Nvidia releases ForceWare 169.01 Beta

Printable View

10-26-2007, 06:54 AM
Marduk_25

Nvidia releases ForceWare 169.01 Beta

Just in time for the release of the demo version of Crytek's Crysis, Nvidia has unleashed its latest beta ForceWare driver. The ForceWare 169.01 comes with support for the GeForce 6, 7 and 8 series (plus the FX series on the Windows XP drives) and, besides being the 'recommended driver for Crysis single player game demo', it features a few game and application fixes. For those wondering, no, there drivers do not come with support for the GeForce 8800 GT.

To download the ForceWare 169.01 Beta from our servers check out the links below:

- ForceWare 169.01 Beta (Windows XP 32bit)
- ForceWare 169.01 Beta (Windows XP 64bit)
- ForceWare 169.01 Beta (Windows Vista 32bit)
- ForceWare 169.01 Beta (Windows Vista 64bit)

Source: http://www.tcmagazine.com/comments.p...=16566&catid=3

Nvidia.com download:

- http://www.nvidia.com/object/winxp_169.01.html
- http://www.nvidia.com/object/winxp64_169.01.html
- http://www.nvidia.com/object/winvista_x86_169.01.html
- http://www.nvidia.com/object/winvista_x64_169.01.html

;)
10-26-2007, 07:04 AM
hecktic

nice!
10-26-2007, 07:08 AM
perkam

8800GT perf drivers or not.

Perkam
10-26-2007, 07:22 AM
OBR

This drivers ARE NOT support 8800GT! Ive tested it ... it says "no compatible hardware" ...
10-26-2007, 07:22 AM
perkam

kk

Perkam
10-26-2007, 07:26 AM
Starscream

Quote:

Originally Posted by OBR

This drivers ARE NOT support 8800GT! Ive tested it ... it says "no compatible hardware" ...

thats already mentioned in the TS.

But shouldnt it be possible to edit the file to include the 8800GT?

edit:
seeing the 8800GT officialy aint launched yet there is the chance that the day of launch Nvidia comes with a new Beta.
10-26-2007, 02:18 PM
JoeBar

It says clearly @ the cards supported, that 8800GT isn't. My guess is that this driver is out for about 2-3 days (just to play Crysis demo in the weekend) and within the next week a new one will be released to support 8800GT...
10-26-2007, 05:49 PM
Warboy

Can anyone do 167.25 vs 169.01 charts so we can pick the highest performance onces.
10-26-2007, 06:06 PM
hecktic

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warboy

Can anyone do 167.25 vs 169.01 charts so we can pick the highest performance onces.

yes i can do that for world of warcraft, unreal tournament 3 demo, and call of duty 4 demo.

Though i must warn you Im using an LCD monitor that doesnt seem to be vista approved which means I have to reset my monitor profile, including the resolution every time vista boots up no matter what driver im using.

But I can run fraps and record the FPS and make a chart for you if you want.

I can also test in XP but ill need to reinstall some of these games there as it will take time. My video card is an XFX 8800Ultra Extreme XXX Edition 675/1175/1667 spec.
10-26-2007, 06:08 PM
Warboy

Quote:

Originally Posted by hecktic

yes i can do that for world of warcraft, unreal tournament 3 demo, and call of duty 4 demo.

Though i must warn you Im using an LCD monitor that doesnt seem to be vista approved which means I have to reset my monitor profile, including the resolution every time vista boots up no matter what driver im using.

But I can run fraps and record the FPS and make a chart for you if you want.

I can also test in XP but ill need to reinstall some of these games there as it will take time. My video card is an XFX 8800Ultra Extreme XXX Edition 675/1175/1667 spec.

