Request for the NVIDIA focus group members...

[BFG10K]

But the same could be said for AMD/ATi as well. They would do the same thing if the position was reversed.

I doubt that very much.

whenever ATi releases an official WHQL driver (usually monthly) their entire range of currently supported video cards work with it. This has been pretty much the case since the monthly Catalyst program started six years ago.

So that means whenever the 3870X2 gets a driver update, so do cards as old as the 9500/9600/9700/9800.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: Twsmit
While I don't doubt this is any sort of conspiracy the facts remain that the 8800's haven't had a driver update in 3 months. Whatever Nvidia's reasoning behind their actions, the fact remains that the 9xxx series is getting weekly updates and the 8800 is not. Reviews are being written as we speak and initial customer impressions are being made right now. It's in Nvidia's best interest to make their new products shine and withholding driver updates for older cards that are 98% the same architecture the end result creates an artificial performance gap.

While I don't doubt engineers and the like have legitimate reasons, I am skeptical that this is purely an engineering decision. Looks to me like it is at least partially driven by marketing.

Look at it this way. You have a whole line of products that utilize a single unified driver for all.
Say this driver can take care of the last three to four years of product. Ok, that's that.

Then you come out with a new series of products. Launch is imminent. Drivers need to be provided. For the time being, separate drivers are used that cover only the new series. While at the same time are being QA tested on all the older products.

When QA is completed, only then will a new single unified driver be introduced to cover all said products.

 

[Janooo]

Originally posted by: nRollo

Originally posted by: NYHoustonman

Originally posted by: nRollo
OK, here's what I found out.

NVIDIA is constantly working on newer drivers for the 6, 7, and 8 series cards.

They said they have as many engineers writing drivers for these cards as they do on the 9-series. They also said it?s faster to QA drivers for a single card than a full line-up of cards, which is why we get a new driver early with a new card. After they complete QA for all cards, they release the driver that supports all products.

Furthermore, they said the new drivers will include a lot of bug fixes and perf optimizations as well as the CP enhancements and other features in the new drivers.

The NV guys say they?re expecting to release a beta version very soon - within the next couple of weeks.


So, there you have it- no conspiracy to make new products look good, just need to get drivers out for new products first.

I understand pushing out drivers for newer cards so they actually work, but I'm not sure I buy the rest of that. A beta in the next few weeks really isn't the response I was hoping for here. Given that the 9000-series isn't that different outside of the GX2, do they really need to put that much effort into that series as opposed to the 8's (assuming you worded that correctly... # of workers on 6 + 7 + 8 = 9?)? Put another way, if they have the drivers working on a card like the 9600 GT, should it really take multiple weeks just to put out a Beta? Hell, they're leaking 2-3 betas a week and have been for over a month now...

NVIDIA doesn't leak betas, devs and people like me who have access to beta drivers do. (well, not people like me, because I don't, but people who get access for reasons other than development like me) Leaked drivers aren't finished, and NVIDIA wishes they weren't leaked.

Beta drivers have been through the same QA as WHQL, they just haven't been through the costly MS signing process.

You contradict yourself. Which one is it?

 

[lopri]

NV would never admit conspiracy theory, be it true or not. And that applies to every corporation who are out there to make money. Unfortunately we will never be able to find out the truth about it, just like everything else. But it's kinda funny to see that some folks urging us to accept what NV PR says as the truth. I mean, did anyone expect anything else?

 

[NYHoustonman]

Originally posted by: lopri
NV would never admit conspiracy theory, be it true or not. And that applies to every corporation who are out there to make money. Unfortunately we will never be able to find out the truth about it, just like everything else. But it's kinda funny to see that some folks urging us to accept what NV PR says as the truth. I mean, did anyone expect anything else?

I was hoping... But, yeah, you're pretty much right :/.

I mean, okay, the 170 series is a big release (just makes me want it more), so I'd expect it to take longer than AMD/ATI's monthly releases. But as other folks have said, it's been 3 months since the last driver release, beta or otherwise, unless you count 169.44 - which supposedly is recommended for a patch of a single game. It's been close to a month since the 170's were released for the 9600GT - a card that is not fundamentally different from previously supported cards. I'd expect more given than what is really just a hotfix from an 'equal' number of engineers in that span of time :-X.

