• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

New nVidia 260.89 drivers available.

Haha, nice one WelshBloke ,,, lolol. But seriously ok Im about to install these drivers,, Ill let you know how things go.

I love beta ,,,,
 
Haven't tried this drivers yet. Ususually I avoid BETAs unless I'm having serious issues. Currently sometimes the core clock drops to 405 and memory to 800 randomly. The only way to get the core back up is to reboot. This only happens when I'm benching and messing with the clocks and having Afterburner open. Still it's a PITA.
 
I purchased a GT 430. It shadow was so potent that it actually killed my GTX 460. Powerful card.
 
Last edited:
Attic said:
why is nVidia so resistant to releasing a whql driver set?
Click to expand...

1. WHQL certification takes several weeks.
2. WHQL certification costs money per tested driver.
3. WHQL certification doesn't add anything
4. nVidia is not resistant to WHQL, ANY non WHQL driver is clearly marked as BETA driver... it is beta because it has NOT been thoroughly tested for STABILITY. They added new features, did a quick test, and released it for the public to perform free QA for them, and tell them if anything is wrong.
By getting a beta driver you understand that it might be buggy as it has not be QAed, and nVidia saves a lot of time and money and effort... plus they get to have it tested it much wider install base and find all those pesky little bugs.
When nVidia submits a driver to WHQL testing, they will also release it as a non WHQL beta before it is done testing, the driver is identical sans the WHQL certificate.

There is a lot you can complain about nvidia about, like their DRM in the driver and other such BS... but WHQL isn't resistance? I don't think so.
 
Download page

Good to see more performance improvements for the 480 and 460.

Release highlights:

New in Release 260.89

New GPU Support

Adds support for the newly released GeForce GT 430 GPU.
Performance

Increases performance for GeForce GTX 400 Series GPUs in several PC games vs. v258.96 WHQL drivers. The following are examples of some of the most significant improvements measured on Windows 7. Results will vary depending on your GPU and system configuration:
GeForce GTX 480:

Up to 10% in StarCraft II (2560x1600 4xAA/16xAF Ultra)
Up to 14% in S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat (1920x1200 4xAA/16xAF)
Up to 16% in S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat (SLI – 2560x1600 4xAA/16xAF)
Up to 6% in Aliens vs. Predator (SLI – 1920x1200 noAA – Tessellation on)
GeForce GTX 460:

Up to 19% in StarCraft II (SLI – 1920x1200 4xAA/16xAF Ultra)
Up to 15% in Battlefield Bad Company 2 (SLI – 2560x1600 4xAA/16xAF)
Up to 12% in S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat (2560x1600 noAA)
Up to 9% in Aliens vs. Predator (1680x1050 4xAA/16xAF – Tessellation on)
Up to 7% in Metro 2033 (1680x1050 noAA – Tessellation on)
Up to 11% in Dirt 2 (SLI – 2560x1600 4xAA/16xAF)
Up to 12% in Crysis:Warhead (SLI – 1920x1200 4xAA/16xAF Gamer)
Up to 13% in Far Cry 2 (2560x1600 4xAA/16xAF)
Up to 12% in H.A.W.X (SLI – 1920x1200 4xAA/16xAF SSAO Very High)
Up to 5% in Just Cause 2 (1920x1200 4xAA/16xAF)
Up to 22% in Riddick: Assault on Dark Athena (1920x1200 noAA)
Up to 5% in 3DMark Vantage (Extreme Preset)
Blu-ray 3D

Adds support for playing back Blu-ray 3D discs when connecting your GPU to an HDMI 1.4 3D TV. Playback requires compatible software application from CyberLink, ArcSoft, Roxio, or Corel. For more information, NVIDIA Blu-ray 3D website.
HD Audio

Adds lossless DTS-HD Master Audio and Dolby TrueHD audio bitstreaming support for compatible Blu-ray movies with GeForce GTX 460 GPUs*.
Adds high definition 24-bit, 96 and 192 KHz multi-channel audio sampling rate support for compatible Blu-ray movies with GeForce GTX 400 Series ,GT 240, GT 220 and 210 GPUs*.
Upgrades HD Audio driver to version 1.1.9.0.
*Note: A Blu-ray movie player update may be required to enable these new features; check with your movie players software manufacturers for more details.These features are only supported on Windows 7.

