Discussion in 'Videocards - NVIDIA GeForce Drivers Section' started by maur0, Aug 4, 2016.
All of those things are already supported?
"Although Microsoft Windows 2000 and later versions of the NT-based operating system, along with Windows 98 and Windows Me, all support various versions of WDM".
So apparently Win98 and WinME are "now" in the world of siriq.
And they shockingly do.
As for Fast Sync I don't think NV ever specified the h/w which they'll support it on but technically it should work on any DX11+ GPU. It's only a question of how far they are willing to go with supporting the feature on old generations.
Petersen said at Pcper that Pascal can do Fast Sync better than previous generations.
It is simply where wdm starts , before we had VxD. It is important to introduce these information's since people don't even know what is wddm and what's related and how in win 7/8/8.1 and 10 . They are not expert , as you can see.
Fastsync perfectly works on fermi. Question is, nvidia how far is going to cut the support of it? Last time nv rep mentioned after nv has disabled fastsync on all other cards apart from pascal of course, it will be available on maxwell and pascal.
Since a little tool is out by don't remember the name of the person , you can enable fastsync on fermi, kepler and maxwell too.
Yeah because you generally want a really high framerate when using it, which is something Pascal is obviously good at doing.
No, it was a technical reason, apart from higher fps.
You have a time stamp for it?
I watched the PC Perspective podcast and I don't remember him stating a specific technical reason, other then you generally wanting a high framerate when it's enabled and obviously the latest generation cards will be more capable of doing that.
I've also seen no disparity between Maxwell/Pascal users over how effective it is in various games in neither this forum nor on the nvidia subreddit. So as far as I'm concerned the only advantage Pascal offers is higher framerates.
Will try to find it when I have time. Write me a PM if I forget it.
WDM have zero relation to WDDM. In fact, WDDM is what came as a driver model for videocards specifically instead of WDM+XDDM due to DWM/Aero introduction in Vista+.
You should really stop spreading FUD. You're completely clueless.
I have doubts about Fast Sync having any kind of special support in h/w. Fast Sync is using the same h/w which is used by vsync but handles the s/w part in a different way. It' basically a pure s/w feature of NV's driver. Still, supporting it on older architectures requires resources which they may be unwilling to spend.
Good idea, ill try that.
No need to do that. Just extract the cab file and run the setup file like normal drivers.
That way you can pick what you do/don't want to install.
I have cleaned installed my windows 10 build 1607, and the driver installed it by itself. The DPC latency issue is still present in the "class 10" series...
Ah, I thought this way of doing it would only update the graphics drivers.
Whats this bs sarcasm again??
Im quite sure newer versions work better.
Nope, it installs everything in the package.
And now we are coming to the article i linked before: https://prohardver.hu/hir/windows_10_anniversary_update_titkolt_frissites.html
Looks like here on this forum we have to take the long way to make understand people about wddm. Thx for helping me out
Win 10 update went fine but this driver did not do so well. Couldn't open windows on desktop so installed older driver and all is fine.
So you don't need to mode the ini file to run othe versions than 10xx?
I'm quite sure you haven't a clue what these new versions actually change even though the Vulkan changelog is open for anyone to read on GitHub. As I've said, it's mostly SDK fixes which have no effect on how applications work, they are helping in the development of said applications instead.
This article seems to be about DXGI 1.5 features (mostly HDR, adaptive sync and such support in a window) which are not related to WDDM either even though it's possible that whatever changes WDDM 2.1 brought were required for DXGI 1.5 implementation. So this article is completely against your previous argument. As I've said, you don't know what you're talking about.
It's really difficult to find any mention of DXGI 1.5 that doesnt have Windows 10 build 1607 in it.
I did find something that says WDDM 1.1 = DXGI 1.1 and WDDM 1.3 = DXGI 1.3, so i'm GUESSING that WDDM 2.0 = DXGI 1.4 and WDDM 2.1 = DXGI 1.5, but i can't say for sure? Dxdiag doesn't seem to show DXGI version and i dont know anyway to check in windows.