NVIDIA & Vista Driver News

jag0 said:
lol..I dunno for me it just felt a lot more stable and everything seemed to run much smoother (much like how it feels when I use WinXP x64.)
Click to expand...
Without empirical evidence, I wouldn't call that a "huge difference".

The only notable thing I see in Vista 64 (iirc) is the (for lack of my memory of the exact term) the dynamic entry points code loads into, so that hackers cannot target code based on the idea that it will load into the same memory addresses every single time.

Watching MS' XP-64 troubles, Vista 64 will be more of a wait than even my migration to Vista 32-bit will be. I just don't trust that good driver development and 32-bit app compatibility will be there. I hope they prove me wrong, though.
 
Kyle could you please ask one of your connections at Nvidia when we will be getting the
ability to overclock the stream procs independantly of the other gpu clock domains on the
8800 series ? You mentioned in the first review (which was great and very well done) that
shortly after release Nvidia would release software utilties that would allow this.Thanks :)
 
Since there's no software overclocking with Vista, I hit my BIOS clocks on my 8800GTS to 621core/1460sp(shader)/2000ram, runs great right now :D! It was quick and easy. I would like to see software overclocking options, though.
 
IMHO -

The WHQL RTM Vista Nvidia drivers blow ass for the 7800 series. If you don't believe me, install Vista and try playing a game that stresses the GPU and post your FPS here..... I get about 60-70% of the FPS I see with the latest XP driver.

The reality is that they have no real interest in supporting the 7x series video card owners. They have had Vista for months and could have easily developed a DX9/7x series driver for Vista for 90% of the install base.

However, this is hard to do when all of your effort is put into the development of the 8x series hardware and will now be put into the development of the new drivers supporting DX 10. The new drivers will be backwards compatible with the 7x series cards as are all the unified drivers, but don't expect performance on par with Windows XP for the 7x series cards any time soon. The focus will be on the 8x series cards which is what they want you to run out and buy!

I hope they prove me wrong.
 
At exactly 12:00 midnight, the Microsoft website was updated to reflect that Vista is now shipping, and you can in fact purchase it online from the Windows Marketplace right now and have it shipped to you, or if you are purchasing an upgrade you can even download it.

So given that milestone, maybe it was wishful thinking on my part, or just plain stupidity, to think that nVidia might have an 8800 series Vista Driver available for download now. Sadly, there is still no joy to be found on the nVidia website.
 
JethroXP said:
At exactly 12:00 midnight, the Microsoft website was updated to reflect that Vista is now shipping, and you can in fact purchase it online from the Windows Marketplace right now and have it shipped to you, or if you are purchasing an upgrade you can even download it.

So given that milestone, maybe it was wishful thinking on my part, or just plain stupidity, to think that nVidia might have an 8800 series Vista Driver available for download now. Sadly, there is still no joy to be found on the nVidia website.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking "Just plain stupidity"

32-bit: http://www.nvidia.com/object/winvista_x86_100.54.html
64-bit: http://www.nvidia.com/object/winvista_x64_100.54.html
 
GilmourD said:
Interesting... I can find it in their driver browser for the 8 series... But the rest of the cards still only list the older drivers. I'm at work at the moment, so I can't download these drivers and take them apart... But does the .inf show the 7900GS? :)
Click to expand...



These drivers support all cards. At least all of the DX9 cards (according to the download page).

<EDIT> Checked the inf:

Code: 
[NVIDIA.Mfg.NTx86.6.0]
&#37;NVIDIA_BR02.DEV_00F1.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00F1
%NVIDIA_BR02.DEV_00F2.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00F2
%NVIDIA_BR02.DEV_00F3.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00F3
%NVIDIA_BR02.DEV_00F4.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00F4
%NVIDIA_BR02.DEV_00F5.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00F5
%NVIDIA_BR02.DEV_00F6.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00F6
%NVIDIA_BR02.DEV_00F8.1% = nv_NV3x_DOEB, PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00F8
%NVIDIA_BR02.DEV_00F9.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00F9
%NVIDIA_BR02.DEV_02E0.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_02E0
%NVIDIA_BR02.DEV_02E1.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_02E1
%NVIDIA_BR02.DEV_02E2.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_02E2
%NVIDIA_C51.DEV_0240.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0240
%NVIDIA_C51.DEV_0241.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0241
%NVIDIA_C51.DEV_0242.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0242
%NVIDIA_C51.DEV_0245.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0245
%NVIDIA_C61.DEV_03D0.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_03D0
%NVIDIA_C61.DEV_03D1.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_03D1
%NVIDIA_C61.DEV_03D2.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_03D2
%NVIDIA_C61.DEV_03D5.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_03D5
%NVIDIA_G70.DEV_0090.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0090
%NVIDIA_G70.DEV_0091.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0091
%NVIDIA_G70.DEV_0092.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0092
%NVIDIA_G70.DEV_009D.1%  = nv_NV3x_DOEB, PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_009D
%NVIDIA_G71.DEV_0290.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0290
%NVIDIA_G71.DEV_0291.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0291
%NVIDIA_G71.DEV_0292.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0292
%NVIDIA_G71.DEV_0293.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0293
%NVIDIA_G71.DEV_0294.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0294
%NVIDIA_G71.DEV_0295.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0295
%NVIDIA_G71.DEV_029C.1%  = nv_NV3x_DOEB, PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_029C
%NVIDIA_G71.DEV_029D.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_029D
%NVIDIA_G71.DEV_029E.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_029E
%NVIDIA_G71.DEV_029F.1%  = nv_NV3x_DOEB, PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_029F
%NVIDIA_G72.DEV_01D1.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_01D1
%NVIDIA_G72.DEV_01D3.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_01D3
%NVIDIA_G72.DEV_01DD.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_01DD
%NVIDIA_G72.DEV_01DE.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_01DE
%NVIDIA_G72.DEV_01DF.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_01DF
%NVIDIA_G73.DEV_0390.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0390
%NVIDIA_G73.DEV_0391.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0391
%NVIDIA_G73.DEV_0392.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0392
%NVIDIA_G73.DEV_0393.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0393
%NVIDIA_G73.DEV_0394.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0394
%NVIDIA_G73.DEV_0395.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0395
%NVIDIA_G73.DEV_039E.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_039E
%NVIDIA_G80.DEV_0191.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0191
%NVIDIA_G80.DEV_0193.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0193
%NVIDIA_NV40.DEV_0040.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0040
%NVIDIA_NV40.DEV_0041.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0041
%NVIDIA_NV40.DEV_0042.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0042
%NVIDIA_NV40.DEV_0043.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0043
%NVIDIA_NV40.DEV_0045.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0045
%NVIDIA_NV40.DEV_0047.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0047
%NVIDIA_NV40.DEV_0048.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0048
%NVIDIA_NV40.DEV_004E.1% = nv_NV3x_DOEB, PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_004E
%NVIDIA_NV41.DEV_00C0.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00C0
%NVIDIA_NV41.DEV_00C1.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00C1
%NVIDIA_NV41.DEV_00C2.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00C2
%NVIDIA_NV41.DEV_00C3.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00C3
%NVIDIA_NV41.DEV_00CD.1% = nv_NV3x_DOEB, PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00CD
%NVIDIA_NV41.DEV_00CE.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00CE
%NVIDIA_NV43.DEV_0140.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0140
%NVIDIA_NV43.DEV_0141.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0141
%NVIDIA_NV43.DEV_0142.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0142
%NVIDIA_NV43.DEV_0143.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0143
%NVIDIA_NV43.DEV_0145.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0145
%NVIDIA_NV43.DEV_0147.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0147
%NVIDIA_NV43.DEV_014A.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_014A
%NVIDIA_NV43.DEV_014D.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_014D
%NVIDIA_NV43.DEV_014E.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_014E
%NVIDIA_NV43.DEV_014F.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_014F
%NVIDIA_NV44.DEV_0160.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0160
%NVIDIA_NV44.DEV_0161.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0161
%NVIDIA_NV44.DEV_0162.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0162
%NVIDIA_NV44.DEV_0163.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0163
%NVIDIA_NV44.DEV_0165.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0165
%NVIDIA_NV44.DEV_016A.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_016A
%NVIDIA_NV44.DEV_0221.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0221
%NVIDIA_NV44.DEV_0222.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0222
%NVIDIA_NV48.DEV_0211.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0211
%NVIDIA_NV48.DEV_0212.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0212
%NVIDIA_NV48.DEV_0215.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0215
%NVIDIA_NV48.DEV_0218.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0218
 
