[Davros]

@ist have nv finally fixed "only show software installed on this machine" yet (in the profiles page)
note to nvidia "bang gunship elite is not barbies riding club"

@malo on mine it leaves a 200mb c:\amd folder
it also leaves 2 folders in program files
It also leaves behind a huge amount of registry entries according to cc cleaner

next time you upgrade uninstall, reboot cancel new hardware detected and before you install the new cats take a look


ps:
12.8 = 101.8mb
12.9 = 178mb
12.9 with dot net 4 support = 219 mb (are they including .net 4 with it ?) still better than nv at 217mb

[imaxx]

...well, suggest AMD to install and use C++ Rad Studio XE2...
This is an example of what you can do fast&easy.

A control panel like CCC can be quickly re-engineered and replaced with ease with it. Really, if you have ever developed in Delphi, it takes very little to redo all the GUI.
Never understood the reason why companies use c# behemoth (except for fast prototyping or if you are compelled to MSVC compiler only...)

[swaaye]

Maybe they could also pretend they need to make it run ultra fast even on Atom.

[madyasiwi]

Originally Posted by Davros

12.9 with dot net 4 support = 219 mb (are they including .net 4 with it ?) still better than nv at 217mb

To be fair NV driver cover DX9 thru DX11 hardware in single package, as opposed to AMD DX11 only. Plus physics engine, 3D stereo middleware and extra compute API bundling. And not to mention damn fast download server

[HMBR]

Originally Posted by karlotta

@HBMR; That is a old looking CCC, must be a XP version? (i see its 12.9).


The speed of my CCC opening is 1 sec. I dont use the profile system, so no info there, but the app works fine. Absolutely a non issue here.

yes, the XP versions looks like this and have some missing functionality...


apart from that, in newer drivers AMD even removed the OpenCL support,

[CarstenS]

Originally Posted by madyasiwi

To be fair NV driver cover DX9 thru DX11 hardware in single package, as opposed to AMD DX11 only. Plus physics engine, 3D stereo middleware and extra compute API bundling. And not to mention damn fast download server

I just downloaded 12.9 Beta with 10,0 Megabytes per second - I don't think that's too shabby. And AMD includes the necessary OpenCL package as well.

[I.S.T.]

Originally Posted by Davros

@ist have nv finally fixed "only show software installed on this machine" yet (in the profiles page)
note to nvidia "bang gunship elite is not barbies riding club"

@malo on mine it leaves a 200mb c:\amd folder
it also leaves 2 folders in program files
It also leaves behind a huge amount of registry entries according to cc cleaner

next time you upgrade uninstall, reboot cancel new hardware detected and before you install the new cats take a look


ps:
12.8 = 101.8mb
12.9 = 178mb
12.9 with dot net 4 support = 219 mb (are they including .net 4 with it ?) still better than nv at 217mb

I'm not sure what the bug is? When I checked it, it's not listing all my games, and is listing some things that were uninstalled(I am presuming that they left traces behind).

[Davros]

Originally Posted by I.S.T.

When I checked it, it's not listing all my games,

Thats the bug, it didnt list games I had that had profiles available, last time I tried it it only listed about 10 games and also listed some games that I've never owned.
and here's the thing, for the profile to activate it has to recognize the game. Makes you wonder is it recognizing the game but not listing it, or is it not recognizing it ?

[hoom]

12.9beta CCC opens in about 4 secs for me.

[Miksu]

Originally Posted by Grall

It's horrifically bloated for the actual work it accomplishes (basically all it does is changing some registry keys) and is just generally cumbersome and quirky.

It's getting better though: first versions of CCC forced me to open some TCP ports from my firewall because it used some strange socked based data transfer between the different components of the program.

As mentioned before, it's not .NET, it's how you use it. It's the de facto choice for the current Windows applications. This may change now somewhat with Windows 8 when C++ has a modern way of building UIs.

[Silent_Buddha]

Originally Posted by karlotta

@HBMR; That is a old looking CCC, must be a XP version? (i see its 12.9).


The speed of my CCC opening is 1 sec. I dont use the profile system, so no info there, but the app works fine. Absolutely a non issue here.

Yeah just tested it on my system. And ~1 sec. here as well. I can't remember when it used to take more than 5 sec. I know it took a while when it was first introduced. But it's been years since it's taken longer than 1-3 seconds to load.

I should try it out on my old Core Duo (not Core 2, but Core only ) notebook and see how long it takes on that.

Regards,
SB

[Grall]

Originally Posted by Silent_Buddha

But it's been years since it's taken longer than 1-3 seconds to load.

There's a chance a lot is simply precached in memory by some resident process on startup, thus cutting down on loadtime when the user tries to bring up the window. The app itself is still humongously huge compared to the tiny work it accomplishes, so it'd be a short leap of imagination to think that if you were to load it completely from scratch it wouldn't take just one second.

[Alexko]

Originally Posted by Grall

There's a chance a lot is simply precached in memory by some resident process on startup, thus cutting down on loadtime when the user tries to bring up the window. The app itself is still humongously huge compared to the tiny work it accomplishes, so it'd be a short leap of imagination to think that if you were to load it completely from scratch it wouldn't take just one second.

Yep. It can take about 1~3 seconds to load if recently closed, more than 30 seconds otherwise.


Note that this is on a Core 2 Duo system with a relatively old Win7 install, lots of applications running, and a slightly fragmented mechanical drive. But still…

[DeF]

It takes about 20 sec for me to load CCC for the first time and like 1-2sec for reopen. The first startup time was so annoying i had to remove it from loading at windows start.
NV drivers are much better in that regard. But, i like the layout and design of CCC more. Seems to be more clear and simple to use.
As a side note i dont understand why more and more modern programs are missing an option to prevent them loading at start up. Always have to do it from msconfig.

[karlotta]

OK, still on the time it takes to open. Reboot, CCC is in the tray, right clk choose Catalyst, 1~ sec. Or do you not have the CCC in the tray? Cache is good, dont fear the cache.

[Silent_Buddha]

That's my experience as well, which is why I find the 20-30 seconds so startling. It can't even be that it does it on Windows start otherwise my Windows boot time would double or triple. (Right now boot time is about 10-15 seconds after POST).

And since I almost never change graphics settings, everytime I open CCC it's the "first time" on my systems.

Just tried it on my WHS server with far lower specs. Slower and with a 5 year old mechanical drive. And it was still just 4-5 seconds on there.

I imagine on my old Core Duo notebook it'll probably take over 5 seconds, but probably less than 10. So yes, in that case, the old CP "might" save some time. Then again to access the old CP you had to drill down through multiple windows just to get to it.

And this is all assuming that you don't just right click on the CCC icon in the task tray for 3D settings, which is almost instant. Not something that was available with the old CP.

Regards,
SB

[itsmydamnation]

first opening takes 2 seconds for me but im running pretty old at the moment (12.1)