and find the drivers won't allow you to do certain things, after you've laid say at least 100 bucks on the line. If I'm gonna put down 100-200 dollars on the table for a graphics card, I don't know about everyone else, but I expect a product that works as advertised. I have to work hard for my money personally. And so a hundred bucks is a big deal to me. If they are going to release it, it should work like they say it should, plain and simple. I know what getting the run around is first hand. At my job, we've got a 500-600 dollar printer from HP sitting, supposed to be wonderful, but you know what we got the thing in november or so, and and I've been fighting with them since january. I've been troubleshooting network issues, driver issues, replaced parts in the thing, sent them emails, called. The least they could do is send a tech to look at the thing or offer an exchange.

So to the op, I feel ya man. I am a computer tech, I know the frustration of fighting an issue, and then still not getting it to work and little help from the company. I don't care if their card is the best card there is, if their drivers won't support the features the op needs, he may as well have bought a card with drivers that will.



That's well said.

I'm a consumer, not a fanboy. Let's be honest here, the 4800 series offered best bang for bucks at the time. I don't really know what's happening on the market right now...

Obviously competition is good for all of us as it brings prices down. But ATI can't compete. Full stop. It's their attitude that's putting so many people off. Endless driver problems. They never get it right. Every time I was installing new ATI driver I hoped it's going to solve the vsync problem. And I was always disappointed.

I'm fed up with them.
a b U Graphics card
May 9, 2009 6:49:40 PM

Idk, i can see where you are coming from andyKCIUK, though, i have a 4870 and don't seem to have any problems with it, in fact it's running more stably than my 8800GTS i used to have
a b U Graphics card
May 9, 2009 7:01:26 PM

nVidia did have the fastest card awhile ago. It ate the Ultras lunch, had a great price point, and its drivers? Well, they suck. The 98x2 was good for a short while, and anyone that owns one I guess could claim theyd never buy an nVidia again also. Especially if they paid full price for it.
My point here is, dont completely disown a company just because at a certain time, or card, it fails your usage. V sinc can be important, or not. To make such a final decision about a company is severe IMHLO
May 9, 2009 7:49:27 PM

well if you don't want your 4850 i'll trade you for my evga 8800gts 512
a b U Graphics card
May 9, 2009 7:56:20 PM

Both nvidia and ati have there share of problems!
a c 130 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
May 9, 2009 8:17:18 PM

@ andyKCIUK

Look i can totally see where you are coming from, I had an Issue with a certain shop a while ago and swore never to use them again. That makes sense to me as its a service issue that wont change anytime soon. Still a wild over reaction at the time but im a stuborn git.
This is i think where you are, at the complete over reaction stage. Sure the card bombed and to you its the drivers. Seriously though look at it logically. If it was the drivers then everyone would be slating them, the reviewers would be telling us about them if they were that bad.
Im sorry to say that im completly 100% with rangers on this one its very easy to get installing a set of drivers wrong or get conflicts because of bad uninstall/install practice. I have used only ATI cards for the last 10 years or so and the 4770 is the first card i have had any serious driver issues that are actually down to the driver and not something i did wrong.

Mactronix
May 9, 2009 8:44:55 PM

Lets all ditch products that have annoying problems....
Lets start with vista because of its UAC.
Core i7 coz it only fits into 1366 socket
DDR3 coz its more expensive than DDR2
ATI products coz they are crappy with vsync
Nvidia products coz they dont support DX10.1
and the list continues...
At this rate what shall we be left with?
May 9, 2009 8:47:44 PM

I play BF2, i had a 3870x2 and recently upgraded to a 4890. no probs here.
a c 130 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
May 9, 2009 8:55:27 PM

Is it just me ? whats the big thing with V-sync any way ? Is the game that easy on hardware that you just cant help but get tearing ? I have never played it so don't know.
Just strikes me that changing other settings in the drivers would stop the issue, maxing Quality or forcing triple buffering etc, hell even under clocking the card.
Mactronix
May 9, 2009 8:57:08 PM

Well, well, well...

I feel stupid now.

I made it work. :o 

Kind of... anyway it's not an ATI issue anymore.

I've been trolling around different forums all day today and I just started BF2 with the vsync on!

As always the solution was rather simple: I downloaded D3DOverrider and created a new profile for BF2.
It didn't work at first, I had to change "Application Detection Level" to HIGH to make it work. I opened/closed BF2 several times and restarted my PC as well to make sure it works every time and it does work indeed.