Release Highlights:

* First Beta driver for GeForce 8800 GTX/GTS GPUs
* This driver supports the following features:
o Single GPU support
+ DirectX 9 support for GeForce 6/7/8 series GPUs
+ DirectX 10 support for GeForce 8800 GPUs
+ OpenGL support for GeForce 6/7/8 series GPUs
* DirectX 9 and OpenGL NVIDIA SLI support for GeForce 8800 GPUs will be available on January 31, 2007 in a new driver from NVIDIA
* If you would like to be notified of upcoming drivers for Windows Vista, please subscribe to the newsletter
* Please read the release notes for more information on product support, feature limitations, and known compatibility issues




SWEET, SLI support tomorrow!
 
I dont understand why they just wouldn't release the SLI supported drivers today; instead of waiting an extra 24 hours. I'm guessing testing does not get done that quickly. Oh well.
 
TheSandman2236 said:
I dont understand why they just wouldn't release the SLI supported drivers today; instead of waiting an extra 24 hours. I'm guessing testing does not get done that quickly. Oh well.
Click to expand...

They're probably awaiting final WHQL/testing certification on them, or something along those lines. It doesn't make a huge amount of sense to me, either.
 
So you suspect these will actually be certified? (chuckles) I think the word Vista is sonomious with "beta". Though, it would be nice ^_^
 
Blue Falcon said:
These drivers support all cards. At least all of the DX9 cards (according to the download page).

<EDIT> Checked the inf:

Code: 
[NVIDIA.Mfg.NTx86.6.0]
%NVIDIA_BR02.DEV_00F1.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00F1
%NVIDIA_BR02.DEV_00F2.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00F2
%NVIDIA_BR02.DEV_00F3.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00F3
%NVIDIA_BR02.DEV_00F4.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00F4
%NVIDIA_BR02.DEV_00F5.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00F5
%NVIDIA_BR02.DEV_00F6.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00F6
%NVIDIA_BR02.DEV_00F8.1% = nv_NV3x_DOEB, PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00F8
%NVIDIA_BR02.DEV_00F9.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00F9
%NVIDIA_BR02.DEV_02E0.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_02E0
%NVIDIA_BR02.DEV_02E1.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_02E1
%NVIDIA_BR02.DEV_02E2.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_02E2
%NVIDIA_C51.DEV_0240.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0240
%NVIDIA_C51.DEV_0241.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0241
%NVIDIA_C51.DEV_0242.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0242
%NVIDIA_C51.DEV_0245.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0245
%NVIDIA_C61.DEV_03D0.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_03D0
%NVIDIA_C61.DEV_03D1.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_03D1
%NVIDIA_C61.DEV_03D2.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_03D2
%NVIDIA_C61.DEV_03D5.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_03D5
%NVIDIA_G70.DEV_0090.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0090
%NVIDIA_G70.DEV_0091.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0091
%NVIDIA_G70.DEV_0092.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0092
%NVIDIA_G70.DEV_009D.1%  = nv_NV3x_DOEB, PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_009D
%NVIDIA_G71.DEV_0290.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0290
%NVIDIA_G71.DEV_0291.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0291
%NVIDIA_G71.DEV_0292.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0292
%NVIDIA_G71.DEV_0293.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0293
%NVIDIA_G71.DEV_0294.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0294
%NVIDIA_G71.DEV_0295.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0295
%NVIDIA_G71.DEV_029C.1%  = nv_NV3x_DOEB, PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_029C
%NVIDIA_G71.DEV_029D.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_029D
%NVIDIA_G71.DEV_029E.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_029E
%NVIDIA_G71.DEV_029F.1%  = nv_NV3x_DOEB, PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_029F
%NVIDIA_G72.DEV_01D1.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_01D1
%NVIDIA_G72.DEV_01D3.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_01D3
%NVIDIA_G72.DEV_01DD.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_01DD
%NVIDIA_G72.DEV_01DE.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_01DE
%NVIDIA_G72.DEV_01DF.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_01DF
%NVIDIA_G73.DEV_0390.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0390
%NVIDIA_G73.DEV_0391.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0391
%NVIDIA_G73.DEV_0392.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0392
%NVIDIA_G73.DEV_0393.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0393
%NVIDIA_G73.DEV_0394.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0394
%NVIDIA_G73.DEV_0395.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0395
%NVIDIA_G73.DEV_039E.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_039E
%NVIDIA_G80.DEV_0191.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0191
%NVIDIA_G80.DEV_0193.1%  = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0193
%NVIDIA_NV40.DEV_0040.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0040
%NVIDIA_NV40.DEV_0041.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0041
%NVIDIA_NV40.DEV_0042.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0042
%NVIDIA_NV40.DEV_0043.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0043
%NVIDIA_NV40.DEV_0045.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0045
%NVIDIA_NV40.DEV_0047.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0047
%NVIDIA_NV40.DEV_0048.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0048
%NVIDIA_NV40.DEV_004E.1% = nv_NV3x_DOEB, PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_004E
%NVIDIA_NV41.DEV_00C0.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00C0
%NVIDIA_NV41.DEV_00C1.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00C1
%NVIDIA_NV41.DEV_00C2.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00C2
%NVIDIA_NV41.DEV_00C3.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00C3
%NVIDIA_NV41.DEV_00CD.1% = nv_NV3x_DOEB, PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00CD
%NVIDIA_NV41.DEV_00CE.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_00CE
%NVIDIA_NV43.DEV_0140.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0140
%NVIDIA_NV43.DEV_0141.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0141
%NVIDIA_NV43.DEV_0142.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0142
%NVIDIA_NV43.DEV_0143.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0143
%NVIDIA_NV43.DEV_0145.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0145
%NVIDIA_NV43.DEV_0147.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0147
%NVIDIA_NV43.DEV_014A.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_014A
%NVIDIA_NV43.DEV_014D.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_014D
%NVIDIA_NV43.DEV_014E.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_014E
%NVIDIA_NV43.DEV_014F.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_014F
%NVIDIA_NV44.DEV_0160.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0160
%NVIDIA_NV44.DEV_0161.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0161
%NVIDIA_NV44.DEV_0162.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0162
%NVIDIA_NV44.DEV_0163.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0163
%NVIDIA_NV44.DEV_0165.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0165
%NVIDIA_NV44.DEV_016A.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_016A
%NVIDIA_NV44.DEV_0221.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0221
%NVIDIA_NV44.DEV_0222.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0222
%NVIDIA_NV48.DEV_0211.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0211
%NVIDIA_NV48.DEV_0212.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0212
%NVIDIA_NV48.DEV_0215.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0215
%NVIDIA_NV48.DEV_0218.1% = nv_NV3x,      PCI\VEN_10DE&DEV_0218
Click to expand...

Cool. If there's improvements in fps that I've been reading about between this and the 97.xx (I forget which revision) that I'm running, then I'll be very happy. I was actually playing CS:S last night at 1680x1050 with everything set high with no AA and no AF and I was still pulling down over 70fps with the rig listed in my sig. Now I wonder what the improvements will look like... :cool:
 
TheSandman2236 said:
So you suspect these will actually be certified? (chuckles) I think the word Vista is sonomious with "beta". Though, it would be nice ^_^
Click to expand...

Well, I'm running the free Vista Business that I got from PowerTogether. However, before that, I was running RC1 for quite a while. Some of the multimedia features were borked on my machine, but other than that, I had zero problems with it. The final version that I have hasn't had a glitch, yet, and I've been running it since Thursday night. I've gamed under it and I'm happy to the point where I'm thinking of nuking my XP install and doing a fresh drive wipe with only Vista on the drive afterwards. :)

Honestly, I've had less problems with RC1 of Vista than I did with any OS pre-XP SP2, and the final is even better. :)
 
GoldenTiger said:
They're probably awaiting final WHQL/testing certification on them, or something along those lines. It doesn't make a huge amount of sense to me, either.
Click to expand...

