Discussion in 'Videocards - NVIDIA GeForce Drivers Section' started by peppercute, Feb 26, 2018.
The game does not have an SLI profile and as I remember the 1st one never had one either.
Hasn't it already been about 5 drivers? Fps remains lower.
no problems for me... driver keeps settings in the cpl, although i only got a 1080gtx...
Ok nvm that FFXV part, its the same as 390.77
I tested it again, but this time a bit tighter ram timings, actually even tighter, and with 100mhz lower cache 4.1GHz instead of 4.2GHz
390.77 (I had tiny bit faster vram, that's why 4points more)
Custom resolutions working fine here on 2 monitors. Did you use CRU to add the new resolutions to the EDID profiles as well as the NVCP? Also, you may need to check "Enable resolutions not exposed by the display" is on.
No. There was no driver for my 1080 where "fps was lower" since my last significant upgrade back in June 2016. Each version produce slightly different result which is either lower or higher than a previous one. Learn what "margin of error" means.
It was meant to be ironic...Indeed within the margin of error. If you do the benchmark twice or more the error can even be more than 5%
Apparently customer support twitter guy is sleeping. Thanks for the link.
I know what it means...but the fact that this is okay with you is kind of disturbing. Our lack of expectations from nvidia is why they can do what they are doing. I say we start demanding driver optimizations and performance boosts.
They can't just wave a magic wand and get more performance without compromising something else (like IQ). GPU's are often hitting close to peak performance when brought to retail (otherwise why bring it to retail?), so what you're wanting is for them to release a GPU at say 75% potential and then every driver from release add a few percent performance?
That would be buying an AMD GPU
Sad that a majority thinks this way...people forget so fast. There have been drivers that improved performance in the past. Take the recent dx12 driver not too long ago. Gave me a pretty big boost on dx12 titles. Go back even further to maxwell when we got the legendary dx11 driver. I'm not asking for giant boosts but I think it's just sad when fps don't even go up by 1 after 10 drivers...in fact the fps goes down.
Such drivers always come out somewhat shortly after a new architecture of GPUs has been launched, because many things in modern GPUs can be done in hundreds of different ways and sometimes it takes a lot of time to find one which is the most efficient. However, once you've optimized the driver for most of typical use cases, there's not much you can do to improve performance any further.
Pascal is not that much different from Maxwell in its architecture and thus you can say that it's been 3,5 years of current driver improvements, it's completely unrealistic to expect any significant gains from drivers at this point. Yes, they managed to bump the binding tier last year and this did provide boosts in several DX12 titles (mostly those coded specifically for AMD h/w as a part of their devrel program as GCN had higher resource binding tier previously and this was part of the reason why it was faster at running such code) but this was something which nobody really expected and is somewhat of a testament to the skills of NV's s/w engineers.
Btw, AMD's gains from driver improvements are significantly overblown. They mostly provide the same thing as NV these days - as in optimize their driver for some specific titles where it may result in noticeable gains sometimes. But overall, in general, they've peaked at optimizing their GCN driver quite some time ago.
I had a funny moment with one old (2012) game which has two types of gameplay - gunplay and exploration of a map. I forgot to set V-Sync to "Adaptive" in global profile in NVCP, and exploration of the map gameplay became very difficult due to mouse cursor moving like with near the zero mouse sensitivity. Funny how things can be related indirectly (because I don`t see how increased FPS can cause such slowdown of the mouse movements).
Lol and 391.05 beta driver lost 80points again..
And how would you know? It's not like you use AMD's cards on a regular basis. You're blowing wind out your backside again, making comments with no hands-on experience.
Performance on my 390 steadily improved over the last year and a half in all my games, none of which are AAA titles so you can dismiss popular title optimizations. (Like SWTOR, DA:I, Diablo III, Conan: Exiles, Mass Effect 2/3) They really did pull their collective heads out of their own arses, and closed the gap on DirectX performance (DX9/11). The hardware now compares very nicely with their comparable NV counterpart. The only place where AMD still needs optimization work is OpenGL performance.
Now I use a new laptop with a full GTX1070M, mainly because buying a new Vega card was overinflated, and the price on the system was very good. (It's currently $1299 at MicroCenter)
You know me so well.
And this is the point where you present benchmarks proving this.
I'm fairly confident that's an Adobe issue. Adobe Premiere Pro 2018 is a hot mess right now. My best advice to you is to revert to 2017.
The difference between 390 and its direct counterpart, the gtx 970, is the same now that it was 1 or 2 years ago, so I would say that your perception is more like a placebo effect.