I've got different problem now, I get kicked by PunkBuster after a minute or so. I can't blame ATI for that, though.

Stupid PunkBuster...

So, I have to admit I overreacted a bit.
a c 130 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
May 9, 2009 9:01:34 PM

Never mind you found away around it thats the main thing :) 
Now just gotta sort that stupid Punkbuster thing :fou:  PC's are fun aint they ?

Sorry i know nothing about that :( 

Mactronix
May 9, 2009 9:10:25 PM

mactronix said:
Is it just me ? whats the big thing with V-sync any way ? Is the game that easy on hardware that you just cant help but get tearing ? I have never played it so don't know.
Just strikes me that changing other settings in the drivers would stop the issue, maxing Quality or forcing triple buffering etc, hell even under clocking the card.
Mactronix



You've probably never played with vsync enabled. The difference is huge. I couldn't play in BF2 without vsync this morning: it's just chaos on the screen. I prefer to have constant 75fps synced than 300fps without vsync. Even more, I can see the difference between 75Hz and 85Hz. One of the reasons I don't have bigger LCD is that they support 60Hz only. 60Hz is not enough.
a c 130 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
May 9, 2009 9:30:04 PM

Can you explain to me how its different exactly please ? I am genuinely interested as to what the difference is from a image quality point of view. To be honest its nice to find someone who seems to care more about quality than FPS.
I to appreciate quality of image and if it really is that different i may give it a go. There was quite an in depth study group which i was part of on another forum and the subject of V-sync as a form of image quality improvement never came up.
Probably a case of looking too hard at the small things and missing the obvious :lol: 

Or it has just occurred to me that it may not be image orientated at all and you just like to have things predictable and fluid as far as movement etc is concerned ?

Mactronix
May 9, 2009 9:35:48 PM

mactronix said:
Can you explain to me how its different exactly please ? I am genuinely interested as to what the difference is from a image quality point of view. To be honest its nice to find someone who seems to care more about quality than FPS.
I to appreciate quality of image and if it really is that different i may give it a go. There was quite an in depth study group which i was part of on another forum and the subject of V-sync as a form of image quality improvement never came up.
Probably a case of looking too hard at the small things and missing the obvious :lol: 

Or it has just occurred to me that it may not be image orientated at all and you just like to have things predictable and fluid as far as movement etc is concerned ?

Mactronix


I am also curios. Tried it once and i did not see any difference in visual quality. I guess it did not work.
May 9, 2009 9:48:30 PM

mactronix said:
Can you explain to me how its different exactly please ? I am genuinely interested as to what the difference is from a image quality point of view. To be honest its nice to find someone who seems to care more about quality than FPS.
I to appreciate quality of image and if it really is that different i may give it a go. There was quite an in depth study group which i was part of on another forum and the subject of V-sync as a form of image quality improvement never came up.
Probably a case of looking too hard at the small things and missing the obvious :lol: 

Or it has just occurred to me that it may not be image orientated at all and you just like to have things predictable and fluid as far as movement etc is concerned ?

Mactronix



It's just smooth. That's the best word I know in English to describe it. I've read on the net that some people can't see the difference, but it's really hard to believe. I never game without vsync. Like I wrote before the screen looks really chaotic without syncing. I can remember playing in TOCA:RaceDriver on a CRT@100Hz: that was really cool. Smooth as butter.
a c 106 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
May 9, 2009 9:51:29 PM

Well, I haven't really had any issues with ATI cards in XP. Vista gives me a little trouble, but then that's why I have an image of a clean install to restore it in an emergency ^_^. Doesn't help that I'm always messing with it, but anyway....

I've built a couple of computers with the 4850 recently. My cousins was even running Windows XP Home. The thing that causes the most problems is having integrated graphics. If you don't disable it, then it causes all sorts of problems. Causes issues with nVidia cards too of course, but I haven't built too many machines with GeForce cards since ATI has been the better value lately :D .
a c 130 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
May 9, 2009 10:05:07 PM

andyKCIUK said:
It's just smooth. That's the best word I know in English to describe it. I've read on the net that some people can't see the difference, but it's really hard to believe. I never game without vsync. Like I wrote before the screen looks really chaotic without syncing. I can remember playing in TOCA:RaceDriver on a CRT@100Hz: that was really cool. Smooth as butter.


