Oh christ I've responded to the wrong thread. ATI also has WHQL drivers out for win7. :laugh: I swear there was a thread for that...perhaps I should look there.
I kept 178.24 sense all the 18x. drivers seem to cause problems with some games I play. Oh well. Don't really feel like testing every 18x. driver set either to see which is the best for my system either. Unless it is worth it ?
I got a 14% fps boost over series 181 drivers on my Geforce 260 in Crysis Warhead. Pretty happy with 'em.
Plain and simple because 185.85 drivers suck and cause more problems than they are worth. Sorry.
WaitingForNehalem
Platinum Member
- Aug 24, 2008
- 2,497
- 0
- 71
lopri
Elite Member
- Jul 27, 2002
- 13,310
- 687
- 126
Well, other than the HDCP issue (really a non-issue since I play Blu-Ray fine regardless of what Control Panel says) 185 series has been the best Vista drivers from NV for me. 2D acceleration hasn't crashed any app/OS yet and games feel smoother. There was always this stuttery feeling with my GTX 280 in games despite playable FPS, but it's gone for the most part (at least on my system). Kudos to NV. :thumbsup:
nOOky
Diamond Member
- Aug 17, 2004
- 3,230
- 2,286
- 136
Wow. Installed these finally today. I can't get my monitor to scale to fit the screen. I re-installed them, same issue. Looks like I'm reverting back without even gaming on them. First encounter with nvidia drivers that suck that I can remember...
Yeah they play games well but they have strange issues. For example all Valve games and even some others will display a strange thing every now and then. Difficult to explain without seeing a picture of it or for yourself. Not the only one having this problem either with the 185.85 drivers.
apoppin
Lifer
did you "use Nvidia scaling" in the CP?
- strangely this is the first time i got the scaling [centered timings] to work with all my LCDs - including my notebook - without a workaround
Just in case no one believes me that the Nvidia 185.85 drivers are a big pile of mess just read this 9 page thread with all the problems people have been having. Some of them aren't even gamers. http://forums.nvidia.com/index.php?showtopic=96665
Spike
Diamond Member
- Aug 27, 2001
- 6,770
- 1
- 81
Dang it, I thought this was just me. My 8800GTS 512 was having tons of problems with these drivers during a lan party the other day. Once I rolled back to some 170 version it worked great, apart from the normal overheating problems (just sent it in for RMA because of those).
nOOky
Diamond Member
- Aug 17, 2004
- 3,230
- 2,286
- 136
Originally posted by: apoppin
did you "use Nvidia scaling" in the CP?
- strangely this is the first time i got the scaling [centered timings] to work with all my LCDs - including my notebook - without a workaround
No, I did not. It is set to "use monitor's built in scaling" or whatever the setting is. I did try switching it to nvidia scaling, same result. Changes refresh from 60 to others etc. I tried to re-install the new drivers, and the second time I caught it automatically installing my monitor as an hdmi devce or something like that. My monitor is an Acer 22" 1080p (I am at work and forgot the model number maybe H213" With an MSI 8800gts512oc video card.
Anyway, a revert back to the previous drivers made her whole again.
So... I put my old 8800GT 512MB card into my gf's computer that's running Win7 RC on an AMD 3700+ (2.2Ghz) with 2 MB ram, using the 185.85 drivers for Win7 32bit. Nothing is overclocked.
Now, when it was in my XP system, the 8800GT gave me great frame rates in Cod4 at 1600x1200 with everything maxed. In Win7 on my gf's comp, Cod5: World at War stutters pretty badly at 1600x1200, even with most of the eye candy disabled and textures set to Normal. I know these are different games, but couldn't I expect slightly reduced frames in Cod5? It's the same engine afterall, just tweaked a bit more.
Cod4 was smooth at max settings on my XP system with 2 Gigs of ram... Cod5 is not playable at 1600x1200 even with most of the eye candy disabled. What gives?
I haven't tried rolling back to earlier drivers, but I will definately try that. Is it Win7 that isn't really optimized for gaming yet? Or is it that Cod5 prefers a faster CPU as SickBeast reported above?
Also, this is the only game that I've tested out on this system so far. I'll get TF2 up and running and hopefully get some better performance in that game at 1600x1200.
Now, when it was in my XP system, the 8800GT gave me great frame rates in Cod4 at 1600x1200 with everything maxed. In Win7 on my gf's comp, Cod5: World at War stutters pretty badly at 1600x1200, even with most of the eye candy disabled and textures set to Normal. I know these are different games, but couldn't I expect slightly reduced frames in Cod5? It's the same engine afterall, just tweaked a bit more.
Cod4 was smooth at max settings on my XP system with 2 Gigs of ram... Cod5 is not playable at 1600x1200 even with most of the eye candy disabled. What gives?
I haven't tried rolling back to earlier drivers, but I will definately try that. Is it Win7 that isn't really optimized for gaming yet? Or is it that Cod5 prefers a faster CPU as SickBeast reported above?
Also, this is the only game that I've tested out on this system so far. I'll get TF2 up and running and hopefully get some better performance in that game at 1600x1200.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter