Stupid thing about the CCC drivers.

[The Outsider]

On a whim I thought I would try out the CCC version drivers. They
take up a ton of memory compared to the CP drivers so I don't
recommend them. One thing about the control panel in the CCC drivers
is that it is so huge that when you resize your dispaly to 640x480 you
can't access the apply button afterwards to apply any other changes.
Trying to drag the window up to get access to the apply area it just
bounces back down out of sight. Stupid UI design by ATI, IMO. Stupid
of me for installing this shit in the first place. ;-) If we are all
*forced* to go to CCC for the next driver version I forsee a lot of
gnashing of teeth. Give it up ATI, this CCC driver is unecessary
crapola. About to uninstall CCC and that .Net shit too.

 

[First of One]

On a whim I thought I would try out the CCC version drivers. They
take up a ton of memory compared to the CP drivers so I don't
recommend them. One thing about the control panel in the CCC drivers
is that it is so huge that when you resize your dispaly to 640x480 you
can't access the apply button afterwards to apply any other changes.
Trying to drag the window up to get access to the apply area it just
bounces back down out of sight.

I think WinXP lists a display capable of 800x600x256 colors as a
requirement, so the UI design limitation won't affect too many users. Your
sentiments about the heavy memory usage are quite justified, however.

Stupid UI design by ATI, IMO. Stupid
of me for installing this shit in the first place. ;-) If we are all
*forced* to go to CCC for the next driver version I forsee a lot of
gnashing of teeth. Give it up ATI, this CCC driver is unecessary
crapola. About to uninstall CCC and that .Net shit too.

What was that saying again? "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice,
shame on me."

 

[The Outsider]

I think WinXP lists a display capable of 800x600x256 colors as a
requirement, so the UI design limitation won't affect too many users. Your
sentiments about the heavy memory usage are quite justified, however.

Yea, the CP drivers only list 800x600 as the minimum but CCC allowed
to select 640x480. I selected that res so I could set the refresh rate
for it but after going to 640x480 I was unable to apply any changes.

I'm back to the CP drivers now and uninstalled .NET too. My pagefile
usage is now down by about 150mb.

 

[The Outsider]

What was that saying again? "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice,
shame on me."

p.s. Looks like I'm stuck on CAT 5.9 CP version forever because I
believe the next version may be CCC only. My next card will be Nvidia
if that's the case because I absolutely refuse to use these CCC
drivers.

 

[Mike Foss]

p.s. Looks like I'm stuck on CAT 5.9 CP version forever because I
believe the next version may be CCC only. My next card will be Nvidia
if that's the case because I absolutely refuse to use these CCC drivers.

I'll be right behind ya.

Oh, and unless you did a full restore to get rid of dot net, you
only *think* you've uninstalled it. When it installs, it reverts a
whole slew of system files (primarily DirectX files) back to
older versions (e.g. 9.0c to 9.0b), and the damage is not
repaired when it's uninstalled. In addition, it leaves a dozen
or so orphaned DLLs in this folder as well.

Nasty, nasty shit.

 

[AAvK]

What are CP drivers? Never saw that anywhere... Omegas? I am a newby with a
new x800xl, last time I had an ATI vid-card was in my 1st comp in '98, 8mb rage
fury.

 

[Geoff]

On a whim I thought I would try out the CCC version drivers. They
take up a ton of memory compared to the CP drivers so I don't
recommend them. One thing about the control panel in the CCC drivers
is that it is so huge that when you resize your dispaly to 640x480 you
can't access the apply button afterwards to apply any other changes.
Trying to drag the window up to get access to the apply area it just
bounces back down out of sight. Stupid UI design by ATI, IMO. Stupid
of me for installing this shit in the first place. ;-) If we are all
*forced* to go to CCC for the next driver version I forsee a lot of
gnashing of teeth. Give it up ATI, this CCC driver is unecessary
crapola. About to uninstall CCC and that .Net shit too.

currently ati make CCC and CP versoins of drivers
you don't want the CCC ones (for above reasons) you want the CP (control
panel)
generaly the cp ones are 25 meg to download, the CCC ones are 30 meg or so

 

[DDC]

I'll be right behind ya.

Oh, and unless you did a full restore to get rid of dot net, you
only *think* you've uninstalled it. When it installs, it reverts a
whole slew of system files (primarily DirectX files) back to
older versions (e.g. 9.0c to 9.0b), and the damage is not
repaired when it's uninstalled. In addition, it leaves a dozen
or so orphaned DLLs in this folder as well.

Nasty, nasty shit.

I think you've just playing jalous because of a low perfomance pc.
just buy some memory and get a new crt dam it... my Vc performe at the
top notch that it can go whit ccc. panel control panel doesn't give
all of the extra feature like Hdtv and other stuff that i can recall.

at 3dmark05 i'm on the top of the list of default system no over
clocking.


and i'm not on a athlon 64. ;-p.

 

[AAvK]

currently ati make CCC and CP versoins of drivers
you don't want the CCC ones (for above reasons) you want the CP (control panel)
generaly the cp ones are 25 meg to download, the CCC ones are 30 meg or so

ok tanks

 

[The Outsider]

I'll be right behind ya.

Oh, and unless you did a full restore to get rid of dot net, you
only *think* you've uninstalled it. When it installs, it reverts a
whole slew of system files (primarily DirectX files) back to
older versions (e.g. 9.0c to 9.0b), and the damage is not
repaired when it's uninstalled. In addition, it leaves a dozen
or so orphaned DLLs in this folder as well.

