Saw this at RAGE3D - any truth to them?

http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthre...eadid=33716791

It says:

First, the Catalyst 3.8's seem to be causing the core to overheat
by between 8 and 12 degrees, which has caused hardware failures
in the cards themselves due to overheating. This did not happen
in any earlier version of the Catalyst drivers.

Second, the Catalyst 3.8's seem to have a bug in some systems
that allows the driver to process the SECONDARY adapter settings
when a game is started and tries to switch to the resolution and
refresh rate specified in the program.

Normally, the card is limited by the INF file settings for the
PRIMARY adapter, so that no resolution or refresh rate is
attempted that is beyond the capability of the monitor hardware.
But in the 3.8's, it seems to be processing the SECONDARY adapter
settings first. In a system without a monitor plugged into the
second adapter, there is no INF file limiting refresh rates and
resolutions, so, the system is trying to force refresh rates and
resolutions beyond what the monitor on the PRIMARY adapter is
capable of.

So instead of having the monitor "flicker" once when it switches
to the desired resolution/refresh, monitors are "flickering"
between 4 and 8 times, with resolutions and refresh rates that
are beyond the capability of the actual monitor.

As a result, some monitors have been damaged, while others have
blinked out and recovered. Some users monitors are under warranty
and can be RMA'd, but for those who don't have a monitor under
warranty, their monitor is damaged and they must buy a new one.

For those lucky enough to have had their monitor survive the
process, dropping back down to an earlier Catalyst seems to solve
the problem completely.

It may be tied to the VPU Recover feature or the built in
Overclocking support, both of which were introduced in Catalyst
3.8, but nobody can seem to get verification from ATI.

On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 00:07:45 GMT, "Paul D. Sullivan"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Saw this at RAGE3D - any truth to them?

I don't know but I'm uninstalling the 3.8 drivers pronto.

My technical opinion.... F*CK the 3.8's!!!! Burn them!!

--
Tony DiMarzio
(E-Mail Removed)
(E-Mail Removed)
"Replicant" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 00:07:45 GMT, "Paul D. Sullivan"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
> >Saw this at RAGE3D - any truth to them?
>
> I don't know but I'm uninstalling the 3.8 drivers pronto.

"Paul D. Sullivan" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:ld0jb.27352$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Saw this at RAGE3D - any truth to them?
>
> http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthre...eadid=33716791
>
> It says:
>
> First, the Catalyst 3.8's seem to be causing the core to overheat
> by between 8 and 12 degrees, which has caused hardware failures
> in the cards themselves due to overheating. This did not happen
> in any earlier version of the Catalyst drivers.

That could explain why my system has suddenly started rebooting when playing
games.

>
> Second, the Catalyst 3.8's seem to have a bug in some systems
> that allows the driver to process the SECONDARY adapter settings
> when a game is started and tries to switch to the resolution and
> refresh rate specified in the program.

And that could explain why when I change res in Halo the game picks the
wrong refresh rate.

Note to self. Always stay one step behind in driver revision. 3.7 will be
going on tonight.

>
> Normally, the card is limited by the INF file settings for the
> PRIMARY adapter, so that no resolution or refresh rate is
> attempted that is beyond the capability of the monitor hardware.
> But in the 3.8's, it seems to be processing the SECONDARY adapter
> settings first. In a system without a monitor plugged into the
> second adapter, there is no INF file limiting refresh rates and
> resolutions, so, the system is trying to force refresh rates and
> resolutions beyond what the monitor on the PRIMARY adapter is
> capable of.
>
> So instead of having the monitor "flicker" once when it switches
> to the desired resolution/refresh, monitors are "flickering"
> between 4 and 8 times, with resolutions and refresh rates that
> are beyond the capability of the actual monitor.
>
> As a result, some monitors have been damaged, while others have
> blinked out and recovered. Some users monitors are under warranty
> and can be RMA'd, but for those who don't have a monitor under
> warranty, their monitor is damaged and they must buy a new one.
>
> For those lucky enough to have had their monitor survive the
> process, dropping back down to an earlier Catalyst seems to solve
> the problem completely.
>
> It may be tied to the VPU Recover feature or the built in
> Overclocking support, both of which were introduced in Catalyst
> 3.8, but nobody can seem to get verification from ATI.
>
>

Hi Paul,

thanks for the heads-up. On page 3 of that thread someone points to a thread
on Driverheaven regarding a statement from ATI if I understand this
correctly, but I can't read that thread as I'm not registered on DH.

