nvidea's "new" drivers continue to get slower :)

[DuRaNgO]

We see here again that the 7.17 drivers lag behind the 6.31 drivers. The difference seems to get worse as the resolution gets higher causing stress on internal memory bandwidth of the card. Under the 7.17 drivers, Quake ran very unstable in 32-bit color in all resolutions.

ripped from HERE

It seems the more nVidea tries to improve image quality with new drivers (NED'S), the slower the card gets

jim

------------------
P3-700e @ agiga! Check it here!
Abit BE6-2
TwinMos 256mb pc-133
G400 32mb DH
Maxtor 15.3gb 7,200rpm
SB Live!
Toshiba 12x DVD
Iomega 650cd burner
Winblows 98se & DX7
and 384k DSL!

[DosFreak]

You should do your research before you run your mouth off.

1. Nvidia themselves have stated that these drivers are not even leakable material.
2. The 7.17's drivers in Windows 2000 improved 3Dmark scores by 700+. Improved Game1, Game 2 scores by 10-12fps, Improved Highy Poly by an ungodly amount.
3. Dx7 V Dx8 does not matter in this. Very little difference between the 2 performancewise at this time. It's really not a factor at this point in time in terms of benchmarking
4. 7.17's are buggy under Windows 2000 with memory leaks and slowdowns in 16b color.

"It seems the more nVidea tries to improve image quality with new drivers (NED'S), the slower the card gets"

It seems the more Nvidia tries to innovate with new drivers, the more viscious Murcers become.

Hmmm, I wonder why that is?

Getting ansy for g800?

haha

[DuRaNgO]

sorry to bum you out

[DuRaNgO]

Getting ansy for g800?

getting nervous of the g800

[DosFreak]

WINDOWS 2000 BENCHMARKS <---- NOT crappy 9x
http://www.overclockedcafe.com/articles.htm


My benchmarks:

P3550@630
Direct3D Hardware T&L
1024X768 32bc 32bt 24bz

Directx7 SP1
Directx 8 Build 219
(Didn't bring Build 400 (Final) benches with me)
Difference between 6.47 & 7.71 Directx7

6.47/7.17

3DMARK
3232/3877

Game 1
66.1/46.1/22.4
71.4/54.2/32.7

Game 2
74.6/37.5/22.6
88.2/47.2/29.4

High Poly
1815/1679/1011
8439/5255/2869


Difference between DX7 & DX8

DX7/8

3DMARK
3877/3921

Game 1
71.4/54.2/32.7
72.9/55.2/33.6

Game 2
88.2/47.2/29.4
88.0/47.7/29.5

High Poly
8439/5255/2869
8442/5255/2869

[DuRaNgO]

judging by those numbers, I'd say 2000 is the crappy one

[paulcs]

I've been testing and writing about what Kyle calls NED's (NVIDIA Experimental Drivers) for a while now. I've done this across platforms and with different generations of boards. For the GeForce series, I think the fastest set was 6.27, although I like the 6.34 leak best. I hear that the 6.35 set, with DirectX 8, is a very good combination.

In W2K, I can't even run 3DMark 2000 with DirectX 8 installed with a GeForce DDR and on an Abit KA7-100.

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

[This message has been edited by paulcs (edited 11 November 2000).]

[paulcs]

Well, adding an additional 128 MB RAM fixed the above problem. Funny how this problem started only effected 3DMark 2000 and only after DirectX 8 was installed.

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

[DosFreak]

Yep, I'm using the 6.34's in Windows 2000.

The 7.17's have memory leaks and slowdowns in 16b (probably caused by leak).

[isochar]

Well, your "slow" processor and running 32 bit killed your 3dmark2000 score. You should usually run 16-bit...

By the time those drivers are officially released, they will have gone through several revisions. nVidia's driver team is one of the best, and I wouldn't be surprised to see most of the 7.17 problems resolved sometime soon.

[superfly]

Well i'm using win2k myself with a dual p3 667(3dmark uses only one cpu though),and i get the following results.

with the 6.47 drivers and dirext x8(final version)i get 5350 3dmarks and that is only about 200/300 points lower than i would get under win98,so no complaints here(at the standard test of course).

It seems that the 6.4x set of drivers are the best ones to use with 3dmark 2000(so far)but they still have a few issues,one of wich is the inability to run games in opengl or direct 3d at 1600*1200(that i've noticed myself).

when using the 7.17's the score does down,but not too much(i hit roughly 5000 3dmarks),but i haven't used those very extensively so note any other problems with them.

But right now i'm still using the certified 6.31's with on problems whatsoever and i'm sure that in a few weeks ther will be official 7.xx series drivers(a.k.a detonator 4's)with all the kinks worked out.

By the way 3d mark 2001 should be out very soon now that direct x8 final has been released,i saw a couple of screenshots and it's really looking dialed(think terminator 2 and matrix for inspiration and you'll be close)

[DosFreak]

The 6.34's have been out for a looonngg time now. They are even WHQL certified. Go get 'em.

[superfly]

True,i could install them but like the old saying goes:

If it ain't broke,don't fix it... .

[Pace]

Originally posted by DosFreak:
The 6.34's have been out for a looonngg time now. They are even WHQL certified. Go get 'em.

Where from? NVIDIA have only got the 6.31s

Paul.

------------------
Pace3000 Network: (early stages)
Computer Solutions | Arena | Seti | P3K | TechSupport | Portal | Pace Central
Matrox Users / SETI@MURC
Join the team! | Crunch faster! | View the stats!

[bastioned]

Hello guys, I just wanted to make a comment about this thread: don´t you think it´s fantastic to have a forum such as this ( a Matrox forum ) where anybody can discuss whatever , even not Matrox related things? just look at the thread, someone would think it´s a NVidia forum! DD

Be welcome