From that reply it seem that its the latter reason in my post. I'm not saying anything against you personally but it would seem that your speed of focus ? Don't know ? that's the best way i can think of explaining it, doesn't like being jumped around. As i said if its smooth and predictable then your eyes are in their comfort zone.
just me theorising, none of that's based on fact but personally i never had an issue with whats going on in the scene ever since i learnt to use AF and Mipmaps properly. Temporal AA also helps but lets not get to complicated

Mactronix
May 9, 2009 10:22:06 PM

michaelmk86 said:
Because you have some problems with ati doesn’t mean that ati is bad and nvidia is good.


Correction. EVERYONE has problems with ATi drivers.

ATi drivers suck.
a c 130 U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
May 9, 2009 10:28:21 PM

^ :pfff:  Oh no my Troll alarm has gone off :lol: 

Mactronix
a b U Graphics card
May 9, 2009 10:48:36 PM

Another user sucks and fails.
May 9, 2009 10:51:09 PM

cruiseoveride said:
Correction. EVERYONE has problems with ATi drivers.

ATi drivers suck.


Correction; newbs just suck. :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol: 
May 9, 2009 10:57:47 PM

Quote:
I won't go into why you are slightly (majorly)wrong with regards to lcd's but i will say that i understand the concern with v-sync and tearing in some games, bf2 i don't as it has a 100fps cap on it so it ain't so bad.

Of course as i'll repeat for the third time, why you blame ati instead of EA/DICE i don't know as the lack of widescreen support, AF filtering and v-sync options plus a few others like the random gun fire, inability to change your name of your account would make me think It ain't ATi that was the problem in the first place.


The FPS cap at 100fps isn't the same as having v-sync turned on and your monitor at 100hz. V-Sync makes the image on screen smooth while there is motion. With v-sync on there is no tearing of the image when you move your mouse around. Yes, V-sync does cap the FPS at the refresh rate of the monitor (if triple buffering is enabled), but capping your FPS at 100 or lower through the game does not smooth the screen during motion like v-sync does. No matter how low the software cap for the FPS is, if v-sync is not on there will be tearing of the image if move the mouse somewhat quickly to look around. In a first person shooter game that happens a lot.

Changing the refresh rate on a LCD doesn't really change the refresh rate of the screen like it did on a CRT. On a CRT if you had the refresh rate set to 60hz you could SEE the screen flickering(if you have good eyes, a lot of people say they can't see a difference between 60hz and 85hz, they do however say 85hz hurts their eyes less). If you set it to 75hz+ the screen flickering goes away. With a LCD all the refresh rate does is change the FPS cap if v-sync is enabled, the refresh rate does not make the image quality better like it does on a CRT(if you're one of the people that can't see the difference between the 60hz and 85hz then there is no image quality difference).

Refresh rate for a CRT basically controls how many times per second the screen is updated. For 60hz i believe it gets updated 30 times per second, and 42.5 for 85hz. If you ever saw a show where they filmed a CRT screen you could see the refresh rate, the horizontal lines that roll through the CRT is the screen refreshing the image. If they were to increase the refresh rate of the monitor while filming the show you would see the horizontal lines move up or down the screen faster than they were when set to 60hz.

LCDs don't really have anything that is like refresh rate for a CRT, only thing that comes close is the Response Time of the LCD which is measured in milliseconds and at a fixed setting by the manufacturer of the panel.
May 9, 2009 11:14:56 PM

khaydin said:
The FPS cap at 100fps isn't the same as having v-sync turned on and your monitor at 100hz. V-Sync makes the image on screen smooth while there is motion. With v-sync on there is no tearing of the image when you move your mouse around. Yes, V-sync does cap the FPS at the refresh rate of the monitor (if triple buffering is enabled), but capping your FPS at 100 or lower through the game does not smooth the screen during motion like v-sync does. No matter how low the software cap for the FPS is, if v-sync is not on there will be tearing of the image if move the mouse somewhat quickly to look around. In a first person shooter game that happens a lot.

Changing the refresh rate on a LCD doesn't really change the refresh rate of the screen like it did on a CRT. On a CRT if you had the refresh rate set to 60hz you could SEE the screen flickering(if you have good eyes, a lot of people say they can't see a difference between 60hz and 85hz, they do however say 85hz hurts their eyes less). If you set it to 75hz+ the screen flickering goes away. With a LCD all the refresh rate does is change the FPS cap if v-sync is enabled, the refresh rate does not make the image quality better like it does on a CRT(if you're one of the people that can't see the difference between the 60hz and 85hz then there is no image quality difference).