Nasty, nasty shit.

You sure about DXc reverting to some DXb files? I just tried to
reinstall DXc and it didn't update any files that I could see. You
know where I can get a list of these orphaned DLL's so that I can
purge them from my system? I've already found the reg entry it leaves
behind and deleted that.

 

[Mike Foss]

You sure about DXc reverting to some DXb files? I just tried to
reinstall DXc and it didn't update any files that I could see. You
know where I can get a list of these orphaned DLL's so that I can
purge them from my system? I've already found the reg entry it leaves
behind and deleted that.

A reinstall of DX9.0c will update some dll files. As for the
orphaned files, sort your \winnt\system32 folder by date and
look for a bunch of files that are different than your original
install date. Pull properties for these files and look for .NET
in the descriptions. Be careful with this, as some of these
dll files are required even after .NET is uninstalled.

 

[PhxGrunge]

A reinstall of DX9.0c will update some dll files. As for the
orphaned files, sort your \winnt\system32 folder by date and
look for a bunch of files that are different than your original
install date. Pull properties for these files and look for .NET
in the descriptions. Be careful with this, as some of these
dll files are required even after .NET is uninstalled.

Reinstalling DirectX will do nothing. It takes the information in the
Windows registry and compares that to the files you are installing, and if
newer version is listed in the registry, it will do nothing.

DirectX will not reinstall without uninstalling the previous version.
However, Microsoft does not put an uninstaller into their DirectX installs.
So, you must uninstall manually, including all registry entries - a real
pain.

The Diag program for DirectX only shows you the versions of the files that
are listed in the registry, not the actual versions of the files loaded on
the computer. Easiest way to fix any DirectX install is to kill windows,
then reinstall Windows, then DirectX.

 

[Tony DiMarzio]

Reinstalling DirectX will do nothing. It takes the information in the
Windows registry and compares that to the files you are installing, and if
newer version is listed in the registry, it will do nothing.

DirectX will not reinstall without uninstalling the previous version.
However, Microsoft does not put an uninstaller into their DirectX
installs. So, you must uninstall manually, including all registry
entries - a real pain.

The Diag program for DirectX only shows you the versions of the files that
are listed in the registry, not the actual versions of the files loaded on
the computer. Easiest way to fix any DirectX install is to kill windows,
then reinstall Windows, then DirectX.

I *highly* doubt that the .NET framework, which has been publicly available
for over 2 years now, cripples a DirectX 9.0c installation in any way,
shape, or form. That sort of bug/issue that would have the whole PC gaming
community in an uproar.

Tony

 

[First of One]

ATi offers two versions of its Catalyst drivers. Contents are the same, but
with different interfaces:

CP - Control Panel
CCC - Catalyst Control Center

These abbreviations are actually used in the driver package filenames.

 

[bandit]

p.s. Looks like I'm stuck on CAT 5.9 CP version forever because I
believe the next version may be CCC only. My next card will be Nvidia
if that's the case because I absolutely refuse to use these CCC
drivers.

Just got Control panel version of 5.10 on ati web site

 

[bandit]

Just got Control panel version of 5.10 on ati web site

forget that .net S*** when they force me to use that to update drivers
im nvidia bound

 

[Mike Foss]

Reinstalling DirectX will do nothing. It takes the information in the
Windows registry and compares that to the files you are installing, and if
newer version is listed in the registry, it will do nothing.

DirectX will not reinstall without uninstalling the previous version.
However, Microsoft does not put an uninstaller into their DirectX installs.
So, you must uninstall manually, including all registry entries - a real
pain.

The Diag program for DirectX only shows you the versions of the files that
are listed in the registry, not the actual versions of the files loaded on
the computer. Easiest way to fix any DirectX install is to kill windows,
then reinstall Windows, then DirectX.

Thanks for the info. Any idea why MS designed it this way?
Doesn't having one set of file versions listed in the registry
and another physically on the hard drive would cause all
sorts of problems?

 

[The Outsider]

A reinstall of DX9.0c will update some dll files. As for the
orphaned files, sort your \winnt\system32 folder by date and
look for a bunch of files that are different than your original
install date. Pull properties for these files and look for .NET
in the descriptions. Be careful with this, as some of these
dll files are required even after .NET is uninstalled.

I think I'll just leave them as is. They are not causing any issues.
Thanks anyway.

 

[The Outsider]

Reinstalling DirectX will do nothing. It takes the information in the
Windows registry and compares that to the files you are installing, and if
newer version is listed in the registry, it will do nothing.

DirectX will not reinstall without uninstalling the previous version.
However, Microsoft does not put an uninstaller into their DirectX installs.
So, you must uninstall manually, including all registry entries - a real
pain.

The Diag program for DirectX only shows you the versions of the files that
are listed in the registry, not the actual versions of the files loaded on
the computer. Easiest way to fix any DirectX install is to kill windows,
then reinstall Windows, then DirectX.

I'm not about to do that. Why would .NET install older file versions
of DX anyway. I don't beleive it unless someone can show me the proof.

 

[The Outsider]

Just got Control panel version of 5.10 on ati web site

Yea, I see them there but haven't installed yet. WTG ATI, never drop
the CP version of your drivers.