I've been using ATT and Radeon Pro for years ( CCC was always a basketcase for one thing or another in my experience). They (ATI Tray Tools and RadeonPro) have more dedication on the part of their devs than does AMD's own Catalyst writers...but then I was never a big fan of Terry Makedon, under whose stewardship, CCC went backward IMO (now ominously part of the APU driver team)- and caused many people like myself to look to a full-time alternative to CCC some years back.I never trust 3rd part stuff that mess with things like graphics drivers. But Radeon Pro seems legit. But at the same time, adding features not meant to be run is risky.
He GR,btw when tweaking from radeon pro,disable in-game vsync..ok
I think CCCs problem is that it is written under .net framework. .net Framework is great in concept, but holds some unneeded junk that CCC doesnt need. nVidia's approach is much more subtle and convenient.I've been using ATT and Radeon Pro for years ( CCC was always a basketcase for one thing or another in my experience). They (ATI Tray Tools and RadeonPro) have more dedication on the part of their devs than does AMD's own Catalyst writers...but then I was never a big fan of Terry Makedon, under whose stewardship, CCC went backward IMO (now ominously part of the APU driver team)- and caused many people like myself to look to a full-time alternative to CCC some years back.
/Guy tagged as Nvidia fanboy using ATT and RadeonPro since 2004 and 2008 respectively...OMGWFTGTFOSUVNSFW!!!
A bigger problem is that under a merged ATI and AMD, hardware and software groups are never homogeneous. Each design group worked within its own enclave, and acting somewhat independent of each other. As I noted in my AMD history article*, AMD has historically been a conglomeration of fiefdoms (generally reflected in employee reviews).I think CCCs problem is that it is written under .net framework. .net Framework is great in concept, but holds some unneeded junk that CCC doesnt need. nVidia's approach is much more subtle and convenient.
Yes agreed, playing with 60 fps maxed out settings feels like invincible when gaming...that fluidity of shooting and moving is stunning...60 FPS RULES
Front and centre- but unless you're a benchmarker, like tinkering with settings, or frequent enthusiast boards, the software largely passes by the mainstream - as does nHancer and Nvidia Inspector.But im shocked to say the least, where has this software been all this time...
I was wrong to label that article a cut & paste and I apologize for doing so Graham.* Also my own work -just to pre-empt certain posters, and a not a "cut-and-paste from Wikipedia", nor from AMD's own rather sparse reference.
Hehe - 60 fps rules till you get a monitor that does more.
FPS =/= resolution =/= screen size.Yes man I agree with you partly there and mainly on SP,but personally not on competitive fps.I play lot of multiplayer shooters,but hate those big *** monitors on it.For me,the sweet spot for multiplayer fps is monitor between 19-20"(not more than 20") and especially maintaining that desired 60 fps target..But for SP,monitor size/hz does not matter unless you play on veteran level.
FPS =/= resolution =/= screen size.Yes man I agree with you partly there and mainly on SP,but personally not on competitive fps.I play lot of multiplayer shooters,but hate those big *** monitors on it.For me,the sweet spot for multiplayer fps is monitor between 19-20"(not more than 20") and especially maintaining that desired 60 fps target..But for SP,monitor size/hz does not matter unless you play on veteran level.
There's 120Hz monitors out there, FYI.
No it doesn't!!120HZ requires bigger monitor above 20"(27" and above generally).
No it doesn't!!120HZ requires bigger monitor above 20"(27" and above generally).
Refresh rates are not limited by screen size. Refresh rates are limited by the pixel capabilities to change states.
I dont think you have seen a TS article with so much flame in it lol.I've never seen a TS article with this many comments o.O;
I say my 200th reply should close this out .I'm surprised the thread hasn't spontaneously combusted by now. :O