They're probably finding out which optimizations they can dumb down so that future driver releases will yield better performance and IQ. ;)
 
I'm really curious what the performance/glitchy-ness difference is between the retail Ultimate and RC2. I'm considering buy home premium with my college's student discount; I honostly dont think I need ultimate.
 
JethroXP said:
Ok, I left myself open for that one. Apparently if I had stayed up for another five hours I would have seen that too. Still though, BETA drivers is what we get? What a fiasco.
Click to expand...


I don't really know what to say to that statement. I don't want to sound rude but I get the distinct feeling that even if they came out with drivers that were declared 100% final and non-beta, you might find something else to complain about and declare a 'fiasco' where none exists.

Windows Vista became available at retail today. We have working drivers which I'm sure nVidia busted their ass on.... today. Tomorrow we will have SLI enabled drivers. A day late yes, but hardly a 'fiasco'.

I guess I just don't see where you are coming from, but I respect your opinion just the same.

Cheers. :)
 
JethroXP said:
Ok, I left myself open for that one. Apparently if I had stayed up for another five hours I would have seen that too. Still though, BETA drivers is what we get? What a fiasco.
Click to expand...

I concur WHOLEHEARTEDLY, just as 90% of the rest of the community does as well.
 
Blue Falcon said:
I don't really know what to say to that statement. I don't want to sound rude but I get the distinct feeling that even if they came out with drivers that were declared 100% final and non-beta, you might find something else to complain about and declare a 'fiasco' where none exists.

Windows Vista became available at retail today. We have working drivers which I'm sure nVidia busted their ass on.... today. Tomorrow we will have SLI enabled drivers. A day late yes, but hardly a 'fiasco'.

I guess I just don't see where you are coming from, but I respect your opinion just the same.

Cheers. :)
Click to expand...

Where I am coming from is having owned an 8800GTX for over a month now, as well as the RTM version of Vista, and not being able to use that "Vista Ready" hardware with Vista. The consumer launch of Vista is today, but it's been in RTM form for well over two months. Apparently I lack an apprciation for how difficult it must be to write drivers for the new Vista Driver Model. But is that my fault? When a $650 piece of hardware is sold and label as "Vista Ready" I suppose I had some expectation that it really meant that, not that I'd have to wait over a month for a BETA driver. Is that not a fiasco?
 
JethroXP said:
Where I am coming from is having owned an 8800GTX for over a month now, as well as the RTM version of Vista, and not being able to use that "Vista Ready" hardware with Vista. The consumer launch of Vista is today, but it's been in RTM form for well over two months. Apparently I lack an apprciation for how difficult it must be to write drivers for the new Vista Driver Model. But is that my fault? When a $650 piece of hardware is sold and label as "Vista Ready" I suppose I had some expectation that it really meant that, not that I'd have to wait over a month for a BETA driver. Is that not a fiasco?
Click to expand...


Funny, for a so-called "beta" driver, this works as well as any "release format" one I would have hoped for. I've been using "beta" ones just fine for a few now.
 
GoldenTiger said:
Funny, for a so-called "beta" driver, this works as well as any "release format" one I would have hoped for. I've been using "beta" ones just fine for a few now.
Click to expand...

The term BETA isn't meant to imply lower performance or lack of features. It means only that the product is still in development and may contain (known) bugs. It's simply a milestone in the development process. That they are working as you expected is great, that means they are very close to release quality.

That being said, most companies usually strongly advise general users against using BETA drivers because they are unsupported. Releasing these today seems like a face-saving move on nVidia's part. If tomorrow's driver release is really the official build, why bother muddying the waters with a BETA release that is intended as a 1-day stop-gap?
 