I went back to the 3.7 after some brief testing as they seemed a tad slower
than the 3.7's in N2k3 and IL2-FB. Also, the graphics quality didn't improve
any, I wasn't even sure whether it had perhaps deteriorated a bit in the
areas further away from the viewer.

I didn't see that multiple flicker issue, and I've read others reporting
that the flickering got better for them - I don't know what to think.
Maybe it works differently on different systems.

Achim




"Paul D. Sullivan" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:ld0jb.27352$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Saw this at RAGE3D - any truth to them?
>
> http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthre...eadid=33716791
>
> It says:
>
> First, the Catalyst 3.8's seem to be causing the core to overheat
> by between 8 and 12 degrees, which has caused hardware failures
> in the cards themselves due to overheating. This did not happen
> in any earlier version of the Catalyst drivers.
>
> Second, the Catalyst 3.8's seem to have a bug in some systems
> that allows the driver to process the SECONDARY adapter settings
> when a game is started and tries to switch to the resolution and
> refresh rate specified in the program.
>
> Normally, the card is limited by the INF file settings for the
> PRIMARY adapter, so that no resolution or refresh rate is
> attempted that is beyond the capability of the monitor hardware.
> But in the 3.8's, it seems to be processing the SECONDARY adapter
> settings first. In a system without a monitor plugged into the
> second adapter, there is no INF file limiting refresh rates and
> resolutions, so, the system is trying to force refresh rates and
> resolutions beyond what the monitor on the PRIMARY adapter is
> capable of.
>
> So instead of having the monitor "flicker" once when it switches
> to the desired resolution/refresh, monitors are "flickering"
> between 4 and 8 times, with resolutions and refresh rates that
> are beyond the capability of the actual monitor.
>
> As a result, some monitors have been damaged, while others have
> blinked out and recovered. Some users monitors are under warranty
> and can be RMA'd, but for those who don't have a monitor under
> warranty, their monitor is damaged and they must buy a new one.
>
> For those lucky enough to have had their monitor survive the
> process, dropping back down to an earlier Catalyst seems to solve
> the problem completely.
>
> It may be tied to the VPU Recover feature or the built in
> Overclocking support, both of which were introduced in Catalyst
> 3.8, but nobody can seem to get verification from ATI.
>
>

ATI's first response on Warp2Search has been to blame
soft-modders. But there are more people than soft-modders who
have had their cards fried.

The "Blinking" deal is frying monitors. It cycles through some
half-dozen unsupported refresh rates and resolutions before
trying to lock in the one that works.

That does not happen with Catalyst 3.5.

Must suck losing a monitor because of crappy drivers.