Refresh rate for a CRT basically controls how many times per second the screen is updated. For 60hz i believe it gets updated 30 times per second, and 42.5 for 85hz. If you ever saw a show where they filmed a CRT screen you could see the refresh rate, the horizontal lines that roll through the CRT is the screen refreshing the image. If they were to increase the refresh rate of the monitor while filming the show you would see the horizontal lines move up or down the screen faster than they were when set to 60hz.

LCDs don't really have anything that is like refresh rate for a CRT, only thing that comes close is the Response Time of the LCD which is measured in milliseconds and at a fixed setting by the manufacturer of the panel.



I will never be able to understand why every single thread about vsync has to be brought down to CRT's refresh rate flickering and LCD's response time...
All I said was that I can see the difference between 60/75/85/100Hz with vsync enabled. That's completely different thing. Probably this is one of the reasons why so many ppl still don't understand what vsync is there for.

And triple buffering is there to give you more FPS options at let's say 60Hz then just 60 or 30FPS.
May 9, 2009 11:29:09 PM

daship said:
Another user sucks and fails.



I'm not quite sure if that's to me or to cruiseoveride... but,

The question is:
Do I really have to go through this entire process of digging through the internet, posting questions on different forums and so on, just to enable one basic option in my graphics card? BF2 is still a very popular game and has been around for a few years now. I just spent a good few hours trying to get my €150 card to work. It's a disgrace.

ATI DRIVERS SUCK.

BIG TIME
.

There you have it.

May 9, 2009 11:30:19 PM

andyKCIUK said:
I will never be able to understand why every single thread about vsync has to brought down to CRT's refresh rate flickering and LCD's response time...
All I said was that I can see the difference between 60/75/85/100Hz with vsync enabled. That's completely different thing. Probably this is one of the reasons why so many ppl still don't understand what vsync is there for.

And triple buffering is there to give you more FPS options at let's say 60Hz then just 60 or 30FPS.


What i wrote wasn't really in any kind of response to what you said, it was what StrangeStranger said, which is why i quoted him. What he said made it seem like a game capping your FPS at 100 was the same thing as having V-Sync enabled and your refresh rate set to 100hz, which it's not.

But, with you I do agree that ATI's drivers suck. I used to have a 4850 with Vista 64bit SP1, anytime i'd play a game after a few minutes i'd get a message from windows vista saying that my video driver has stopped responding but recovered. It would keep doing this every few minutes until i got fed up and just stopped playing the game. I formated the computer and installed Windows XP 32bit and had NO issues whatsoever with any games, never saw that message again. Then to test that I formated again and installed Vista 64bit again and hey look at that my video driver has stopped responding again.

Seems like a lot of companies are having problems writing good drivers for vista 64bit, my X-Fi Titanium card randomly starts crackling when playing music or games. When i installed XP 32bit i never had that problem. Both the 4850 and the X-Fi titanium card worked flawlessly.

Since then i've replaced both those cards, I now have a GTX260 core 216 and an Auzentech X-Fi Forte. No issues with either card in Vista 64bit Sp1 and Windows 7 RC1.
May 9, 2009 11:42:47 PM

khaydin said:
What i wrote wasn't really in any kind of response to what you said, it was what StrangeStranger said, which is why i quoted him. What he said made it seem like a game capping your FPS at 100 was the same thing as having V-Sync enabled and your refresh rate set to 100hz, which it's not.


I know, sorry dude, you're a good man.
May 10, 2009 12:38:02 AM

andyKCIUK said:
I'm not quite sure if that's to me or to cruiseoveride... but,

The question is:
Do I really have to go through this entire process of digging through the internet, posting questions on different forums and so on, just to enable one basic option in my graphics card? BF2 is still a very popular game and has been around for a few years now. I just spent a good few hours trying to get my €150 card to work. It's a disgrace.

ATI DRIVERS SUCK.

BIG TIME
.