Installation

New driver installer with enhanced user interface and new Express and Custom installation options.
Express – fast and easy one-click installation
Custom – customized installation
Option to perform a clean installation (completely removes older drivers from your system prior to installing the new driver).
Option to choose which driver components (ie. PhysX or 3D Vision) to install.
Improved installation time for multi-GPU PCs.
NVIDIA Surround

Updated NVIDIA Surround setup wizard
After first setup, wizard allows users to jump to any setup step.
Improved display connection diagrams and tooltips.
Improved UI for setup and arrangement of displays.
Improved bezel correction setup experience.
Adds help page to highlight which in-game resolution to select (e.g. how to pick bezel corrected resolutions)
Option to dedicate an extra GPU to PhysX or to drive an additional display.
Allows for portrait or landscape setup directly from the setup wizard.
Updated 3D Vision Surround and NVIDIA Surround game support list. Please visit the 3D Vision Surround web page for a full list of supported games.
NVIDIA 3D Vision

With Release 260 drivers, the installation process for 3D Vision has changed. Please view this knowledgebase article for more information on the changes.
Adds NVIDIA 3D Vision streaming support for Firefox 4 and Google Chrome web browsers.
Adds support for Sony’s 3D Sweep Panorama picture format added to NVIDIA 3D Photo Viewer (Sony digital cameras that can capture 3D Sweep Panorama pictures include NEX-5/NEX-3, Alpha a560/a580 and Cyber-shot DSC-WX5/DSC-TX9/DSC-T99 models).
Adds support for new 3D Vision Desktop LCD monitors: BenQ X2410 and NEC F23W2A
Adds support for new 3D Vision projectors: Sanyo PDG-DWL2500 and ViewSonic PJD6251
Added the following 3D Vision game profiles:
Arcania: Gothic 4
Fallout: New Vegas
FIFA 11
Formula 1 Racing
Final Fantasy XIV Benchmark
Guild Wars 2
Kane & Lynch 2 – Dog Days
Lead and Gold
Lego Harry Potter
Live For Speed
Lost Planet 2
Moonbase Alpha
Serious Sam HD – The Second Encounter
Shrek Forever After
Singularity
Vitua Tennis 2009
Virtua Tennis 3
Update the following 3D Vision game profiles
Drakensang: The Dark Eye – updated in-game compatibility text
Mafia II – updated profile to properly for 3D Vision-Rating
StarCraft II – fixed profile to properly recognize the retail game executable name and match the 3D Vision rating of “Good”
Super Commander – fixed HUD elements
TRINE – new profiles fixes that allow the game to be rated “3D Vision-Ready” when used with the TRINE patch v1.08, available via Steam.
NVIDIA SLI
Adds or enhances SLI profiles for the following PC games:
City of Heroes: Going Rogue
Alien Swarm
Dead Rising 2
Front Mission Evolved
Kane and Lynch 2: Dog Days
LEGO: Harry Potter
Other Improvements

Adds support for OpenGL 4.1 for GeForce 400 series GPUs.
Upgrades PhysX System Software to version 9.10.0514.
Improves compatibility for older PC games (DirectX 7 to DirectX 9) running on Windows 7 (examples: Gothic, Gothic II, Falcon 4.0: Allied Force, Links 2003, Independence War II - Edge of Chaos, and X2: Wolverine's Revenge).
Adds drag and drop display arrangement support to the “Set up multiple displays” page.
Includes numerous bug fixes. Refer to the release notes on the documentation tab for information about the key bug fixes in this release.
Users without US English operating systems can select their language and download the International driver here.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
hmmm... both my 9800sli (dx10) and 460/768 (dx11) are a couple frames slower in the heaven benchmark (too many years of looking at 3dmark, had to try something new), but the minimum framerate on both improved... interesting...
 
taltamir said:
1. WHQL certification takes several weeks.
2. WHQL certification costs money per tested driver.
3. WHQL certification doesn't add anything
4. nVidia is not resistant to WHQL, ANY non WHQL driver is clearly marked as BETA driver... it is beta because it has NOT been thoroughly tested for STABILITY. They added new features, did a quick test, and released it for the public to perform free QA for them, and tell them if anything is wrong.
By getting a beta driver you understand that it might be buggy as it has not be QAed, and nVidia saves a lot of time and money and effort... plus they get to have it tested it much wider install base and find all those pesky little bugs.
When nVidia submits a driver to WHQL testing, they will also release it as a non WHQL beta before it is done testing, the driver is identical sans the WHQL certificate.

