Nvidia Forceware 174.93 prerelease

[John Aiton]

right click and save as

http://pic.xfastest.com/z/174.93/XFa...%20Vista32.rar


users report more crysis improvement,
use at your own risk etc

[cottonvibes]

why would i want to download a pre-release of drivers? :O

[John Aiton]

Originally Posted by cottonvibes

why would i want to download a pre-release of drivers? :O

because they are basically the final drivers before official release and are the best forceware yet for crysis

(I have them installed - they're great)

[runawayprisoner]

Every new forceware is better for Crysis...

[cottonvibes]

its like nVidia is only making forceware drivers to improve Crysis lol

but do you even notice the difference?

i'm still on 169.xx cuz i'm too lazy to update... and sometimes you get slow-downs in games with new forceware.
so i don't really care..

[MrPink]

So if I get you...those aren't betas right? I'm currently using the 174.74 betas, and they seem ok, though I've gotten some strange artifacts in Supcom: FA. IDK what its called...Alpha?...where all the colors are inverted.

But with Crysis, what kind of improvement are we talking here? Like, 10fps? 5fps? And how about other games, any artifacting or decrease in performance?

[runawayprisoner]

Well, if you have 20 forceware updates, and each of them can improve like 0.1fps on average... then in the end, you have up to 2fps increase on average... from 1fps to 3fps! A 3-fold increase!

Aww... not helping, is it?

[MrPink]

rofl...but its true! i've leaped at every new forceware that was released, then went to play Crysis and see if it got any faster

Really though, its just annoying how hard it is to get that game steady with decent graphics. I would LOVE a constant 30fps with high/very high settings at 1680x1050 resolution.

[cottonvibes]

Originally Posted by runawayprisoner

Well, if you have 20 forceware updates, and each of them can improve like 0.1fps on average... then in the end, you have up to 2fps increase on average... from 1fps to 3fps! A 3-fold increase!

Aww... not helping, is it?

sadly thats what it is,
people talk about speed ups in games, but then its only like 1fps difference.
you won't even notice it.

and people really shouldn't rely on forceware for speed increases, they're mainly made to get games running properly.

[runawayprisoner]

Originally Posted by MrPink

Really though, its just annoying how hard it is to get that game steady with decent graphics. I would LOVE a constant 30fps with high/very high settings at 1680x1050 resolution.

A 9800GTX overclocked to death or a 9800GX2 overclocked mildly can probably do that with ease.

[John Aiton]

Originally Posted by runawayprisoner

Every new forceware is better for Crysis...

actually yeah, they are for crysis and sli updates

if only because all the 9 series can play every modern game at max settings bar crysis

Originally Posted by cottonvibes

its like nVidia is only making forceware drivers to improve Crysis lol

but do you even notice the difference?

i'm still on 169.xx cuz i'm too lazy to update... and sometimes you get slow-downs in games with new forceware.
so i don't really care..

yes, huge difference

the thread rap made about forceware in the last release brought a big speed improvement (around 7 fps for me)

i think it was 174.74 iirc

Originally Posted by MrPink

So if I get you...those aren't betas right? I'm currently using the 174.74 betas, and they seem ok, though I've gotten some strange artifacts in Supcom: FA. IDK what its called...Alpha?...where all the colors are inverted.

But with Crysis, what kind of improvement are we talking here? Like, 10fps? 5fps? And how about other games, any artifacting or decrease in performance?

around 2-4 fps more for me, but it all adds up
and an increase in the min fps is the important factor

[runawayprisoner]

But it's true they add about 0.1 to 0.5 to each forceware release... and in the end, we end up with something like a total of 2 to 3 steady FPS on average. With a good CPU, your frame rates won't drop below 20fps, and with the game running a constant 25fps with its peak at 55fps, I guess that's really playable. You wouldn't want to know how much faster the darned game run when it's at 40-50fps... trust me.

[MrPink]

Originally Posted by runawayprisoner

A 9800GTX overclocked to death or a 9800GX2 overclocked mildly can probably do that with ease.

well idk, the 9800gtx has higher clocks, and is PCI-X 2.0

but the 8800gtx has 50% more vram, and a higher memory bandwidth (384-bit vs. 256-bit on the 9800gtx). :/
as for the 9800gx2, yes, i'm sure it runs everything maxed.

And John Aiton, do you know when these are officially released? I just realized I have Vista 64 bit, so I can't use those drivers that you provided

[Squall-Leonhart]

forceware 169 sucked, i get more performance and quality on 174.74

[John Aiton]

Originally Posted by MrPink

well idk, the 9800gtx has higher clocks, and is PCI-X 2.0

but the 8800gtx has 50% more vram, and a higher memory bandwidth (384-bit vs. 256-bit on the 9800gtx). :/
as for the 9800gx2, yes, i'm sure it runs everything maxed.

And John Aiton, do you know when these are officially released? I just realized I have Vista 64 bit, so I can't use those drivers that you provided

sure

here's all the os files

XP-32 bit
http://pic.xfastest.com/z/174.93/XFa...%20WinXP32.rar

XP-64bit
http://pic.xfastest.com/z/174.93/XFa...%20WinXP64.rar

Vista 32
http://pic.xfastest.com/z/174.93/XFa...%20Vista32.rar

Vista 64
http://pic.xfastest.com/z/174.93/XFa...%20Vista64.rar


I thoroughly recommend to anyone not upgraded yet to hold off til mid june for gt-200

[MrPink]

Is gt200 the new Radeon cards or more Nvidia? Because I know that the geforce 9900s are just going to using a die shrunk g92 core, meaning all we'll be seeing are higher memory/core clocks. I'll probably be going with ATI for my next graphics upgrade, but I guess saying that now is pointless. I'll have to wait for both the geforce 9900s and the HD4000's to come out

[John Aiton]

Originally Posted by MrPink

Is gt200 the new Radeon cards or more Nvidia? Because I know that the geforce 9900s are just going to using a die shrunk g92 core, meaning all we'll be seeing are higher memory/core clocks. I'll probably be going with ATI for my next graphics upgrade, but I guess saying that now is pointless. I'll have to wait for both the geforce 9900s and the HD4000's to come out

you're talking about the 9800gt which is g92b,
a 55nm die-shrunk 9800gtx

the 9900gtx (if it will be called that - isn't final yet) is the gt200,
it's gonna be freakin epic, 512 memory bandwith, new architecture and a HUGE core size with well over 1 billion transistors

it's a gonna be fast

the good news is that they'll prectically be released at the same time,
the ATI 4 series 9800gt
AND 9900gtx (which will most likely carry a new series name instead with a new naming scheme)

[Squall-Leonhart]

the naming scheme is not changing, there would be no point to nvidia recently changing the drivers from Forceware to just Geforce Drivers, if they were changing the product name.

[John Aiton]

Originally Posted by Squall-Leonhart

the naming scheme is not changing, there would be no point to nvidia recently changing the drivers from Forceware to just Geforce Drivers, if they were changing the product name.

GeForce will remain, just not all the ever increasing 1000s

speculation is the GeForce will get a new scheme of numbering,
but nvidia themselves haven't decided yet so no-one could guess it

Edit: nvidia recently trademarked the name Tegra

geforce tegra?

[S.SubZero]

Originally Posted by John Aiton

sure

here's all the os files

XP-32 bit
http://pic.xfastest.com/z/174.93/XFa...%20WinXP32.rar

Any chance you can post the proper links instead of these broken ones? Note where the URL goes. ... ...