Looking Back Pt. 2: X800 & Catalyst Under The Knife
by Ryan Smith on February 22, 2006 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Half-Life 2
There’s little that can be said about Half-Life 2 that hasn’t already been said, other than that perhaps Valve put the game’s graphics to a point where the gritty, depressing world of Half-Life was a little too well done. It’s not a tropical paradise, and it’s not one large monster closet, but Half-Life 2 is unique among first-person shooters for what it does with putting players in the middle of a crumbling city. It is for this reason that the game offers a good take on another aspect of performance.
Here again, we also see some more aggressive performance improvements in the case of AA/AF than without.
There’s little that can be said about Half-Life 2 that hasn’t already been said, other than that perhaps Valve put the game’s graphics to a point where the gritty, depressing world of Half-Life was a little too well done. It’s not a tropical paradise, and it’s not one large monster closet, but Half-Life 2 is unique among first-person shooters for what it does with putting players in the middle of a crumbling city. It is for this reason that the game offers a good take on another aspect of performance.
With the excitement over this title both before and after it launched, the performance graphs aren’t really surprising here. ATI needed to optimize for this title as they could, and while it’s a bit unusual compared to all of the other shooters tested today to see a gradual performance increase versus one large increase, it’s still a moderate performance increase overall. Of course, since the Source engine was being used in Counter-Strike: Source a few months before Half-Life 2 was released, ATI had the chance to get a jump on optimizing for the engine before the game’s release (and hence, our use of the oldest drivers), so we can’t fully quantify all of the optimizations that ATI made in their drivers for this game.
Here again, we also see some more aggressive performance improvements in the case of AA/AF than without.
Catalyst 4.05 versus 6.01 (mouse over to see 4.05)
24 Comments
View All Comments
mino - Thursday, February 23, 2006 - link
What they can do is provide Control panel.Had they provided CP at least once a quarter, many customers would be happier and it would not require so much resources after all.
As a result of CCC being the only option, we have decided to abandon all planned purchases of X1000 based graphics cards recently.
The slowness is not the only issue, we've had also problems to meke CCC run at all(it is needed for multi-display configs).
MrJim - Wednesday, February 22, 2006 - link
Hopefully ATI will come to their senses about CCC, as its now it isnt working for the demanding users at all. Average joe maybe dont know you can replace CCC with ati tray tools to help speed up things and thats sad. Please bring back the old control panel, please?Lonyo - Wednesday, February 22, 2006 - link
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2701...">http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2701...The "mouseover" comparison at the bottom has one 3D Mark shot, and one HL2 shot.
Ryan Smith - Wednesday, February 22, 2006 - link
Fixed, thanks.