Nice, You should use TF2, CS:S, UT3, CoD4, Crysis, and Bioshock if you can, Those will show some good results.
10-26-2007, 06:13 PM
emoners

maybe the non-BETA version will support the 8800GT
10-26-2007, 06:14 PM
Warboy

Quote:

Originally Posted by emoners

maybe the non-BETA version will support the 8800GT

It could be as simple as editing a dev ID/ device ID code. I'll look later.
10-26-2007, 07:02 PM
Cybercat

This driver killed my ability to overclock.
10-26-2007, 07:06 PM
emoners

anyone else tried this driver already?
10-26-2007, 07:20 PM
strange|ife

i would avoid this beta. i not only lost 600 points in 3dmark. but crysis runslike :banana::banana::banana::banana: with it. Im sure there are better ones, but 163.71 works the best imo. Tf2 performance is amazing with that driver aswell.
10-27-2007, 08:02 AM
dengyong

Overclocking fine with ntune, good boost in sm3 performance.
10-27-2007, 08:28 AM
Borgod

163.69 DFI 680i. QX6700, 8800GTX SLI = 14402
169.01 Asus 650i. as above (no change, stock clocks) = 14543

I cant explain it... but I was amazed with the improvement. My DFI 680i broke so I bought an Asus P5E SLI with no real dramas swapping motherboard. This was NOT a new install of XP... yet I got a significant improvement. Absolute standard clocks for both benchmarks.
10-27-2007, 09:16 AM
fireice2

Tried the new drivers with my 8600.

Gave me around 45~50fps in UT3 Demo with everything maxed out. :D no AA though as usual.
10-27-2007, 09:41 AM
hecktic

maybe its just me but im getting jumpy fps in all games on this driver.... i dont get it... previous beta driver was a consistent 60fps in world of warcraft and now im getting anywhere from 25 to 58... never consistent... strange ... it might also be that my card is discontinued by XFX.... hmm i think ill contact XFX about this
10-27-2007, 09:43 AM
RAW-Raptor22

Quote:

Originally Posted by hecktic

maybe its just me but im getting jumpy fps in all games on this driver.... i dont get it... previous beta driver was a consistent 60fps in world of warcraft and now im getting anywhere from 25 to 58... never consistent... strange ... it might also be that my card is discontinued by XFX.... hmm i think ill contact XFX about this

Are the 167.26 or these drivers better?
10-27-2007, 11:07 AM
[XC]Atomicpineapple

These drivers appear to have stopped Crysis SP Demo working. Crysis now hangs at startup.

Hmm OK, maybe not. 64 bit version doesnt work (running Vista Ultimate X64) but 32 bit runs. Broken demo, or odd drivers?
10-27-2007, 11:12 AM
jagt

Awesome drivers. Gained 500 points in 3Dmark06. RivaTuner must be re-installed to allow overclocks though.
10-27-2007, 11:14 AM
Warboy

There is no true performance difference between these and 167.26s.

I just tested them.
10-27-2007, 12:03 PM
dengyong

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warboy

There is no true performance difference between these and 167.26s.

I just tested them.

This driver has better compatibility.

Works perfect with ntune.

Also fixed the desktop resize issue for hdtv.

Over 600 point boost in 3dmark06 I'm @16632 no tweaking on a single gtx.

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=3535396
10-27-2007, 12:34 PM
Warboy

Quote:

Originally Posted by dengyong

This driver has better compatibility.

Works perfect with ntune.

Over 600 point boost in 3dmark06 I'm @16632 no tweaking on a single gtx.

http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=3535396

Well I did my test in 05. So it could stress the cpu, Since for some reason on some overclocks, if the CPU isn't stable in 05, But it would be stable in 06. So just wanted to run a CPU test too.

also, I call lies.

Here is My GPU clock vs Yours.
Core Clock 675 MHz vs 732 MHz
Memory Clock 1053 MHz vs 1106 MHz

Tell me whats wrong with that picture.
10-27-2007, 01:48 PM
dengyong

1 Attachment(s)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warboy

Well I did my test in 05. So it could stress the cpu, Since for some reason on some overclocks, if the CPU isn't stable in 05, But it would be stable in 06. So just wanted to run a CPU test too.

also, I call lies.

Here is My GPU clock vs Yours.
Core Clock 675 MHz vs 732 MHz
Memory Clock 1053 MHz vs 1106 MHz

Tell me whats wrong with that picture.