> Hi Paul,
>
> thanks for the heads-up. On page 3 of that thread someone
> points to a thread on Driverheaven regarding a statement from
> ATI if I understand this correctly, but I can't read that
> thread as I'm not registered on DH.
>
> I went back to the 3.7 after some brief testing as they seemed
> a tad slower than the 3.7's in N2k3 and IL2-FB. Also, the
> graphics quality didn't improve any, I wasn't even sure
> whether it had perhaps deteriorated a bit in the areas further
> away from the viewer.
>
> I didn't see that multiple flicker issue, and I've read others
> reporting that the flickering got better for them - I don't
> know what to think.
> Maybe it works differently on different systems.
>
> Achim
>
>
>
>
> "Paul D. Sullivan" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:ld0jb.27352$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Saw this at RAGE3D - any truth to them?
>>
>>
http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthre...eadid=33716791
>>
>> It says:
>>
>> First, the Catalyst 3.8's seem to be causing the core to
>> overheat
>> by between 8 and 12 degrees, which has caused hardware
>> failures
>> in the cards themselves due to overheating. This did not
>> happen
>> in any earlier version of the Catalyst drivers.
>>
>> Second, the Catalyst 3.8's seem to have a bug in some systems
>> that allows the driver to process the SECONDARY adapter
>> settings
>> when a game is started and tries to switch to the resolution
>> and
>> refresh rate specified in the program.
>>
>> Normally, the card is limited by the INF file settings for the
>> PRIMARY adapter, so that no resolution or refresh rate is
>> attempted that is beyond the capability of the monitor
>> hardware.
>> But in the 3.8's, it seems to be processing the SECONDARY
>> adapter settings first. In a system without a monitor plugged
>> into the
>> second adapter, there is no INF file limiting refresh rates
>> and resolutions, so, the system is trying to force refresh
>> rates and resolutions beyond what the monitor on the PRIMARY
>> adapter is
>> capable of.
>>
>> So instead of having the monitor "flicker" once when it
>> switches
>> to the desired resolution/refresh, monitors are "flickering"
>> between 4 and 8 times, with resolutions and refresh rates that
>> are beyond the capability of the actual monitor.
>>
>> As a result, some monitors have been damaged, while others
>> have
>> blinked out and recovered. Some users monitors are under
>> warranty
>> and can be RMA'd, but for those who don't have a monitor under
>> warranty, their monitor is damaged and they must buy a new
>> one.
>>
>> For those lucky enough to have had their monitor survive the
>> process, dropping back down to an earlier Catalyst seems to
>> solve
>> the problem completely.
>>
>> It may be tied to the VPU Recover feature or the built in
>> Overclocking support, both of which were introduced in
>> Catalyst
>> 3.8, but nobody can seem to get verification from ATI.

"Joachim Trensz" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bmj3gs$ndlg7$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi Paul,
>
> thanks for the heads-up. On page 3 of that thread someone points to a
thread
> on Driverheaven regarding a statement from ATI if I understand this
> correctly, but I can't read that thread as I'm not registered on DH.
>
> I went back to the 3.7 after some brief testing as they seemed a tad
slower
> than the 3.7's in N2k3 and IL2-FB. Also, the graphics quality didn't
improve
> any, I wasn't even sure whether it had perhaps deteriorated a bit in the
> areas further away from the viewer.
>
> I didn't see that multiple flicker issue, and I've read others reporting
> that the flickering got better for them - I don't know what to think.
> Maybe it works differently on different systems.
>
> Achim
>
>
I just installed a 9800 Pro along with the 3.8 drivers and this talk of the
core overheating and monitor failures is making me nervous. Being a new ATI
user, I gather uninstalling the 3.8 drivers also requires uninstalling the
3.8 Control Panel seeing has the 3.7's has it's own Control Panel. Is this
the correct procedure?

Thanks

I did uninstall the 3.8 control panel as well when going back to 3.7. I
don't know if that would have been necessary or not, but it didn't do any
damage for me either.

Achim


"RobB" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:zRajb.340895$(E-Mail Removed)...
....
> I just installed a 9800 Pro along with the 3.8 drivers and this talk of
the
> core overheating and monitor failures is making me nervous. Being a new
ATI
> user, I gather uninstalling the 3.8 drivers also requires uninstalling the
> 3.8 Control Panel seeing has the 3.7's has it's own Control Panel. Is
this
> the correct procedure?

Yep, I saw the remark on Warp2search, but the postings on rage3d clearly
contradict that assertion made on warp2search.

I'm going to stay with the 3.8. I think there will be a CAT 3.8a or 3.9
quickly.

Achim


"Paul D. Sullivan" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:Kx9jb.22479$(E-Mail Removed)...
> ATI's first response on Warp2Search has been to blame
> soft-modders. But there are more people than soft-modders who
> have had their cards fried.
>
> The "Blinking" deal is frying monitors. It cycles through some
> half-dozen unsupported refresh rates and resolutions before
> trying to lock in the one that works.
>
> That does not happen with Catalyst 3.5.
>
> Must suck losing a monitor because of crappy drivers.