Omega vs. Catalyst

Vertical_Zer0 · 01-23-05, 08:18 AM

Are there performance/quality differences between the Omega and Catalyst drivers? Any different features? I've been using the Omega drivers since I bought my ATi card, but I was wondering if you all have found any nuances that make Catalysts better?

veryhumid · 01-23-05, 08:23 AM

i think the goal of the omegas is to keep performance on par with the ati release but improve image quality. Omega drivers usually offer more control than the ati release with the control panel, and sometimes they perform better because omega drivers are often based on beta drivers released by ati. sometimes you can spot a difference in how a rendering looks in a game if you use both drivers within a short amount of time. Other than that it's really just a slightly tweaked ati driver with a more useful interface and integrated overclocking. Well that's what i think, anyway

IrQ · 01-23-05, 09:35 AM

The Omega's generally offer a much better performance rating while achieving the same image quality as the the Catalyst. Omega doesnt write a whole new driver. He generally just takes the most current set and tweaks them to death. They deliver the same quality at higher performance.

They do also allow more control over the driver then the catalyst do.

veryhumid · 01-23-05, 10:05 AM

haha, our first lines are total opposites. I'll be the first to say i don't know if i am right

worth a read: http://www.omegadrivers.net/about.php

Marcus Marti · 01-24-05, 05:19 AM

Well, what I want to know is the performance difference if there is any between Catalyst and Omega.
I've read about better Aqm scores but is there anyone who has experience with this?
I've googled it but I would like to know about individual opinions from people.

IrQ · 01-24-05, 05:28 PM

I have played around a LOT with the DNA drivers, Catalyst drivers, and Omega drivers. Catalyst are by far the most stable at stock speeds and have the fewest glitches but at the same time deliever the least amount of performance.

The DNA and Omega drivers are very mixed. They both offer crisper graphics and better colors then the catalyst with a higher performance rating. Both driver sets also handle overclocking much better then the catlyst drivers also. DNA and Omega drivers give better performance on diffeerent games though. I've seen my performance go through the roof with Doom3 and the DNA's on my radeon 9500 compared to the Omega's. At the same time far cry and Grand theft auto with the Omega's killed the DNA drivers. It depends on what games you play.

When you install the DNA drivers they give you a list of games for pre optimized setting and profiles and you can load those set of tweaked drivers for those games. Basically if you arnt playing a game that uses the engine from one of those games listed then use the Omega's.

The DNA drivers I believe are also not being made anymore.

For a better idea with my radeon 9500 at stock with stock graphics setting off the drivers and base settings for 3dmark2001se I scored 9510 with the catalyst, 10581 with the Omega's and 10398 with the DNA drivers.

buster · 01-24-05, 06:55 PM

omegas #1 in my book,alot better performance in all games and video.

9mmCensor · 01-24-05, 06:56 PM

Omega's > *

meionm · 01-24-05, 07:04 PM

I think omega's drives are optimized for better performance in games, to give better quallity of images. This optimization doesn't show in 3dmark scores

Vertical_Zer0 · 01-24-05, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by IrQ

For a better idea with my radeon 9500 at stock with stock graphics setting off the drivers and base settings for 3dmark2001se I scored 9510 with the catalyst, 10581 with the Omega's and 10398 with the DNA drivers.

We need more numbers like this to give a better comparison, nice work IrQ! How about some from '03 or '05? Or better yet, actual games?

germanjulian · 01-24-05, 07:49 PM

catalyst!
never noticed any difference and there are benchmarks out there which show that ofter omega drivers are better... but 1 to 2 FPS!??

and image quality better.
let someone play on your computer and then ask them which drivers you are using. they wont be able to tell.

Sentential · 01-24-05, 07:52 PM

Omega drivers are tweeked for increased IQ and picture quality. They are generally much slower than the regular Catalyst drivers but the quality is considerably higher. Its all about balance. If you are an IQ freak definatly use the Omegas.

Also the Omegas have several soft-modding features for 9800SE cards and 9500s who do not wish to physically mod their card

JigPu · 01-24-05, 08:49 PM

I've consistanty heard what Sentential is saying about the Omegas. Higher IQ, slightly slower speed. On my system though, I seem to have gotten a descent framerate boost (for just a driver change anyway

) from using them. Mabey it's just me and a few others in the thread, but I definatly see higher performance.