There is a lot you can complain about nvidia about, like their DRM in the driver and other such BS... but WHQL isn't resistance? I don't think so.
Click to expand...

Good info. Your points paint a clear picture as to why nVidia is resistant to releasing WHQL's in a timely manner though.

I disagree with point 3. WHQL adds exactly what it is intedned for; value to the driver set by signifying it's been thouroughly tested and certified.

Having owned both AMD and nVidia my feelings are that if AMD can and does release WHQL certified drivers in a timely fashion, then nVidia ought to be releasing the WHQL's within a reasonable time frame of significant performance improvements being touted from a beta set. If the beta's are touting features or performance improvements then I'm unsatisfied if a WHQL isn't put up to the website within a month or two.
 
Sylvanas said:
Download page

Good to see more performance improvements for the 480 and 460.

Release highlights:
Click to expand...


If we are going to be pimping the value of the release of a new beta set then I'd expect it to be compared to the earlier released beta driver set. In this case I believe the 260.63's were released about a month ago, this set had a release breifing nearly identical to what you posted.

Comparing the performance gains of this most recent set and talking about continued performance gains is nice, but we got that with the 260.63's, we also got most if not all of the other features in the release notes of the 260.89's in the 260.63's . We could pimp every 260.xx release as compared to the official 258.96's, but why not compare the most recent beta's to the prior release of the betas if we are looking at continued performance gains?

I see the value of the beta release schedule, but having been sitting with an awsome 460 that suffers from a debilitating bug with my Sony Bravia HDTV, I can't help but feel that if nVidia would work towards more rigerous testing and certifications for releasing WHQL's driver packages that my issue might have been resolved. So far none of the beta's fix the issue that was present in the last WHQL set that was released a damned long time ago. The bug is not present in earlier driver sets, it was introduced in the 258.96's, this confirmed with testing with a GTX260. The 460 doesn't have support in those earlier driver revisions however.
 
Last edited:
Attic said:
I disagree with point 3. WHQL adds exactly what it is intedned for; value to the driver set by signifying it's been thouroughly tested and certified.
Click to expand...
Ah, I see... well, it doesn't add anything if you don't trust microsoft 🙂
WHQL certification means microsoft labs got to test it on some machines... it has no indication of how much QA the developer put into to... huge glaring flaws easily bypass the MS team. Its basically a racketeering scheme where MS forces companies to PAY MS for the PRIVILEGE of releasing MS compatible drivers... this is what happens when you have a monopoly.
 
Attic said:
If we are going to be pimping the value of the release of a new beta set then I'd expect it to be compared to the earlier released beta driver set. In this case I believe the 260.63's were released about a month ago, this set had a release breifing nearly identical to what you posted.

Comparing the performance gains of this most recent set and talking about continued performance gains is nice, but we got that with the 260.63's, we also got most if not all of the other features in the release notes of the 260.89's in the 260.63's . We could pimp every 260.xx release as compared to the official 258.96's, but why not compare the most recent beta's to the prior release of the betas if we are looking at continued performance gains?

I see the value of the beta release schedule, but having been sitting with an awsome 460 that suffers from a debilitating bug with my Sony Bravia HDTV, I can't help but feel that if nVidia would work towards more rigerous testing and certifications for releasing WHQL's driver packages that my issue might have been resolved. So far none of the beta's fix the issue that was present in the last WHQL set that was released a damned long time ago.
Click to expand...

Your beef is with Nvidia not me, I was just posting what the release notes are on the download page for everyone to see as these threads usually end up with people asking what's changed and what hasn't and posting the release notes may aid those who can't acess the download page (perhaps at work etc).

I agree, and I didn't pick up on the comparison being made to 258 it's been bolded in my above post.

Attic Having owned both AMD and nVidia my feelings are that if AMD can and does release WHQL certified drivers in a timely fashion, then nVidia ought to be releasing the WHQL's within a reasonable time frame of significant performance improvements being touted from a beta set. If the beta's are touting features or performance improvements then I'm unsatisfied if a WHQL isn't put up to the website within a month or two.
Click to expand...

