graphics bugs with ATI 4800 series (4850/4870/4890)

[ryan80 10]

going back to the catalyst 9.4 drivers did make performance improvements.

[Dogtags 0]

going back to the catalyst 9.4 drivers did make performance improvements.

I tried that as well after you mentioned it and found no difference what so ever, Receiving.... as bad as ever and performance was no better, maybe slightly worse but it was marginal.

[householddog 10]

Even if this is a driver issue, it up to BI to bring it up with ATI, not the other way around.

Its not as if ATI has access to BI source code for testing.

[Skeptic 10]

so its confirmed that windows 7 runs this without any issue? which version of catalyst driver? 9.4 or 9.6?

but is there still huge performance hit in built up area or populated towns?

might download and install windows 7 RC later if this is true.

In my case going from XP SP3 32bit and Cat 9.4 to Win7 RC 64bit with 9.5 Cat cured it. This is definitely driver issue. I'm back on XP now with 9.5 and in few short MP sessions (<=1hr) I had no problems with mem setting on very high (have 1Gb HD4890 here).

[zlitter 0]

hello here i have a saphire 4870 512mb i have same graphiqs error in arma2.

In arma1 i had the same problem whatever ati drivers i used untill i try the 1.15 beta patch that fixed the problem at 100%. i bought the gc in september 2008 stoped playing my favorite game for months estie and now its

the same thing for arma2 :(

[archsceptic. 10]

I've made this post in the AMD forums:

http://forums.amd.com/game/messageview.cfm?catid=233&threadid=115658&enterthread=y

Can everybody who is unhappy about how their ati cards are performing, particularly with ArmA2, pile in there and make your feelings known. My 4870 X2 2Gb has under-performed with just about every game I've played on it.

I think we all know by now ArmA2 has some problems, not least mystifyingly poor performance on top-end systems compared to mid-range systems. BI are bound to blame ati and ati are bound to blame BI - but I think we've said enough in this forum to let it be known how things are - but I haven't yet seen a complaint in the AMD forums.

Come on guy's, get over there and tell them. One catalyst release after another has achieved zilch for me - ever since 8.12. If we dont make a noise they wont get off their backsides and do anything, except fine tuning the next catalyst release for SIMS 3.

Men, attach bayonets!!!

:mad::mad::mad:

[randir14 10]

Actually it probably is ATI's fault. This isn't the only game that ATI cards have problems with. Another recent one was Prototype which was missing a ton of shader effects and shadows on ATI cards.

[Chaz 10]

My specs:

eVGA 780i mobo (P08 BIOS)

2 GB DDR2

ATI 4870HD 512mb

150GB raptor HD

Resolution 1920X1080

When I first played this game, I was using the old 8.9 drivers. Massive texture corruption, frame slowdown, virtually unplayable.

Upgraded to catalyst 9.6 No problems at all, other than some textures "re-drawing" itself as I turn around. My videocard fan speed is set to 45% when gaming.

I see about 30-35 fps on average- 40-55 fps in open less populated areas. 20-25 in dense populated city areas and firefights.

[moondawg 12]

Just thought I`d pop in here.

I run Arma 2 on vista 64, 4850 512 with cat9.5, Q9400@3,4 and 4gb.

Runs smooth enough, and never an artifact.

Now, i wanted to test the performance on XP

So i got cat9.6, and fired up armamark 2.0. Lo and behold, lots of artifacts.

Now, I haven`t develved into this, but I had none on vista at same settings..

[householddog 10]

Guys Ginger has logged this fault in the tracker.

Sign up and vote for this issue to be dealt with here.

http://dev-heaven.net/issues/show/2500

[Sneaky5150 10]

When I set Texture Detail to Very High than I have similar artefacts. When I set Texture Detail to High, than I don't have artefacts but I can see textures and lods redrawings in heavy geometry locations. When I have Texture Detail=Normal and Video Memory=Very High with AA=Disabled than I receive HUGE performance increase and it removes constant and annoying texture redrawing when I turn around. I have good performance and I don't have any artefacts. I just want to note that my video card has 1Gb of memory installed.

ARMA2 option :

1920*1200

Fillrate - 100%

Texture Detail - Normal

Video Memory - Very High

Anisotropic Filtering - High

AA - Disabled

Terrain Detail - High

Objects Detail - High

Shadow Detail - High

PostProcess Effects- Disabled

Visual Distance - 3000

Thanks for posting that. That seems to have worked, so far.

Still, would like to run crossfire or SLI. And, make a decision one way or the other which board to build out. Right now it's looking like nvidia unless BI or ATI address this issue.

Please BI? I'll give ya 50.00 dollars! Wait....I already did! Just kiddin!

[kklownboy 43]

Thanks for posting that. That seems to have worked, so far.

Still, would like to run crossfire or SLI. And, make a decision one way or the other which board to build out. Right now it's looking like nvidia unless BI or ATI address this issue.