The only complaint I have with Omegas is their control panel and tweaky (for me) instalation. I had the hardest time getting the Omegas to install for some reason, and the 3D tab is more confusing than the Catalyst drivers IMHO.

JigPu

Marcus Marti · 01-25-05, 02:53 AM

Well, this surely helps!!!
Thanks everyone for sharing their experience, so far it seems the Omegas are favoured.
I'm thinking of switching now myself.
But I do agree with Vertical_zer0 on more numbers, that would really be great!

01-23-05, 08:18 AM	Thread Starter #1
Vertical_Zer0 Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: USA	Omega vs. Catalyst Are there performance/quality differences between the Omega and Catalyst drivers? Any different features? I've been using the Omega drivers since I bought my ATi card, but I was wondering if you all have found any nuances that make Catalysts better? __________________ My systems: Intel Core 2 Duo e6420 topped by Thermalright Ultra-120, 2GB Transcend DDR800, 320GB Seagate Barracuda SATA II 16MB cache HD, 250GB WD IDE HD, 200GB Maxtor IDE HD, Lian-Li PC-7B case, EVGA nVidia GeForce 8800GTS 320MB AMD Athlon XP 2500+ @2200mHz, 1024 MB PC3200 RAM, 80GB Maxtor HD, 20GB Western Digital HD, AGP nVidia 6600GT, MSI K7N2 Delta, Custom Modded Case FOLD for Team 32!
	QUOTE Thanks

01-23-05, 08:23 AM	#2
veryhumid Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: New Hampshire	i think the goal of the omegas is to keep performance on par with the ati release but improve image quality. Omega drivers usually offer more control than the ati release with the control panel, and sometimes they perform better because omega drivers are often based on beta drivers released by ati. sometimes you can spot a difference in how a rendering looks in a game if you use both drivers within a short amount of time. Other than that it's really just a slightly tweaked ati driver with a more useful interface and integrated overclocking. Well that's what i think, anyway __________________ < FOLD! < Heatware < EVGA X58, 920, TRUE, 12GB Corsair, 2 x EVGA GTX 285, Enermax Revolution, Velociraptor, 7 64-bit
	QUOTE Thanks

01-23-05, 09:35 AM	#3
IrQ I NEED TO CONTACT LUTAWICASA OR SILVERSINKSAM Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Lancaster, PA	The Omega's generally offer a much better performance rating while achieving the same image quality as the the Catalyst. Omega doesnt write a whole new driver. He generally just takes the most current set and tweaks them to death. They deliver the same quality at higher performance. They do also allow more control over the driver then the catalyst do.
	QUOTE Thanks

01-23-05, 10:05 AM	#4
veryhumid Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: New Hampshire	haha, our first lines are total opposites. I'll be the first to say i don't know if i am right worth a read: http://www.omegadrivers.net/about.php __________________ < FOLD! < Heatware < EVGA X58, 920, TRUE, 12GB Corsair, 2 x EVGA GTX 285, Enermax Revolution, Velociraptor, 7 64-bit
	QUOTE Thanks

01-24-05, 05:19 AM	#5
Marcus Marti Registered Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: the Netherlands	Well, what I want to know is the performance difference if there is any between Catalyst and Omega. I've read about better Aqm scores but is there anyone who has experience with this? I've googled it but I would like to know about individual opinions from people.
	QUOTE Thanks

Omega vs. Catalyst

Internet Services

Website Development

Tech Hardware

01-24-05, 05:28 PM	#6
IrQ I NEED TO CONTACT LUTAWICASA OR SILVERSINKSAM Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Lancaster, PA	I have played around a LOT with the DNA drivers, Catalyst drivers, and Omega drivers. Catalyst are by far the most stable at stock speeds and have the fewest glitches but at the same time deliever the least amount of performance. The DNA and Omega drivers are very mixed. They both offer crisper graphics and better colors then the catalyst with a higher performance rating. Both driver sets also handle overclocking much better then the catlyst drivers also. DNA and Omega drivers give better performance on diffeerent games though. I've seen my performance go through the roof with Doom3 and the DNA's on my radeon 9500 compared to the Omega's. At the same time far cry and Grand theft auto with the Omega's killed the DNA drivers. It depends on what games you play. When you install the DNA drivers they give you a list of games for pre optimized setting and profiles and you can load those set of tweaked drivers for those games. Basically if you arnt playing a game that uses the engine from one of those games listed then use the Omega's. The DNA drivers I believe are also not being made anymore. For a better idea with my radeon 9500 at stock with stock graphics setting off the drivers and base settings for 3dmark2001se I scored 9510 with the catalyst, 10581 with the Omega's and 10398 with the DNA drivers.
	QUOTE Thanks