I'm not sure what your asking me there but my os is not tweaked in that 3dmark06 run and my single 8800gtx has volt mods and running the clocks I stated for that run. I did provide a link to my published results.

You tell me whats wrong with that picture.
Attachment 66301
10-27-2007, 02:24 PM
Warboy

Quote:

Originally Posted by dengyong

I'm not sure what your asking me there but my os is not tweaked in that 3dmark06 run and my single 8800gtx has volt mods and running the clocks I stated for that run. I did provide a link to my published results.

You tell me whats wrong with that picture.
Attachment 66301

what I'm calling you on is, I'm pretty sure at +700Mhz, Anything gains points lol. And I think people want benchmark driver based tests without v-mod overclocks.
10-27-2007, 03:07 PM
dengyong

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warboy

what I'm calling you on is, I'm pretty sure at +700Mhz, Anything gains points lol. And I think people want benchmark driver based tests without v-mod overclocks.

Wrong, my previous run was made at the same core 732 and the mem at 1127 and before the 3dmark06 patch, so it wasn't reading my gpu clocks.
16042 for 163.71 http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=3318218
16631 for 169.01 http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=3535396

And a comparison between 163.75 and 169.01 at stock gtx clocks of 621/1000
14149 for 163.75 http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=3537982
14808 for 169.01 http://service.futuremark.com/compare?3dm06=3537821

I can back up everything I post so GROW UP!

It's better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.
10-27-2007, 05:11 PM
hecktic

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raptor22

Are the 167.26 or these drivers better?

Its hard to tell but so far it seems under vista 32 and xp home the new drivers are more stable than the previous 167.26.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warboy

There is no true performance difference between these and 167.26s.

I just tested them.

Yah it doesnt seem as if there is any gains but rather increased stability.

P.S. i can atest to dengyong scores. The modifications he has done to his card DO allow for increased performance thus the higher scores in benchmarking.
10-27-2007, 05:26 PM
dengyong

Slightly better performance increase at stock gtx clock than overclocked.

Test results in post #29.:up:

This driver also fixes the desktop resize issue for hdtv.
10-27-2007, 05:34 PM
Rattle

this driver improved frames in crysis for me, that also work well with HL2 Ep2, UT3 demo.

My card still overclocks fine with riva 2.05 and 2.06
gtx at 650/1620/2000

also the 64 bit dont run for me either with any driver I have tried, it just hangs in one spot or another almost right after it launches...
10-27-2007, 10:12 PM
Soulburner

Over 163.76, this gave me another 3-4fps in the Crysis GPU timedemo.
10-28-2007, 01:03 AM
strange|ife

i still dont know whats wrong here. im on vista, specs in sig. and i lost almost 600 points in 3dmark06. i havent tried that new patch though for mark, so i will try that.

my crysis performs worse aswell. but seems most people love these new betas...

ill try em again, and the new riva
10-28-2007, 01:13 AM
Warboy

Quote:

Originally Posted by strange|ife

i still dont know whats wrong here. im on vista, specs in sig. and i lost almost 600 points in 3dmark06. i havent tried that new patch though for mark, so i will try that.

my crysis performs worse aswell. but seems most people love these new betas...

ill try em again, and the new riva

Try this, Uninstall all Nvidia based drivers, Then use Guru3D Driver Sweeper to clean ATI, Nvidia, and Nforce, then Reinstall these drivers.
10-28-2007, 09:41 AM
514y3r

I gained another 400 +/- 3DMark06 with stock settings but they dont like to be OC'ed with the last beta drivers I could easaly overclock to 680Mhz core seems this new driver will either lock up or end 3Dmark during testing.
10-28-2007, 10:21 AM
514y3r

the 3DMark06 Hotfix did the trick for me.... So went ahead and did some tweaking...

163.75 Beta Driver (680 core 1100 memory):

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...3/3D_11752.jpg

169.01 Beta (I was getting artifacts @ 680 core, so clocked it down slightly to 671Mhz)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v161/LC1983/12264.jpg

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:37 PM.

XtremeSystems