Nvidia Geforce 451.22 Driver [Clean Edition]

The prevents the installation of drivers from any source, not just WU.

 

thats why i install dch version of gpu driver, if you install dch, windows not gonna overwrite it

i installed from official nvidia link, ~2gb bundled with cuda, over 450.99 dch driver

 

I have no idea what you mean with that question, this is about driver differences, not the card values.

 

I mean the values sewn into the bios cards, are they not exceeded? Or, with 451.22, the card simply works at higher "permissible: frequencies that are original. Is the video card overclocked, is that what I mean, above the standard values of the base and turbo boosts?

 

Card is running @stock

 

That is, just above the frequency values from 451.22. that is, there is a higher workload?

 

No, it's with the exact same workload, clock speed differences are minimal.

451.22 GPU 2,010 MHz (average 1,938 MHz) GPU memory average 1,910 MHz CPU 4,399 MHz

450.99 GPU 1,980 MHz (average 1,913 MHz) GPU memory average 1,924 MHz CPU 4,399 MHz

446.14 GPU 1,995 MHz (average 1,944 MHz) GPU memory average 1,938 MHz CPU 4,374 MHz

The average GPU frequency is higher with 446.14, so has less drops, also the average memory speed with 446.14 is the cards specified memory speed, so for some reason there are drops with the two other drivers.

Btw. the card is set to Gaming Mode (Default) - GPU Boost Clock : 1830 MHz , GPU Base Clock : 1650 MHz

Temperatures look fine with all 3 drivers as well, so can exclude downthrottling.

 

Does your card 2.010 MHz have the maximum boost value? and is it reached at 451.22? but the average frequency is lower on wddm 2.7 drivers, I understood that

 

Over 1860MHz is already beyond specified boost for what ASUS writes for the cards details when it is set to OC mode, not sure how it manages to boost beyond even with 446.14

This with 446.14 and the card set to gaming mode, I don't quite understand why it boosts higher.
I don't have any OC utility installed either

 

Can you please explain the difference between the gtx and rtx packages of this driver? I did not quite understand. and what if i install via cuda on gtx?

 

So far the brghtness bug is corrected and very stable al my games run very good wth these. Keepers for now.)

 

Why?, is there a way to get the more resent Vulkan Driver to use with these?

 

Nope you need to install the Nvidia vulkan beta drivers which include the latest 1.2 build of Vulkan that CEMU needs for async compute.

They can be found here
https://developer.nvidia.com/vulkan-driver

there is no way, AFAIK, to separate Vulkan from the driver and use it with another one as I am sure it is apart of the Display Driver container it self.

 

These drivers seem pretty damn good. Very stable and all games run silky smooth so far. If you are on the fence run DDU and install them!

 

But when the official release comes they will include Vulkan most recent version right?

Because I don't understand why would the have a previous version of Vulkan.

 

vulkan 1.2.14x is still being implementation validated, if all goes well it may end up in the 455

 

Just needs testing that is all, AMD seem to be better this way though as they seem to be quicker to include new version with the latest official WHQL drivers. But again, this could also mean AMD are worse and do less testing than Nvidia.

 

Yeah at least it's better than the earlier days and "competing" by being first to support this or that feature, AMD's not entirely perfect in which extensions they support and how even if they have landed the core 1.2 spec and support for this in their drivers.
NVIDIA's doing it longer term through testing on a separate but public driver just a bit behind the main branch which seems like a good way to get user feedback and ensure the driver branch itself is robust while working on this one thing and extending support for newer SDK's and extensions plus bug fixes until it gets merged into the main driver.

Interesting to hear that Vulkan 1.2 gets utilized in CEMU but then emulators usually push these API's well in advance of other applications or software plus a good overall understanding of how the API works and how to utilize it.
Along with driver specific quirks or unsupported features although this can also happen in the VLK SDK itself which from a quick check the latest 1.2.140.2 runtime actually resolves such a driver crash through the runtime or loader software.

Well at least the WDDM / OS "Firsts!" between AMD and NVIDIA have mostly stopped so less risk of rushing or missing or skipping some of these bits ha ha.

 

theres a 3-4 month validation period between vulkan drivers getting a spec update and it landing in a GRD.

At this rate 1.2.140+ will be available in time for Ampere, expect 1.2.138 or 139 before then.

 

I just wanted to visit and thank you. Installed this driver along with a clean install of Windows 2004. Everything seem to work flawlessly, no bugs, no crashes or anything. Minimal driver, minimal overhead, no overabusement of nvidiacontainer.exe in task manager and less used resources.

I also managed to turn on hardware accerelated GPU thingy but didn't experience any uplift in performance but windows in general feels snappy and smooth in this combination