Ok, I am wondering why people make such a big deal about using the ATI drivers on ATI's site and not the ones you get from Windows Update.

I am using Windows XP w/ SP2 and the latest drivers from Windows Update and they appear to be perfectly fine performance wise and stuff.

So what is superior about the Omega's, DNA's, or "Official" Catalyst?

Is that there that much better performance?

From what I have seen the latest Omega's and Catalyst 4.12 Betas have texture problems in Half-Life 2s and both Omega's and DNA's have some tricky installations.

So, is it really necessary to use these other drivers?

Thanks in advance,
Trizum

Drivers from ATI might be newer than the ones from Windows update website. Of course, that doens't mean it's better but hopefully with each new release, they address the bugs from their older drivers. As far as the Omega and other drivers go, they are hacked versions of the OEM ATI drivers. I don't use them but others say that they are better for OCing. I personally don't trust them to be stable enough.

as far as i know, the drivers you get off the windows site do not support openGL.. so when you have a default installation, you cannot play 3D games until you get the proper drivers off the ati/nvidia site.

I've had some rather unpleasant experiences getting drivers from Windows Update. I steer clear and go straight to the manufacturers site!

ATI's goal when releasing an update, is to correct problems and improve some code. Microsoft has to quality test it against their own quality chart, and will not modify the update, just approve it. So, in due time, the drivers from winupdate will be the same ones, with issues resolved, only a month late.

So do you want your bug fixes now, or when Microsoft says so?

Another thing I have noticed with the Windows Update drivers, is that the screen is absolutely messed up when scrolling websites