There you have it.



you jumped the gun you say the drivers suck, but a little checking on the web you find out that its BF2 that sucks, you got the problem sorted out and still you blame ATI drivers.

i did a little checking on the web myself and found out that you SUCK BIG TIME, for not doing a little research B4 coming on to toms and spouting a load of crap
May 10, 2009 1:05:53 AM

rangers said:
you jumped the gun you say the drivers suck, but a little checking on the web you find out that its BF2 that sucks, you got the problem sorted out and still you blame ATI drivers.

i did a little checking on the web myself and found out that you SUCK BIG TIME, for not doing a little research B4 coming on to toms and spouting a load of crap



There you go: fanboyism in pure shape and form.

Firstly, I wouldn't use the words "little checking on the web" to describe an entire day wasted, not by any stretch of English lingo,

Secondly, if you did "a little checking on the web" yourself and found out that I "SUCK BIG TIME, for not doing a little research B4 coming on to toms and spouting a load of crap", why didn't you just post a solution to my problem? That's what this forum is for, isn't it? Looks to me like you're quite keen on stirring **** yourself.

And thirdly, where did I write that "its BF2 that sucks"? Where did you get this idea from? Oh, I forgot: you did "a little checking on the web" youself... :D 







Anonymous
May 10, 2009 1:22:29 AM

Wow, lots of replies on this one, I for one have never had any problems with the drivers for my 4870 on any games with or without vsync enables so do feel for you, but itd the nature of owning a pc, problems arise, its how you deal with those problems that counts, dont rant and rave, just fix it, and if you cant, then change your setup! I dont go off on one when i cant get something to work correctly for a client or myself, I just find a solution, because its easier to look for solutions than problems my friend.
May 10, 2009 2:00:36 AM

Quote:
ATI > Nvidia these days

+1 on this one. You have to agree.
they are not renaming gpus
they have DX10.1 support
they have the 1st 40nm desktop GPU, which is not just the 1st but really rocks by the way!
a b U Graphics card
a b Î Nvidia
May 10, 2009 2:12:18 AM

I think we're getting a little overexcited here. For every person who has ATI driver problems, there is someone with NVidia driver problems (or claims ATI drivers are better). Lets just agree they both suck now and then. And really, these are just stupid graphics cards after all (so who cares).
May 10, 2009 2:35:26 AM

andyKCIUK said:
?

He means there is an error between your chair and your keyboard, between your right and left audio input ports.

You're using beta level (from MS it's more like pre-alpha) and immature drivers and complaining about something that will likely be fixed when the final products are released (or shortly there after).

I know this might be a shocker, but it could be a bug in Windows 7... MS isn't known for bugs, I know, but it could be... I mean look at how well Windows ME ran.
a c 1362 U Graphics card
a c 155 Î Nvidia
May 10, 2009 2:51:51 AM

Amazing! In my house there is 8800gt, 9600gso, HD4850 and several older cards from both parties. I have never had any driver problems with any of them. Ones in a while when you buy a new game it does not work properly, it is more often than not fixed by a patch from the game supplier than with driver updates.
I know that many people download and install beta drivers. Why are they called beta? Because that is the cheapest way for the developer to test his product to work all the bugs out of it! Maybe I have been problem free because I do not provide that free service to the publishers.
May 10, 2009 3:02:50 AM

descendency said:
He means there is an error between your chair and your keyboard, between your right and left audio input ports.

You're using beta level (from MS it's more like pre-alpha) and immature drivers and complaining about something that will likely be fixed when the final products are released (or shortly there after).

I know this might be a shocker, but it could be a bug in Windows 7... MS isn't known for bugs, I know, but it could be... I mean look at how well Windows ME ran.


Guys, do you sometimes read OPs (that stands for opening post AFAIK...)???
I rather clearly stated there what I had to be doing every time I wanted to play BF2 to enable that fecking vsync under WinXP. OK, it's a link to another thread I've started, but it doesn't take that much time to check it out...

I was hoping that my misery is going to end with installing Win7. Yes, I knew Win7 is just a RC; that's clearly stated in the OP as well.

This thread is not just about another crappy driver from ATI. I've been having this problem since day one, ffs.

It's late and I'm going to bed now. Hopefully I'll have a dream about a world where things do what are they're suppose to do. Where you spend your hard earned cash and you're not getting crap.

But I know that one day I'll wake up in the morning, brush my teeth and go to a local shop to get a pint of milk and a nice lady behind the counter will take my money and show me the nearest field asking to milk the cow myself. Obviously I'll have to do "a bit of research" to find that fecking cow first.
!