JethroXP said:
Where I am coming from is having owned an 8800GTX for over a month now, as well as the RTM version of Vista, and not being able to use that "Vista Ready" hardware with Vista. The consumer launch of Vista is today, but it's been in RTM form for well over two months. Apparently I lack an apprciation for how difficult it must be to write drivers for the new Vista Driver Model. But is that my fault? When a $650 piece of hardware is sold and label as "Vista Ready" I suppose I had some expectation that it really meant that, not that I'd have to wait over a month for a BETA driver. Is that not a fiasco?
Click to expand...


I appreciate where you are coming from, but it's not nVidia's fault that you aquired a pre-retail copy of Windows Vista. nVidia has pretty much always been working towards a driver release that would coincide with the retail availability of Vista.

The RTM release back at the end of November was meant primarily to give OEMs a head start on production of machines that would be sold pre-loaded with Vista. While it's true that the OS has been available to certain business customers those customers would typically not be subject to the G80 driver argument.

Most typical buyers would think "When Vista is available at retail" when spotting a "Vista Ready" sticker on the box. I know thats the first thing that came to my mind.

But I agree that the driver situation could have been handled better, I just don't think it's as dramatic as a few people are trying to make it out to be. We've got 2 or 3 people in this subforum in particular repeatedly trolling with inflammatory and non-informative posts bashing nVidia and the world, and IMHO it's getting in the way of good discussion. :(
 
Blue Falcon: I definitely agree with you; as a society today we want everything now. Quite impatient as we are, I don't think it's our right to demand a driver for a card without a full retail version of an OS. Of course I know the arguement of Vista being 4 years too late or whatever but I honestly think they're trying to better the way they develop software. Hardware has been on the forefront for sometime, and now its time for the software to play catch-up. Giving software dev teams the time they need to bring a best-to quality product they can give us is the correct thing to do. I'm not justifying it but, if you look at the trend for beta testing it is actually getting encreasing better then before. I remember my alpha of Windows XP and cursing numerous times at my screen for un-fixed drivers and misc. software bugs. They're slowly moving in the right direction; regardless of the time frame we want them to achieve.
 
I started a seperate thread for the 8800 owners. Let's get those benchmarks, gaming quality/OS stability impressions in!
 
The lack of Vista device drivers is either the hardware industry’s noninterest in Vista or the perception that Microsoft’s Vista would continue to be delayed and that they would have ample time to update their product line to support Vista. For example, HP’s driver section indicates that my D135 printer will only have basic printing and scanning functionality under Vista by use of the embedded anemic “Paint” application. Thus, I purchased the C7180 printer. Consequently, the C7180 garners the “Vista ready” hallmark. Unfortunately, digging deeper, HP’s definition of Vista compatibility is deceptively a play of semantics. Attempting to install the installation CD for the C7180 resulted in the now customary “incompatible” dialog. Referencing the drivers section within HP’s website yields the same asinine disclaimer as the D135. That is, “basic printing functionality.” Forget, Bluetooth, or any of the requisite features of the C7180. To add insult to injury, HP’s half-hearted attempt to satisfy it’s mislead customers is to add that full Vista compatibility is expected “early 2007.” Thus, we should expect some form of a Vista driver between February and May 2007. Anything later, HP may as well state “Mid-2007.” Pretty piss-poor considering that Vista has been in development for five years…
Now, I expect some liberal hack attorney to initiate a class-action lawsuit against HP for false, misleading, or deceptive business practices.
 
The term “beta” is a legal disclaimer designed to eliminate any express or implied liability under the doctrine of negligence. As well, the term “beta” encompasses everything including lower performance and or lack of feature(s).

JethroXP said:
The term BETA isn't meant to imply lower performance or lack of features. It means only that the product is still in development and may contain (known) bugs. It's simply a milestone in the development process. That they are working as you expected is great, that means they are very close to release quality.

That being said, most companies usually strongly advise general users against using BETA drivers because they are unsupported. Releasing these today seems like a face-saving move on nVidia's part. If tomorrow's driver release is really the official build, why bother muddying the waters with a BETA release that is intended as a 1-day stop-gap?
Click to expand...
 
In the race to "one up" their major competitor and release a DX10 card months ahead of ATI, Nvidia has seriously lost face with it's enthusiast market. ATI will not have a DX10 for a few more months but I'm willing to bet the drivers will not be beta.
 
