Download: GeForce ForceWare 182.05 Beta Driver XP | Vista 32/64

This driver decrease oc

 

Excellent performance in L4D, GTAIV, and FO3. Image quality is better than 181.22, but not as good as 181.20.

It seems like Nvidia is going in the right track. Keepers!

(Vista 32-Bit)

 

Same thing happened to me with the 181.22 and win 7/GTX295. The 185.20 Fixed that issue though. Everything i played worked with 185.20 but not 181.22. Maybe give the 185.20 a try.

 

Great drivers , keepers for me , testing in farcry and nfsu - boost in performance. testing on my GTX 285 vista32bit.

 

"XP dos not work good with MultiCore, Vista works great with MultiCore.

So install Vista or Windows 7. "


dont listen to this propaganda, xp owns. install vista - kiss some frames goodbye. its also nice to that see that vista sp2 beta is slower then sp1 so far. good score ms.

 

The new forceware drivers on my Vista 64/ MSI 260 run perfectly same as the old ones did. All games run just fine as before. No glitches.

 

Really? Very nice of you having a DirectX 10.1 vga running @ DirectX 9c.

And I hope you're using XP X64, otherwise it's like you have 3.2GB of RAM... :bang:

Well, here games tend to run BETTER and FASTER on Vista... And specially they LOOK better.... Dunno why... DX10 anyone?? LOL

C'mon, XP is dead... Soon we'll see nvidia and AMD dropping support, as M$ already announced...

BTW, drivers are stable here... Ran only COD4 and L4D until now... Smooth!

 

What i love is you say "don't listen the the propaganda" and then go strait on the post some very wrong propaganda youself .

 

it all depends what you use your os for. xp is 25% faster 'around' for ANY opengl application. which i realize almost no one plays any opengl games anymore.. except quakelive. also audio production software is better in xp. now back to vista. I actually have both xp and vista, i was running vistax64 with 6 gigs ram for a few months. its not that bad. but i do notice less fps in most applications, doesnt feel as 'snappy' as xp. dont get me wrong xp is not great, after a few months it can start to clog up, and slow down. also games like company of heroes have massive difference in fps from xp to vista. example - company of heroes 1920x1080 4xaa/8xaf, runs xp at 68 frames, vista 49fps. seems like vista takes big hit.

http://firingsquad.com/hardware/windows_7_gaming_performance/

i play most games at 1920x1080, and xp is faster for that resolution.

"C'mon, XP is dead... " thats not the point. companies are releasing driver updates for vista and xp. so really its not dead. also yeah im losing a tiny amount of ram that xp cant handle, but on a side note. check how ram vista eats up while idle, over 1 gig doing nothing. xp im never over 16% usage on idle.

 

Actually i haven tried with it at 100% on these drivers, I just had it on 98% from the 181.22s and left it . Prolly try them at 100% to see if it still crashes on the default setting.

 

both XP and vista have their good parts


vista crashes in my pc, no other OS does

XP has null x64 support

XP is a lil better on my pc for fps, but i suposse on high-end pcs maybe not.

Already has been discussed, each pc is a world.

btw, most people doesnt use dx10 in vista (for the guy saying card dx10 in dx9), and if they do, improvements are almost nothing in most games.

 

The doors in Mirror's Edge flicker badly, or just display a black box instead of a texture w/ these. Elevators are particularly bad. Rest of game is smooth though.

Everything else seems to be good, similar results to 181.22's in COD:W@W, L4D, GTA IV. Observations only.

Bummer there's no SLI profile for Burnout.

GTX 295's in SLI. Still doesn't feel like the drivers are really taking advantage of these cards, but I can't complain too much.

 

Hi guys, I noticed a small difference in the contol panel version of 182.05 and 185.20 drivers...

Control panel version

182.05 --- 2.2.390.00
185.20 --- 2.3.100.00


This still shows 185 series is the most advanced driver..., but as far as the opengl 3.0 is concerned this latest beta enables it completely with shading language 1.30 version and with all its functionalities..:banana::banana:

But i dont see any difference in image quality or performance either in gta iv:bang:

 

I dont know if the Nvidia Geforce drivers are better for ME, but the changelog for the PhysX drivers had some changes to ME and crashing when PhysX was enabled so hopefully it works better overall?

 

Prove it, my system runs fantastic for gaming. Vista is a solid OS now, get off the bashing bandwagon. Just makes you look like a dumbass.

 

I will forever bash it, as it is a ram hog. lol

When it comes to vista, there shoulda only been 64-bit versions, imo. 32 shoulda been out-dated when they made vista, simply because of the base ram req vista itself needs, pretty much pushing you over the 4gig limitation of the 32 bit systems.

What is it, like.. 1 gig or 1.5 for vista, then if you have a 295 that's another 1.6, most systems come with atleast 2 gig. So even with say, an 8800gtx... Which only takes 790 instead of the 1.6 a 295 does, we're still about 1.2 past the 4 gig limit on the system. Gonna notice some slowdowns, imo.

That's my only complaint really. I doubt you can honestly associate DX10 fps losses to vista, because it's not vista, it's DX10. New DX's take more power to run when graphics improve. It's not vistas fault there, it's just progression.

 

Wow! people are smoking way too much weed around here......:smoke:

The propaganda is way more against Vista, its been drag to hell for months after the release and even today i can still hear people saying that Vista is a piece of crap but the only point is that they never had a single PC with Vista installed!!??!!??!!??!!??

 

"Prove it, my system runs fantastic for gaming. Vista is a solid OS now, get off the bashing bandwagon. Just makes you look like a dumbass. "

I like how im a dumbass , and you made no valid points for vista being superior. Its runs fanstastic on your machine, thats great, im sure xp sp3 would also. im not saying xp is better, its just better depending what your using your pc for. If you want some nice glossed, eye candy interface vista is way to go, or if you need a 64bit os. But Xp does have its place , atleast until windows7.

 

I love how people are hyping Windows 7 now. This is how it works...

Windows XP is announced. People go crazy about it and get very high expectations. It comes out and everyone whines about it and says how much better Windows 98 is. Fast-forward about a year and XP becomes the godsend of operating systems.

Windows Vista is announced. Hype; it's going to be so cool! High expectations. It comes out and everyone whines and says XP is better. Today it's perfectly fine.

Windows 7 is announced. Hype. You get the idea.

 

A lot of people are st*pid, and you are one of them if YOU have not install't
Vista X64, when you have a Geforce GTX280 and Core 2 Quad Q9450 and
4GB RAM.

The are a lot of games on Vista X64 that works as good as XP, and some even beter then XP, look on the web.

Also there are a lot of games now that have DX10 in them, and sorry but
it looks a lot nicer then DX9.

And also a 32Bit OS like XP can only see and use 3GB ram and not more.

So what actually happens if you go out and buy 4GB of memory for your PC? Well, it's just like the DOS days - there's a hole in your memory map for the IO. (Now it's only 25% of the total address space, but it's still a big hole.) So the bottom 3GB of your memory will be available, but there's a discrepancy with that last GB.

If you want it all, go with a 64-bit OS. In 64-bit Windows, the limit is gone. But on 32-bit some of the available memory size will evaporate. But you'll still have near 3 GB of memory available.

http://www.guru3d.com/article/corsair-4gb-pc26400-ddr2-dimm-kit-review/4

Do your home work better.