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: lopri
NV would never admit conspiracy theory, be it true or not. And that applies to every corporation who are out there to make money. Unfortunately we will never be able to find out the truth about it, just like everything else. But it's kinda funny to see that some folks urging us to accept what NV PR says as the truth. I mean, did anyone expect anything else?

The thing is this thread isn't just about requesting information. It's about that and gaging the usefulness (or lack thereof) of having NVIDIA focus group members on AT forums. Clearly Derek and Anand have decided that they are not an issue, and may have some benefits. Given that, I think we need to give them a chance to show us that they do offer something of value to the forum.

So far, I am somewhat satisfied with the answer. I can see that drivers for the 9-series would get some higher priority because they actually need a new driver inf to function. I also understand that NVIDIA would probably like to do some QA on new drivers with the 8-series before a WHQL release. An official 174.xx beta release for the 8-series would be nice in the meantime.

Originally posted by: Janooo

Originally posted by: nRollo
NVIDIA doesn't leak betas, devs and people like me who have access to beta drivers do. (well, not people like me, because I don't, but people who get access for reasons other than development like me) Leaked drivers aren't finished, and NVIDIA wishes they weren't leaked.

Beta drivers have been through the same QA as WHQL, they just haven't been through the costly MS signing process.

You contradict yourself. Which one is it?

Anyone with even the slightest bit of reading comprehension knows what he meant. This thread has been constructive thus far, please try to keep it that way.

 

[Keysplayr]

Originally posted by: lopri
NV would never admit conspiracy theory, be it true or not. And that applies to every corporation who are out there to make money. Unfortunately we will never be able to find out the truth about it, just like everything else. But it's kinda funny to see that some folks urging us to accept what NV PR says as the truth. I mean, did anyone expect anything else?

So, you want to know things, but will accept no answers. Got it.

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003

Originally posted by: lopri
NV would never admit conspiracy theory, be it true or not. And that applies to every corporation who are out there to make money. Unfortunately we will never be able to find out the truth about it, just like everything else. But it's kinda funny to see that some folks urging us to accept what NV PR says as the truth. I mean, did anyone expect anything else?

So, you want to know things, but will accept no answers. Got it.

Well, you gotta admit a better way for NVIDIA to answer the questions would have been to just post some beta 174.xx drivers for the 8-series. Actions always speak louder than words. In lieu of that we have to accept NVIDIA's explanation, but I think we still have the right to discuss the merits and demerits of the explanation itself. If the information is only given with the caveat that we accept anything they say carte Blanche then it isn't really worth much now is it?

At this point, all we really know is that the official WHQL drivers for the 8-series are still 3 months old, and that some beta drivers may be posted in a few weeks. With the apparent future of video cards being mutli-gpu, which are inherently more driver/profile dependent than their single-gpu counterparts, ongoing driver support and frequent updates becomes a very important issue.

 

[bryanW1995]

I don't have an 8800 series card, but I seem to remember howls from many posters over the past few years about how great their 8800gtx was and how poor the support for it was. Is it possible that it is simply harder for some reason to write the drivers for the 8800 series cards than the old 7xxx or the new 9xxx? I know this sound silly, but they are really many different cards with 256,320 and 384 bit buses, 256, 320, 512, 640, and 768 mb ram etc etc. I do think that it's awfully convenient for nvidia that 174.xx drivers have been making the 9600 (and now 9800gx2) look better than other nvidia cards for a month now, but it seems highly unlikely that they would have deliberately given poor support to their top-tier gpu for so long if they could have avoided doing so.

 

[lopri]

Originally posted by: keysplayr2003
So, you want to know things, but will accept no answers. Got it.

I didn't ask anything.

But I did think the NV's explanation was too typical to be taken seriously. If there were some more specific reasons, it wouldn't have sounded like a total PR talk - especially since we know the 8800 GT has more in common with 9 series than 8 series (G80). When G92 first came out NV updated their WHQL drivers for both G80 and G92 simultaneously. Click

So when 8800 GT debuted, reviews were conducted with the same drivers for both G80 and G92. The current situation is very different and I believe that was the OP's concern. (performance and features)

To be fair, I think we should wait at least till 9800 GTX's debut. 9600 GT is not G92 and 9800 GX2 is SLI, so it's possible that there are priorities and delays. But I think by the time the GTX comes out there should (hopefully) be a unified WHQL drivers set.