GeForce ForceWare 262.99 WHQL Download & Discussion

Discussion in 'Videocards - NVIDIA GeForce Drivers Section' started by Silviu, Nov 9, 2010.

  1. Infanticide

    Infanticide Member Guru

    Messages:
    190
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    AMD Radeon R7 260X 2GB
    Those are very good for F1 2010. Generally very stable on my system with 8800 gt.
     
  2. cowie

    cowie Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    13,271
    Likes Received:
    345
    GPU:
    GTX
    next time i just start shooting lol
     
  3. bliss007

    bliss007 Banned

    Messages:
    1,587
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Asus GTX 580
    Your 3GB of System Memory +1.5GB of Video Memory is over the 4GB total limit so your loosing 500MB of System Memory due to your 1 GPU.
     
  4. SuperBill

    SuperBill Master Guru

    Messages:
    243
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Dual eVGA GTX 580's - SLI
    Working good here on my 275 since they came out. That's not to say you couldn't have problems though as I haven't tested everything I own :) Just saying good so far definitely worth a try.
     

  5. DLD

    DLD Master Guru

    Messages:
    881
    Likes Received:
    69
    GPU:
    MSI GTX1060 6GB
    Stop writing bull$hit - if you're unable to deem OS-es

    it doesn't mean you have to share your ignorance.:banana:
     
  6. Faks

    Faks Active Member

    Messages:
    90
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Gainward GTX 560 Ti 2GB
    here is my moded nv_disp.inf every video card out there now should be able use these drivers :)
    http://pastebin.com/61aCVbHR
    only for windows 7 and windows vista for 32bit only .
     
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2010
  7. Eleventeen

    Eleventeen Member

    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Asus Strix OC GTX970
    Not how it works.
    99% of games can address up to 2GB of system memory (actually ~1.7gb to be exact), and 2Gb of video memory.

    Regardless of your OS. XP/Vista/7 32/64, really doesn't matter.

    The fact your OS is 64bit doesn't matter. Because 99% of games only come in 32bit.

    The only games that can benefit from more memory are ones that include 64bit executables, of which there are almost none. Those that do generally run WORSE in 64bit mode heh, Only one I can think of that has any performance improvmenet is Crysis, and it's a small improvement.

    There are hacks that let some 32bit games address more then 2gb, but guess what, in 95% of cases it makes no difference in performance. Games symply aren't designed to waste so much memory.

    Anyways, anyone who has actaully tested this knows XP is still the prime choice for gaming. Like it or not, it is STILL a faster and more stable gaming OS. Weird for a 10 year old OS sure, but it's a fact.

    BTW I personally prefer windows 7 features, so I dualboot XP32 and Win7 x64.. But no matter how many games I test, they almost always run better on XP.

    Good recent examples:
    Fallout new vegas - much worse performance, less stable without allot of tweaks, and no hardware sound at all (for most ppl anyyways, alchemy causes frequent crashing)
    Star wars the force unelashed 2 - (much worse performance and severe cutscene stuttering without heavy tweaks)
     
  8. Cru_N_cher

    Cru_N_cher Master Guru

    Messages:
    775
    Likes Received:
    2
    GPU:
    MSI NX8800GT OC
    thx Eleventeen its really good to know that experienced IT people are still here :)
    actually its well known under experts that Win7s overhead (GPU copy back) is causing delays and Performance issues and it will never render anything faster that is physically impossible :) though the deeper GPU integration since Vista can allow for some really interesting stuff. Best example are the Shared Window Memory or if a application isn't responding on XP your main application window would stall you couldn't move it around anymore on Vista/7 this wont happen :) you could easily move the Application Window around and its resources would still be drawn. Also a major benefit of the directly integrated GPU copy back is that you now can capture GPU rendered stuff directly like Onscreen applied Pixel Shaders you cant do that with XP at least not with Print Screen ;) you would need to copy it back from the GPU memory needs some special code to be written

    some stuff that also shows some of those problems nicely if you are interested in this performance topics

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ay-gqx18UTM
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToFgYylqP_U
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zzKDHHevxs

    Also the 64 bit thing you need improved code for a performance difference and it will still take some time for everything available in 64 bit especially optimized 64 bit that brings a performance advantage @ all not only being able to utilize more then 3GB.

    And its not enough to have 1 component 64 bit and 1 32 bit you wont gain any performance improvement then the whole application chain needs to be 64 bit, which for Games though isn't a big problem as only the Game Engine needs to be optimized for 64 bit for other usage cases it can be more problematic currently. Overall though you should be able to tune a lot of Win7 performance disabling Aero is 1 of the most important and with some other tweaks you should come pretty close to XP (turning of all the advanced loging in Vista/7) as in itself the Vista/7 kernels are improved, only the stuff ontop of Vista/7 is mostly causing the raw Performance differences.
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2010
  9. Dublin_Gunner

    Dublin_Gunner Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    4,642
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Gigabyte Rx 460 4GB
    This post is not entirely correct. And just for the record, I find Win 7 64bit MUCH faster than XP. Similarly, I found XP Pro x64 a far quicker and more stable platform than XP (though most likely due to being based off Win Server 2003 x64).