01-24-05, 06:55 PM	#7
buster Registered Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: jersey coast	omegas #1 in my book,alot better performance in all games and video.
	QUOTE Thanks

01-24-05, 06:56 PM	#8
9mmCensor Disabled Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Banned Camp	Omega's > *
	QUOTE Thanks

01-24-05, 07:04 PM	#9
meionm Member Join Date: Mar 2004	I think omega's drives are optimized for better performance in games, to give better quallity of images. This optimization doesn't show in 3dmark scores
	QUOTE Thanks

01-24-05, 07:49 PM	#11
germanjulian Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Frankfurt/London	catalyst! never noticed any difference and there are benchmarks out there which show that ofter omega drivers are better... but 1 to 2 FPS!?? and image quality better. let someone play on your computer and then ask them which drivers you are using. they wont be able to tell. __________________ /\|\ Asus P5W DH Deluxe, Intel C2D E6600, 4GB Corsair XMS2-6400C4 DDR2, E-VGA GeForce 7800 GT, Asus Xonar D2, 160GB Intel X25-m SSD, 1TB HD, Coolermaster Cosmos, etc. see my website google my name/\|\
	QUOTE Thanks

01-24-05, 07:52 PM	#12
Sentential Contributing Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Jacksonville, FL	Omega drivers are tweeked for increased IQ and picture quality. They are generally much slower than the regular Catalyst drivers but the quality is considerably higher. Its all about balance. If you are an IQ freak definatly use the Omegas. Also the Omegas have several soft-modding features for 9800SE cards and 9500s who do not wish to physically mod their card __________________ Coolermaster 690II Advanced \| Corsair 1000W Creative X-FI Titanium Fatal1ty Pro Intel i5 2500K (4.5ghz @ 1.33v)Corsair H100 PNY GTX 470 SLI SLi Asus P8Z68-V Pro Intel 320 SSD SATAII 2 X 120GB Raid 0 Kingston HyperX (4x4096MB)(8-8-9-28 @ 1600mhz @ 1.5v) Heatware: 13-0-0
	QUOTE Thanks

01-24-05, 08:49 PM	#13
JigPu Inactive Pokémon Moderator Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Vancouver, WA	I've consistanty heard what Sentential is saying about the Omegas. Higher IQ, slightly slower speed. On my system though, I seem to have gotten a descent framerate boost (for just a driver change anyway ) from using them. Mabey it's just me and a few others in the thread, but I definatly see higher performance. The only complaint I have with Omegas is their control panel and tweaky (for me) instalation. I had the hardest time getting the Omegas to install for some reason, and the 3D tab is more confusing than the Catalyst drivers IMHO. JigPu __________________ .... ASRock Z68 Extreme3 Gen3 .... Intel Core i5 2500 ........................ 4 thread ...... 3300 MHz ......... -0.125 V 2x ASUS GTX 560 Ti ............................... 1 GiB ....... 830 MHz ...... 2004 MHz .... G.SKILL Sniper Low Voltage ............. 8 GiB ..... 1600 MHz ............ 1.25 V .... OCZ Vertex 3 ................................. 120 GB ............. nilfs2 ..... Arch Linux .... Kingwin LZP-550 .............................. 550 W ........ 94% Eff. ....... 80+ Plat .... Nocuta NH-D14 ................................ 20 dB ..... 0.35 C°/W ................ 7 V "In order to combat power supply concerns, Nvidia has declared that G80 will be the first graphics card in the world to run entirely off of the souls of dead babies. This will make running the G80 much cheaper for the average end user." "GeForce 8 Series." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 7 Aug 2006, 20:59 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 8 Aug 2006.
	QUOTE Thanks

01-25-05, 02:53 AM	#14
Marcus Marti Registered Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: the Netherlands	Well, this surely helps!!! Thanks everyone for sharing their experience, so far it seems the Omegas are favoured. I'm thinking of switching now myself. But I do agree with Vertical_zer0 on more numbers, that would really be great!
	QUOTE Thanks

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search