Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

-NEW- Nvidia drivers 174.12 -HOT-

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Originally posted by [YS]Alienz View Post
    The 171 betas benchmark worse and have been out for WELL over a couple days now on various hardware sites. The best UT3 drivers atm proven are 169.32. 169.38 are slighthly worse and equal to 169.28. 171.x are on the bottom.
    I have Vista 64bit and just after formating, I installed the 169.28 Beta then 169.32 WHQL and recently tryed the 171.12 WHQL. I can clearly say that 169.32 are far superior than 169.28 however I'm not sure but it looks like the 171.xx are worse.

    Should I try those 174.12? By the way are they Beta and/or WHQL???

    Edit: WTF! The link for Vista64bit point to WinXP64bit! Edit 2: ok I searched elsewhere and found the right one. Gonna try it later or tomorow even if it's Beta.

    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by Alex88 View Post
      I have Vista 64bit and just after formating, I installed the 169.28 Beta then 169.32 WHQL and recently tryed the 171.12 WHQL. I can clearly say that 169.32 are far superior than 169.28 however I'm not sure but it looks like the 171.xx are worse.

      Should I try those 174.12? By the way are they Beta and/or WHQL???

      Edit: WTF! The link for Vista64bit point to WinXP64bit! Edit 2: ok I searched elsewhere and found the right one. Gonna try it later or tomorow even if it's Beta.
      I'm using Vista 64bit and the 174.12 drivers. I really can't tell or feel a difference in gaming (particularly UT3). But without benchmarks, it's really hard to say.

      Comment


        #18
        Originally posted by Elohim View Post
        I'm using Vista 64bit and the 174.12 drivers. I really can't tell or feel a difference in gaming (particularly UT3). But without benchmarks, it's really hard to say.

        This is a great site for UT3 benches: -

        www.alcomsplace.com

        And it seems to bear out that the 174.12s are the best performers, but only slightly better than the 169.38s.

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by Masaai_Warrior View Post
          This is a great site for UT3 benches: -

          www.alcomsplace.com

          And it seems to bear out that the 174.12s are the best performers, but only slightly better than the 169.38s.
          Thanks! I'll have to bookmark that site

          Comment


            #20
            Thanks a lot mate.

            Comment


              #21
              WTF! The link for Vista64bit point to WinXP64bit! Edit
              OOOPS!
              link fixed

              thanks...

              Comment


                #22
                The whole WHQL process is stupid imo.

                Comment


                  #23
                  Thanks for the link man ... I usually am all over this but I am a bit behind the times it would appear.

                  Edit: From what I am reading I think I will just stick with my 169.32 WHQL drivers.

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Originally posted by ebilcake
                    Slight increase with vista but nothing special, still slower then XP.
                    Yeah I think I will wait to hear more about these drivers on the guru3d forums.

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Originally posted by AnubanUT2 View Post
                      I think I will just stick with my 169.32 WHQL drivers.
                      not from nVidia anyway.

                      i'm still using the drivers that windows update provides (169.06), because i just reinstalled my system not too long ago.

                      personally, i'm not a big fan of customized/tweaked drivers from various websites.

                      on the one hand you don't know what they might've included beyond the driver.

                      on the other hand, you don't know what (possibly hidden) settings are F***ing your computer when it locks up.

                      cause a couple of them will tweak settings you might not have access to... and possibly incompatible with.

                      Comment


                        #26
                        The drivers I have come from EVGA's website and my 8800GTs are EVGA boards and are WHQL so I am not worried about them not being from Nvidia tbh.

                        Comment


                          #27
                          DO they support AA with Nhancer?

                          Comment


                            #28
                            I did a new record on 3DMark06 with these 174.12, now I get 9719pts vs about 9450. Maybe there isn't a big diff vs 169.32 but there sure is vs the 171.xx since those sucks.

                            Comment


                              #29
                              The 171s were absolute garbage in anything but Crysis-- and unstable. These bring them back to near the best of 169... with lots of new functionality.

                              Comment


                                #30
                                Originally posted by lutjekabal View Post
                                DO they support AA with Nhancer?
                                As far as I can tell, the AA-bug is gone, so you can set specific AA settings for your games again, as opposed to being forced to make global ones - through the CP. Also the CP has been updated and it has an option to only display games which are on your system. This seems to miss out my Steam games though.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X