Discussion in 'Videocards - NVIDIA GeForce Drivers Section' started by Krzyslaw, Sep 22, 2015.
nvm: I figured it out
Really? Better how? More accurate representation of the "intended" color, better/smoother banding? I genuinely would like to know.
"More vibrant" gives me shivers as well.. Most of the time it means someone likes boosted saturation/contrast levels, which results in more "pop" but also a loss of (shadow)detail and unnatural/plain wrong representation of colors. For example; all those SweetFX/ReShade profiles: uke2: (= my opinion)
Of course, it's a matter of taste - but to say it's actually better.. you gotta be able to back that up with some proof/facts.
@ Cryis your driver installed fine for me no worries.
This driver seems to give me a more stable Fps in wot just a flat line in AB haven't had that for awhile but only had 5 games so will see with more games how it goes but looks promising
There is no proof for this stuff. People have been claiming this for years but not a single spec of proof posted. Either they vanish completely when they get asked for some or some excuse why you can't see it.
If it truly was as different as they make it out to be it shouldn't take longer then 10min of installing a driver take a couple screenshot, install these and take the same ones and throw it online.
270.35 Tesla had very vibrant colors compared to normal geforce and quadro did too a couple of times, desktop sharpness (icons) was also more defined by quadros. Some geforce drivers were more blurry, same thing was observed by texture filtering a couple of times.
Lately not so much, guess nv decided to make geforce driver more inline with quadro sharpness..
If you or anyone else never noticed it then you need a better monitor or better monitor calibration.
And once again statements but no proof.
Here is my proof: I put a banana background picture up on both my desktops with identical screens side-by-side. I grabbed a Monkey from Monkey Island™ and sat him dead center between the screens. 9 out of 10 times the Monkey went to lick the screen that was driven by Quadro drivers and pooped on the other. The one time the monkey didn't, he urinated onto the camera and that's why I can't post a video of it on ApeTube.banana...
On a more serious note, Quadro drivers often had different default image quality settings than GeForce ones in the past (one could see that by comparing values in Nvidia inspector, the registry or even Nvidia control panel in some cases), as the Quadro drivers were often set for image quality (and stability) while GeForce drivers were set for performance, sacrificing some quality and sometimes stability in the process. One could likely get a similar or same image quality if one changed the settings to be identical. The differences are usually very subtle anyway and some may notice them more than others. Some may also be a placebo effect, for much of the "blanks" of an image are filled in by our brain which can be heavily influenced in what we believe to be true.
After all, some people don't even notice a difference between no anti-aliasing and 4x SGSSAA, while for some anything below 4x SGSSAA is too jagged and annoying. It's all subjective in what one notices and what one doesn't. If one doesn't notice, then there is no need to worry for them.
I myself have noticed differences in image quality between Quadro and GeForce drivers before, although not so much in the more recent versions.
And what proof do you want?
Want me to install some 3year old driver not working on my gpu anymore to show you my point that those really stood out and had really vibrant colour like if you raised digital vibrance from default 50 to 53%?
Or DSR smoothness 20 vs 25% as an example how some older GF drivers looked more soft then others with more sharp look.
Don't call out people if you never saw a difference, that doesn't me we all didn't either.
Deal with it and ignore such comments if you don't like it. Simple as that, now move on.
First I thought I would make a proper reply. Then I realized you don't believe that people can see a difference in color or sharpness. Or that differet monitors aren't equally good. or that different people are not equally good at measuring things. Also you ask for evidence without providing any yourself. So then I realized, since I have only one other user here blocked, might as well double up!
Doing your say and then blocking me, very mature attitude.
I am not saying it doesn't exist, i am saying people have been saying this for years but never i have seen any proof of it. The burden on proof is one the one making the statements, this is basic discussion 101 btw. Also, how can i proof anything when i don't see the difference? It doesn't even make sense.
Anyway this will be my last post about the subject. Have a nice day.
The need for a restart has been relaxed since Windows Vista, nothing changed in 7 or 8 in this. You don't need to restart if you're installing on top of a previous version. If you're installing from default driver (after uninstall with regular uninstaller or DDU or some tool) then you'll have to reboot.
I've installed pretty much every NV driver since GF2GTS on pretty much all their h/w and I've never seen any difference in colors or sharpness with a Quadro driver compared to a regular GF one. I'm not saying it's impossible, but I am saying that whatever was the cause of this is unlikely the driver branch in itself and more likely some settings which were changed by the people who saw this themselves.
Mad Max runs ok with these, ok I tested it only with this driver so far.. Just got it today.
Going to play some other games now.
I had GF2TI. Man you bring memories back
But back to the topic.
What can I say to finish your argument about the colors?
I can say that some people are able to perceive even minor differences in perception of colors displayed on computer monitor. Moreover, improving the quality of color could be the unintended result of amendments contained in the drivers, and the reception of colors is an individual matter, and I think that at this moment we can quit arguing, because even if some of us show you pictures, most of you won't see any, even minimum difference. There are to many varibles in this topic.
Sorry for next post in a row.
I have found something that can improve overal stability and fps for those who have 2nd gen intel CPUs and win 10 64 bit.
I just instaled driver called 2nd generation Intel(R) Core(TM) processor familly PCI Express Controller.
Driver number 10.1.1.9 and I downloaded it by using latest IOBIT driver booster 3.0.3
all seems more stable, I gain about 2-3fps in places where I have lowest fps during gameplay and also GPU-Z started to show temps about 1-2C lower than with previous set 10.1.1.8.
Fraps showing me as i said about 2 fps more for example in fifia 16 after i updated that driver.
You can try guys.
0 Mhz for ram clock fixed ?
i have installed intel chipset software 10.1.2.10
with this version my pci express controller are 10.1.1.8... how i update only this?
nevermind... when i updated directly for 10.1.2.10 these installed 10.1.1.8 for my pci express but others devices installed 10.1.2.10 version... so i downgraded for 10.1.1.9 and installed these 10.1.1.9 for my pci express but other devices too... so later i installed again the 10.1.2.10 and other devices back to 10.1.2.10 and pci express continues like 10.1.1.9...
I'll try these out and see how they do for me thru the week. I'm hoping they wont give me any issues.
Eh? Will give a try on laptop. The last time I used a 3rd party driver updater, it updated my webcam driver and whatever was recorded was upside-down. Never tried it again. Tried to ruin my keyboard too. Had to rollback driver using mouse.
The NVIDIA driver is running good, no real-world difference though.
I can't *see* any color differences. If I had read the posts earlier I would have taken a screenshot of a multi-color in prev. driver and current driver.
10.1.2.10 is on intel xeon pci express x16 controller then the rest is 10.1.1.9
I was able to increase my max overclock with these drivers. Thank you OP!
It was 1506.5Mhz, now 1531.5Mhz