Please BI? I'll give ya 50.00 dollars! Wait....I already did! Just kiddin!

i use a pair of 4870x2s and have none of the issues that are in this thread... game runs good. vista64 with the -winxp flag and using crysis.exe for the Cf strobe, tones it down.

[mr.g-c 6]

Hi i have a HD4890 oc'ed Toxic Model and i can put all on very-high, besides Anti-Aliasing (set to Normal on 1920x1200) and Objects-Detail (High) .

I have none of the texture Problems, but i can only play the game with the "-winxp" switch in my shortcut, which gave me overall 5-10FPS less, because i have Vista64, 8GB Ram.

So when i put out 4GB Ram of my System and play without that -winXP switch, i get 5-10FPS more which is essential in that game to stay above 25-30 FPS....

Im running it with the latest Catalyst 9.6, but also the Previous ones did not help at all.

I pray that this will be fixed with the next patch, otherwise its just lame.... everytime the same with BIS games and good hardware..... *rolleyes*

[Alex72 1]

Im about to buy the 4890. I really hope i will get away without problems. Just want to step up in resoultion and textures to high - then im happy. Bit scared though reading about artifacts...

Alex

Edited July 8, 2009 by Alex72

[kevbaz 0]

I have a XFX HD 4850 XXX Edition 512MB, 2gb ram, AMD Phenom X4 9950 Windows Vista and i have no such artifacts or graphical glitches.....

[BLKSmoke 10]

I have 2 x 4890 (although Crossfire is not working... yet) and I get OK performance. My in game settings:

Quality Preference: Very High

Visibility: 3600

Resolution: 1920x1200

3D Resolution: 100%

Texture: Very High

Video Memory: Very High

An. Filtering: Normal

An. Aliasing: Normal

Terrain: Very High

Object: Very High

Shadow: Very High

Post processing: Disabled

Ratio: 16:10

Results: averaging 27 FPS (demo benchmark)

The rest of my hardware is mentioned in my sig. Although I am now testing Windows7 (64bit) but have found absolutely no difference in gaming performance over Vista (32bit).

Naturally turning some settings down a bit means more frames per second - but I like it to look pretty... I'm still searching for that 'happy medium'.

I'm really hoping ATI get some 'optimised' drivers out for this game soon so I can use my second GPU.

[demowhc 10]

crossfire works if you add -winxp switch to the command line of desktop icon

[SnR 1]

Nvidia just came to the party and brought out a SLI patch for Arma II, lets hope ATI catch up.

[Sneaky5150 10]

i use a pair of 4870x2s and have none of the issues that are in this thread... game runs good. vista64 with the -winxp flag and using crysis.exe for the Cf strobe, tones it down.

Which would indicate it's a XP problem. Although, earlier in the thread some have the same issues using vista. Who wants to upgrade to Vista now, w/ windows 7 coming.

Going to try crossfire, hoping to god the 2nd card arrives with the same bios.

[moondawg 12]

Thought I'd share some more of my experiences with this

I ran arma on vista64, running Armamark 2 tests

My specs were: 4850 512 with cat 9.6, Q9400@3,4 4gb800 ram, Asus p5q-e

armamark 2912, normal with low AA, PP off.

All good, except a little to be desired in fps :/

Since i dualboot to XP(32), i ran it there too. Cat 9.6

20-25% better, armamark 3449 with same settings.

EXCEPT the artifacts made it unplayable..

So I got myself a 4890 1gb :D

In Vista64 i got 3398 score at above settings, and little less (3247) at High.

A little less than I excpected from the beast.

In XP I didn't even bother to check the results, the artifacts came immediately...

So I guess the problem lies in ATI's drivers for xp. Or how BIS code interacts with them.

[thr0tt 12]

Just tried the latest RC of the drivers from ATI and ArmA II is still incompatible with XP and ATI GPU's on some systems.

http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=33948552 if anyone wishes to try but pointless exercise until BIS fix the game.

[BLKSmoke 10]

crossfire works if you add -winxp switch to the command line of desktop icon

Thanks for the tip - but I have tried this along with renaming the exe, and i get no performance difference at all (still ~27FPS). I also get this same FPS if I have only one card in the system.

Guess i'll just have to wait patiently for patches. :(

[Horus 83]

ATI 9.7 (8.630) Vista/Win7 WHQL

ATI 9.7 (8.631) XP/XP64 WHQL

[thr0tt 12]

ATI 9.7 (8.630) Vista/Win7 WHQL

ATI 9.7 (8.631) XP/XP64 WHQL

You mean http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=33948551 and http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=33948552 where you got those links from ? May be useful for people to have a look to see if anyone els has posted responses to the original source.

You could also go http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=98785 or http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?p=3198865 - amazing he gets no recognition here when you folk just post the download links. Just doing my bit for a very helpful leaker of drivers.

[Horus 83]

All this helpful leakers have some contacts with ATI or nVidia :bounce3: so if some1 wants medal go to Olympics :D