1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Quicktest: GeForce 436.02 Gamescom in Battlefield V, Strange Brigade and Formula 1

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Aug 20, 2019.

  1. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,089
    Likes Received:
    5,128
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA
  2. LEEc337

    LEEc337 Active Member

    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    10
    GPU:
    Team Green 960
    Nvidia giving something for nothing

    That'll counter those daft prices for sure
     
  3. oli3

    oli3 Active Member

    Messages:
    71
    Likes Received:
    21
    GPU:
    EVGA GTX 1080 Ti SC
    Will it benefit Pascal 10-series?
     
  4. TLD LARS

    TLD LARS Member Guru

    Messages:
    109
    Likes Received:
    31
    GPU:
    Vega 64
    Looks like its barely outside margin of error.
     

  5. SerotoNiN

    SerotoNiN Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,351
    Likes Received:
    952
    GPU:
    EVGA RTX 2080
    Thanks for the graphs
     
  6. Caesar

    Caesar Master Guru

    Messages:
    728
    Likes Received:
    260
    GPU:
    GTX 1070Ti Titanium
    https://********/XSJPmN6/a.jpg



    https://********/Jx4CV8x/s.jpg
     
  7. jwb1

    jwb1 Master Guru

    Messages:
    466
    Likes Received:
    50
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 1080 Ti
    Complains about free performance. I love the internet.
     
  8. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    4,427
    Likes Received:
    1,358
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    As a Linux user, seeing results like are always seen as a welcome improvement. Doesn't matter if it's a 1% improvement - it shows there's progress. Add to the fact there's some minor visual improvements too, and I'd say this is a better driver release than most (especially for Windows).

    I do think it's a little odd Nvidia is making such a fuss about this (application-specific profile optimizations can yield better results than this) but it's certainly nothing worthy of complaint.
     
  9. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    9,738
    Likes Received:
    2,199
    GPU:
    5700XT+AW@240Hz
    That original against sharpen:
    That's not result of sharpenning, that's result of not gimping shader code and texture resolution.

    And 24 vs 30 bit... where does those images came from? Can we sue them for misleading us?
     
  10. TLD LARS

    TLD LARS Member Guru

    Messages:
    109
    Likes Received:
    31
    GPU:
    Vega 64
    -----------------------------------------
    Yes i am complaining because they claim up to 23% and list a lot of games.
    It is very misleading to find one combination that gives you 23% boost and then list improved performance in 6 games.
    The graphs are less misleading this time around though.
    But i hope they fixed the Forza, dirt and world war Z performance, because a vega and 7 was competing with higher priced nvidia cards.
     
    ManuKey likes this.

  11. jwb1

    jwb1 Master Guru

    Messages:
    466
    Likes Received:
    50
    GPU:
    MSI GTX 1080 Ti
    Hilbert tested with a 2080 Ti. nVidias higher % claims were when they tested with the Super cards. There is no conspiracy. The 2080 Ti is already pretty maxed out.
     
    MegaFalloutFan and pharma like this.
  12. jbscotchman

    jbscotchman Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,052
    Likes Received:
    2,102
    GPU:
    MSI 1660 Ti XS OC
    Well I can confirm these drivers suck dog ass and hate my system for some reason. After a clean installation I launched The Witcher 3 and it crashes on launch. Ran the DIRT Rally benchmark and it struggled to maintain 60-70fps. Shadow of the Tomb Raider benchmark, crashed. Justice RTX demo ran like total crap.

    Re-installed 431.60, tested all the same applications listed above and everything ran great. I'm thinking these might be great drivers for RTX cards, but not for GTX.
     
  13. asturur

    asturur Master Guru

    Messages:
    381
    Likes Received:
    79
    GPU:
    Geforce Gtx 1080TI

    LOL!

    to this is more 16bit vs 24bit :D
     
    schmidtbag likes this.
  14. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    4,427
    Likes Received:
    1,358
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    Yeah I also thought that was a bit ridiculous. Nearly everyone's displays are 24-bit (when Windows claims it's using 32-bit, it usually isn't).
     
  15. Astyanax

    Astyanax Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,300
    Likes Received:
    863
    GPU:
    GTX 1080ti
    Anyone wondering, nvidia are repacking the files with the problematic file replaced with a good one.
     

  16. Gomez Addams

    Gomez Addams Member

    Messages:
    39
    Likes Received:
    17
    GPU:
    2 x Titan RTX, 24GB
    Actually it always is now because GPUs don't like 24-bit frame buffers. There is an alpha channel that is usually set to fully opaque. You could see its effects when compositing was enabled in Windows 7.
     
  17. Robbo9999

    Robbo9999 Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,318
    Likes Received:
    220
    GPU:
    GTX1070 @2050Mhz
    Tried out that new NVidia driver. The same or slightly lower 3DMark & Timespy results. Tried in BF1 with Ultra Low Latency selected in NVidia driver - didn't actively notice any reduction in latency, but think I saw some slightly lower framerates in some places and perhaps a bit more stutter, I didn't play any better with it selected (but hard to tell because each lobby is different with different players). I think I'm gonna put the Latency settings back to default in the NVidia driver and wait for some official sites to do a latency and framerate analysis of this new driver/feature, because it seems that we might lose smoothness and framerate by activating the Ultra Low Latency option.

    (I'm already at 180 fps in BF1, so perhaps at that framerate there's not much reduction in latency to be had anyway by this new Ultra Low Latency option in the NVidia Control Panel.)

    EDIT: some further testing comparing Ultra Low Latency vs "Normal". In BF1 I ran around the same empty server comparing frame rate drops and there was no difference between the two, it was also just as smooth. I chose a map where it would occasionally drop below my 177fps limit that I've set so I could see if the dips happened more often when Ultra Low Latency was set. So that's a positive, looks like my earlier impressions might have been a bit too subjective. Also maybe slightly more crisp response from mouse movement with Ultra Low Latency selected.

    Also tested in Far Cry 5 in the benchmark, Ultra Low Latency setting didn't reduce framerate on that benchmark either.

    Looks like Ultra Low Latency is a keeper for now, will see how it goes with any further gaming I do.
     
    Last edited: Aug 20, 2019
  18. Rich_Guy

    Rich_Guy Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    12,264
    Likes Received:
    433
    GPU:
    MSI 2070S X-Trio
    Drivers back up. :)
     
  19. JamesSneed

    JamesSneed Master Guru

    Messages:
    589
    Likes Received:
    200
    GPU:
    GTX 1070
    I'm getting a 404 now :( Can someone tell nvidia to turn RTX back on.
     
  20. MonstroMart

    MonstroMart Master Guru

    Messages:
    567
    Likes Received:
    173
    GPU:
    ASUS GTX 1070 Strix
    It's actually within the margin of error outside of BFV. 1 or 2 frames is within the margin of error and you can see it by lower result in F1 at 2k which doesn't make any sense if you ignore the margin of error.
     

Share This Page