The thing is that for Nvidia to do that they'd need to restructure their driver department. AMD 'finish' writing a driver usually 2+months before it arrives for download in this site, in this time the Release Candidate driver goes through extensive internal testing, is then sent to Microsoft for WHQL certification, and comes back to packaged up for any last minute alterations before going live. This takes a long time so AMD can have 2 or 3 drivers in the pipeline at one time.

Nvidia has been a little less public on the workings of their driver program in recent years but a few things can be said of it. Nvidia does not have as strict timeline for WHQL releases as AMD and has multiple branches in development at one time (hence the many random leaks of driver sets we see on sites like Guru3d). Once a driver set has fulfilled what Nvidia needed for that release it usually enters a BETA state and is released (after internal testing and QA of course). Either at that point or slightly before, it is submitted to Microsoft for WHQL certification (and often the driver branch that comes back for WHQL has a slightly different version number indicating small changes may have occured, perhaps at M$'s behest).

So here we see Nvidia favouring the release of BETA drivers first and then going down the path of WHQL, and AMD releasing only WHQL drivers (with exceptions to hotfixes or last minute releases to fix a specific problem). To change the way things work at Nvidia would take time and probably incur a few weeks penalty in which time a new game could be released or something that requires a hotfix and nvidia would be unable to start work until they had their house in order- perhaps drawing some unnecessary media attention to the problem.

Personally I think there are merit's to both methods. AMD can have the assurance that their drivers have gone through additional QA measures and that they are releasing a quality driver every time. While Nvidia can more up to the minute with fixes and feature changes as they don't need to wait for WHQL testing.
 
A lot of those WHQL drivers from AMD have obvious glaring bugs (which necessitate a hotfix) which the MS team somehow doesn't catch... Yea, its got MS's Windows High Quality Labs seal of approval... its also still a beta. There are no "solid reliable driver" to go back to without a lot of research into exactly which of the 2 week release driver sets doesn't have the bugs you are personally experiencing.
 
taltamir said:
Ah, I see... well, it doesn't add anything if you don't trust microsoft 🙂
WHQL certification means microsoft labs got to test it on some machines... it has no indication of how much QA the developer put into to... huge glaring flaws easily bypass the MS team. Its basically a racketeering scheme where MS forces companies to PAY MS for the PRIVILEGE of releasing MS compatible drivers... this is what happens when you have a monopoly.
Click to expand...

Indeed the merits of WHQL are another thing entirely. Obviously there are bugs with every driver set which have not been picked up on with either internal QA or at MS. But it does add another layer which can perhaps catch any flaws before release- the less flaws at release the better. I wouldn't be surprised that when AMD and Nvidia take longer than usual to release driver sets, it may sometimes be due to the fact that either internal QA found something or MS did and the driver had to go back to stage 1 to be fixed, submitted, and tested before release.

I'm sure both AMD and Nv would want it to be quicker and more efficient than the wait time for WHQL certification currently is- but it's something they just have to deal with and factor into the schedule.
 
Attic said:
Good info. Your points paint a clear picture as to why nVidia is resistant to releasing WHQL's in a timely manner though.

I disagree with point 3. WHQL adds exactly what it is intedned for; value to the driver set by signifying it's been thouroughly tested and certified.

Having owned both AMD and nVidia my feelings are that if AMD can and does release WHQL certified drivers in a timely fashion, then nVidia ought to be releasing the WHQL's within a reasonable time frame of significant performance improvements being touted from a beta set. If the beta's are touting features or performance improvements then I'm unsatisfied if a WHQL isn't put up to the website within a month or two.
Click to expand...
no, it only adds the illusion of being thoroughly tested. some of the worst drivers ever released, including the ones that caused many cards to fail from overheating, were WHQL.
 
toyota said:
no, it only adds the illusion of being thoroughly tested. some of the worst drivers ever released, including the ones that caused many cards to fail from overheating, were WHQL.
Click to expand...

heh, ain't that the truth... and with that illusion comes a fat paycheck to MS from hardware makers. And if they refuse to conform? well, windows will automatically remove non WHQL drivers and replace them with WHQL drivers on occasion (if you manage to jump through the loops to get them to install in the first place)... ensuring maximum crashes and instability for any company that doesn't want to pay. (I have personally had windows remove good stable non WHQL Driver and automatically switch to a driver by the WRONG COMPANY, because they shared a controller, which happened to be a worse off driver...)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top