Inconsistent behaviour v.0.23 to v.0.24

[Drash]

Hi, I've posted this as a passing comment elsewhere, but 0.23 of ATITool gives 239 fps on the 3D view, whereas 0.24 gives a maximum of just 170 fps. I'm not sure whether this is classed as a bug, but it certainly is an inconsistency which may point to something more important, given the nature of the utility. This was using Catalyst 5.5 (but the 239 max fps was also seen with 5.1 - 5.4 if not earlier as well).

Regards.

Sapphire 9800 Pro 128MB
ASUS K8VSEDX with Sempron 3100+
XPPro SP2
2 x 512 DDR400 Crucial RAM
Everything stock, no o/c
no load: ambient + 5-10 Celsius
max load: ambient + 15-20 Celsius

 

[W1zzard]

does atitool work worse for you now?

 

[Drash]

I don't understand.
I'm currently using Cat 5.5 as 5.6 causes crashes in World Of Warcraft and Max Payne 2. ATITool works, in that it doesn't do anything bad to my system, but 0.24 gives a much slower frame rate in 3D view than 0.23 did (I just use it as a benchmark to check whether tthe latest cat release is as fast as the previous). I'm just thinking that given this frame rate is used in part of the overclocking routine, whether something is wrong there.

Regards.

 

[stordoff]

this tool should not be used as a benchmark as code changes can change the frame rate, ie to make artifact scanning more effective

In order to benchmark I recommend download the free version of 3DMark (Could take a while on dial up)

 

[Drash]

Fair comment - it certainly is not useful to compare between versions. I was trying to track down problems that were eventually found to be caused by Cat 5.6, and was confused/side-tracked by the release of a new version of ATITool - I hadn't thought of artifact checking code affecting the fps. Apologies.