    It doesn't matter whether the game is 64bit or not, its running emulated 32bit, and the OS is assigning its memory partition anyway (in its own little 32bit word).

    Bliss - he's using a 64bit OS, so he's not losing ANY ram address space anyway. He can have up to 16GB addressable RAM in most consumer grade motherboards (physical memory limitation), with a 64bit OS able to address up to 2^64 bits (16 exobytes) (in theory, most consumer cpu architectures limit this somewhat).

    Even though the game may only be able to address 2GB~** + video ram, it still free's up system ram for the OS to use, without the game eating into that address space, so in theory your PC's OS in general should still be more responsive while running a 32bit App.

    Also, a lot of modern 32bit applications are set to LARGEADDRESSAWARE which should allow them to address up to 4GB virtual address space.

    If this is the case, then the 64bit OS is a must, otherwise the one application may request to address up to 4GB of address space (unlikely with most games however), leaving precious little for anything else - particularly if you have a video card with a large >512MB frame buffer.
     
  10. bliss007

    bliss007 Banned

    Messages:
    1,587
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Asus GTX 580
    @ Eleventeen , EXACTLY how it works !

    Nice 1st post or are you on a dupe account ?

    I used 4GB of System Memory with a 8800 Ultra (768MB) on XP 32bit for a few months and I only has use of 3.25GB of System Memory.

    4GB minus the 768MB - 3.25GB !!!

    I ain't the one who needs educated in this field, cowie does.

    I have read some crap in my day on this topic about how it counts HDD cache and Optical Drives cache will it does not and does not even count my X-FI's 64MB, it only counts non localised Memory so that's System Memory + GPU Memory and it cannot use more than 4GB on a 32bit OS without a hack/switch which still has no proper use and can HURT performance.

    @ Cru_N_cher, not so nice to know peeps including your new found IT friend get it wrong !

    You want to run a modern rig on a 32bit OS with a high end GPU or 2x GPU then your a fool and wasting your money and hardware on a dead OS.

    P.S Since Vista SP1/Win 7 MS changed it so even a 32bit OS shows the full 4GB in System Properties, pre Vista SP1/Win 7 it was the amount you get use of but now its amount fitted !
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2010

  11. GatitoMimosin

    GatitoMimosin Active Member

    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    Gigabyte GeforceGTX1050ti
    HTML:
    [CODE]Quote:
    Originally Posted by Announcement  
    doesn't work for my GTX 460 too. when try install it said "could not find compatible graphics hardware" . and yes, i am using 32bit. 
    
    just go there and grab the modified inf:
    http://www.laptopvideo2go.com/drivers
    
    Ps: those modded inf are for international setup only (which makes sense) [/CODE]
    YES THIS WORK!!!
    this solution yes work with my geforce 450 in Windows 7 32 bits SP1
    me use setup international and use INF of this site
    http://www.laptopvideo2go.com/drivers/win7x32/262.99/disclaimer
    AND WORK!!!!
    thanks
    finally install 262.99
     
  12. pyrorob

    pyrorob New Member

    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    AMD R9 280x
    you guys seem to be confused as to how system memory and video memory works... there exclusive to what there used for ie; not compatible for teh same uses, so saying 3gb+768 or whatever doesnt make any sense.. system memory is used to store frequently accessed and currently accessed program\dll\driver data and video is solely for textures..
    for example, i have win 7 x86 and 4GB of memory.. it shows as 4GB total and 3.5gb usable and i have a gtx 275 with 876MB of memory, in a game (say, bc2) using everest i can see the game taking 600-800MB of system memory, while dependent on the texture quality i have it set at, 350-450MB of video memory.. they do not overlap at all and even thou its a 32 bit os i can use all the video memory and system memory at the same time... basically, whether you use a 32bit os or 64bit, you have the same total video memory available..

    and btw, 4GB of memory (4096MB) - 768MB is not 3.25GB (3250MB), its 3.32GB (3328MB) to be exact..
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2010
  13. bliss007

    bliss007 Banned

    Messages:
    1,587
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Asus GTX 580
    I know enough to know how it works, I gave approx Memory Amounts, it does not be exact for discussion purposes

    Replacing the 768MB GPU with a 512MB GPU would give you 3.5GB of USABLE System Memory in a 32bit OS.

    Your the one who does not know what he is talking about but using fancy tech talk you Googled or Wiki'd will not change that.

