Some people claim that Omega drivers bring a lot.I can surely say that this is not the case here. I had one flight saved in my flights as a test. I had original ATI drivers installed - was getting 29fps stable when loaded the flight. Then I installed Omega Drivers - 24-25 varying. And then I reinstalled original drivers - 29fps again. And considering picture quality, the same.Thought I'd share this with you.

Word Not Allowed,I recently changed my FX5200 with a promissing Asus ATI 9600XT 128MB. The first thing I've got into was to change and test various drivers for their performance and of course omega drivers was in the list. I was dissapointed a lot with the last version of omega drivers since every time I had a freeze on my system when runing FS9 and the only recovery was to make a manual restart of the computer. Puting back the original asus ATI drivers and everything back to normal again. So, omega drivers is not the case so far for me either.Vassilis

No problems here, none, nadda - the Omega 2.5.22 drivers for my Saphire ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB have proved absolutely rock solid since installation mid Feb. Image quality and general performance are superb on my Digital Hyundai TFT LCD 17".Remember, the author tweaks them for quality rather than performance although I have to say there ain't much lacking in the latter department as far as I am concerned.Mike

"Remember, the author tweaks them for quality rather than performance although I have to say there ain't much lacking in the latter department as far as I am concerned."Yep. I, too, have been very happy with the Omega's.

I have tried several of these "Omega" drivers and I honestly don't notice any difference at all. Sure, I didn't benchmark them, but "smoothness" and image quality was the same.In the past, they were more useful - Omega was able to "fix" ATI driver bugs by mixing and matching components from different driver versions into a stable package. Nowadays, AIT drivers are so stable that it's not really needed.

"Sure, I didn't benchmark them, but "smoothness" and image quality was the same.".......I think, once again, comments like this have to be regarded as being system dependent. I can state with absolute certainty that the 2.5.22 driver set are one of the smoother performers in the Omega series thus far....on my system, at least.MikeP4 2.4GHz (400FSB), 1Gig PC2100 DDR Crucial, ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128MB (Omega 2.5.22), Hyundai ImageQuest Q17 17" Monitor (1280x1024x32), Gigabyte GA-8IRXP MoBo, Ultra-Quiet PSU 400W, WinXP Home (SP1), DirectX 9.0b, AGP Aperture = 256MB

My last three sets of drivers have been Omega. They're as good or better than the Cats as I prefer a driver tweaked for Image Quality. They've all delivered that and I prefer the old style control panel which Omega has been using. I'm currently running the 2.5.04 (Cat3.10version) I use Omega drivers mostly for their ease of install. A simple double click on the exe followed by a restart and I'm back in business. It's hard to screw that up and believe me, I could in a minute given more than one or two simple steps to follow.