NVIDIA GeForce 358.50 WHQL

Impressive, isn't it ?

 

I agree. It is despicable that they do this just because they can't come up with a better product that is quiet alot faster like cards used to be in years gone by.

 

Yes, there's no reason to dismiss Fermi due to its age. Fermi will still get some improvements from DX12.

For DX12/Vulkan adoption, the more cards that support it, the faster the adoption will be. And for the studios, it's much more important to keep the requirements low than high.

 

Lol Kepler is far from dead, i run anything at 60+ fps easily.

Witcher 3 being an exception of course.

 

The drivers have been running well on my Titan X so far. No noticeable performance improvements or decreases in Battlefront over 356.04, which was good anyhow. The driver profile for the game seems to be rather generic, too.

It isn't so much that they couldn't, it's just that they don't really have an incentive. Still despicable, however.

 

To me that looks like you can try to play with system timer resolution utilities (instead of running flash video in background).

 

So if they release a game that needs 2 Titan-X cards just to run @ 800x600 with everything on min and 20 fps, it's our fault for having ??? hardware?

 

after install valley and heaven benchmark up to 50% slower, will test games later :3eyes: + first ever saw error that fullscreen not working. after 3 try it was working... great start for a new driver :banana:

 

Here have not changed, the same results as the previous driver.

 

Hey. Can you help me with Gainward 770? What driver is the best for you?
Thanks

 

Work good for me in BF3 and BF4 averaging 190 FPS at 1920x1080 144 Hz.

 

Finally a new driver. It's been too quiet of late in this section :cheers:

 

It´s more likely a vram resource issue like in Mortal Kombat Komplete, in that occasion devs gave an option to ignore memory limits which totally fixed the stuttering but this time they and nvidia are taking a nap.

 

I don't know if it matters but for what it's worth I had to refresh my WEI twice. This is what I got the first time:

 

I think this critical fix has dropped down to no 2 on nVidias to do list, behind getting the Win10 compatibility sorted.

Im surprised there isnt public outcry about this.

Hope they put more resources into that fix, there must be thousands uoon thousands of people wanting the shadows in F.E.A.R fixed.

 

Mine also dropped that much. I lost around 1100 points on Valley. Same settings NVCP untouched on both drivers. There is something very wrong here. I don't understand this massive FPS loss on Valley.

 

Last three Developer drivers: 355.83; 355.84 & 356.04 are performing exceptionaly on my side, more stable + higher max/lowest framearate compared with last few WHQL's, no bugs (except graphic memory speed bug on 355.83 sometimes showing 0MHz but it's not runnning on 0MHz of course) and not a single BSOD and/or hard resets I had with few latest WHQL's. I've tested them on few 760's, 780 & 750Ti all on Win7 x64 SP1, but not on Win10 you're using. Games I've tested them so far are GTA V, Witcher 3, CS:GO...

edit
Reading comments here seems to me that I'm going to skip this one WHQL from R358 branch just to preserve my nerves/hair. After quite a lot of problems with WHQL's from R355 branch in past three months (BSOD's, hard resets... never had those problems with WHQL's from earlier branches) I'm going to think not twice but three times before making a jump from Develeper drivers to some newer WHQL or Beta again. What the hell is NVidia doing with all these WHQL's lately and it's even paying to MS to get WHQL certificate for drivers that are obvioulsly not enough tested on their side?

 

Dafuq, same here, from 4216 to 2946 if my old valley saved screenshot is correct

 

I tried the driver with my 970 running at 1557mhz

Valley 1080p

Driver 356.04
Avg 65.10
Min 25
High 123

Driver 358.50
Avg 64.9
Min 35
High 122

 

Firestrike and 3DMark11 scores both went up for me except for PhysX in Firestrike.

Firestrike: http://www.3dmark.com/compare/fs/6164381/fs/6047742
3DMark11: http://www.3dmark.com/compare/3dm11/10374747/3dm11/9965845