    If you had a GPU with 0MB of Memory (for talking sake) you would get use of all 4GB of System Memory.

    I NEVER said you have more or less VIDEO Memory to use in 32bit/64bit, you have LESS System Memory to use.

    I'm trying to be polite but after reading 1000's of threads over years on this topic that ain't even this threads topic I get a bit sick of the BS.

    Solution is to not run crappy 32bit OS on high end modern hardware !
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2010
  14. smut

    smut Member Guru

    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    9
    GPU:
    GTX 960 SuperSC
    Bliss is right, you guys are WRONG. Video memory takes away from the total RAM because it consumes address space. Anyone familiar with the limitations of x86 vs x64 should know this. A simple google search will confirm this.

    For example, if you had 4GB of system ram and a 1GB video card under a 32 bit operating system, each individual program could only use 3GB of that system ram (due to the video card using 1GB of address space). However there is something else most people are NOT aware of. Under DirectX 9.0C (and lower) video card ram must be duplicated into system ram. That means if you're running on the highest settings with your new shiny 1GB video card - that 1GB of video memory must be duplicated leaving you with only 2GB left for your game. On Win7 with WDDM1.1, the system memory copy was removed entirely, which effectively cuts the memory consumed in half. The memory does not need to be duplicated anymore. So even a 32bit Win7 is better then 32bit XP simply because of that 1 change which frees up more RAM to be used.
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2010
  15. HeavyHemi

    HeavyHemi Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,956
    Likes Received:
    961
    GPU:
    GTX1080Ti
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2010

  16. Zer0K3wL

    Zer0K3wL Banned

    Messages:
    3,073
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    gtx 480 850/1700/2000 h2o
    masive boost in starcraft 2 with AA well minimum fps mostly.
     
  17. TheHunter

    TheHunter Banned

    Messages:
    13,408
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    MSi N570GTX TFIII [OC|PE]
    well i have 1gb ram on gpu and in winxp 32bit(im using dual boot) it still shows 3.25gb, so that what you just said is wrong.
     
  18. Zooze

    Zooze Master Guru

    Messages:
    487
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Palit GTX465 1Gb Dual Fan
    I feel the need to clarify here around memory and RAM and some people in this thread dont really understand how this works.

    Lets start from the beginning, if you take a look how the memory would be mapped out with a 32bit OS. The CPU can only address 4Gb memory map which includes all hardware as thus:

    [​IMG]

    Now this memory map DOESN'T directly reflect the memory you have on devices such as graphics cards. You can have a 2Gb Graphics card on a 32bit OS with 4Gb RAM and you would still see around 3.25Gb. The reason for this is that the GPU can access all that memory as you would expect, all the CPU needs to do is have the mappable memory addressing range to communicate to the graphics card (e.g. to send graphics and textures, wireframes etc to the graphics card). These mappable addresses are typically linked to the bus on the computer, and the more cards you have on the bus the less RAM you see available on your computer.

    In a 64bit world you dont have the 32bit address space problem so hardware can be addressed outside the 4Gb address space limit as such:

    [​IMG]

    Its clear that going to 64bit provides significant improvements moving forward, most applications as already mentioned tend to only use up to 2Gb of addressable RAM, however this is becoming less and less and most executables have the greater than 2Gb limit dissabled to allow them to use up to 4Gb of address space. You can use CFF Explorer to check the exectuable for these and even reset the flag if you want to. Hope this helps, kindest regards

    Zoozer
     
  19. bliss007

    bliss007 Banned

    Messages:
    1,587
    Likes Received:
    0
    GPU:
    Asus GTX 580
    Well that is how it worked for me, I have seen varied between 3GB and 3.5GB on XP 32bit using GPU varied from 512MB to 1GB so do not tell anyone they are wrong if you do not know the facts at their end.

    Once again nobody here said you DO NOT get your full Video Memory to use !

    I know how it works without getting all tech and copy/pasting info from somewhere found using a search engine.

    And at the end of the day I'm sick of n00bs all over forums asking about it who still run 32bit OS esp when they have very high end new hardware. :banana:

    This thread WAS massively derailed by offtopic BS so lets move back to topic.
     
    Last edited: Nov 13, 2010
  20. TheHunter

    TheHunter Banned

    Messages:
    13,408
    Likes Received:
    1
    GPU:
    MSi N570GTX TFIII [OC|PE]
    yea i said you where wrong because by your theory i should have only 3gb instead of 3.25gb., and when i had my old 8800gts 320mb it was still 3.25gb.

    3.25gb is std in winxp with 4gb ram no matter what gpu ram size., it reserves 750mb, like in the post above with the chart..

    must be something with your mobo then.. and stop bashing others if they want to use xp its their choice not yours!
     

Share This Page