DieU said:
The term “beta” is a legal disclaimer designed to eliminate any express or implied liability under the doctrine of negligence. As well, the term “beta” encompasses everything including lower performance and or lack of feature(s).
Click to expand...

Beta is not a legal disclaimer of any sort. It maybe associated to such disclaimers but by itself is not.

In software engineering the term "beta" is a "milestone in the development process". That's a very succinct definition. Beta usually signifies development is feature complete and a subsequent development transition, typically to a bug fixing phase. Each development house may treat the details of beta differently. And once marketing gets a hold of anything from development all strict definitions are tossed aside anyway (I jest).

Now that we're seeing lawsuits concerning "Vista Ready" hardware I wonder if manufactures will become more responsible when peddling their wares next time. I'm not worried about nVidia or Amd/ATi; I don't recall an occasion where either failed the community on Windows drivers. That's not so for printer/scanner/multifunction device manufactures. I've been screwed twice for printer drivers by 2 different manufactures; once no driver was ever produced and second the term 'compatible' really meant only the minimalist feature set. And I love their solution buy one of our newer devices... right because I can trust you.

</offtopicrant>
 
The fact that nvidia has dropped the ball on their driver support (while mind boggling) doesn't really surprise me that much based on the fact that not even the nForce 4 chipset drivers aren't even available for download.

Now before people start saying "well they're probably included with Vista itself"...that's no excuse. The nForce 4 chipset is a pretty popular chipset and was used in quite a few motherboards (73 boards for AMD and 4 for Intel on Newegg.)

Any excuse that nvidia has is unforgivable b/c Vista has been in production for a LONG ass time. I would have maybe expected this from Ati a while back but not from nvidia.

/sigh/
 
jag0 said:
The fact that nvidia has dropped the ball on their driver support (while mind boggling) doesn't really surprise me that much based on the fact that not even the nForce 4 chipset drivers aren't even available for download.

Now before people start saying "well they're probably included with Vista itself"...that's no excuse. The nForce 4 chipset is a pretty popular chipset and was used in quite a few motherboards (73 boards for AMD and 4 for Intel on Newegg.)

Any excuse that nvidia has is unforgivable b/c Vista has been in production for a LONG ass time. I would have maybe expected this from Ati a while back but not from nvidia.

/sigh/
Click to expand...

Hi... nForce 4 user here. My board seems to have been detected as an nForce4 board. Uh... Yeah. nForce drivers built in and supplied by nVidia.
nforcedriverproof.jpg
 
Yea...there also drivers built into XP as well but that doesn't mean they are the optimal.

:rolleyes:

The fact that there are NO DRIVERS (please read again what I wrote) on their website means that Vista is using sub-par drivers.
 
the drivers included with vista for Nforce4 do NOT support raid either. Didn't detect my raid array when i tried to install vista... had to use some custom drivers with mod'd INF's to get it to go.
 
I'm sure even with that post...there will still be people that say "well my board works in Vista fine..."
 
I would still classify the Nforce drivers as beta as well. I'm running them, but had issues with the Nvidia NIC when using them. Have to run on the Marvell NIC to get my network to work. And as one poster stated, no official RAID support yet. I luckily am not currently running RAID though, so that doesn't affect me other than having an undetected device. And having to custom modify an .inf to get a device to detect is not acceptable for non-Beta driver status.
 
I'm using Vista x86 with the 100.64 beta drivers right now.

Looking through my registry in the /Microsoft/Windows/CurrentVersion/Run folder, I notice there are 3 processes started at start-up related to the Nvidia driver. One of them is 'NvMediaCenter' which provides the icon in your taskbar/system tray to bring up the Nvidia control panel. Thing is, I don't have an Nvidia icons in my system tray. So what is this program doing? Just baggage from the old XP driver?
 
I have decided to go back to 100.59 since I continue to get this error, oh about every 10 minutes.

driverstoperror.jpg
 
Yup! I get the same thing, which is why I went back to XP! Haven't had a single problem and SLI works perfectly. Once they get it figured out, I'll switch back.

It's ashame too, since I really liked Vista.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top