ForceWare 158.16 surfaces

[ahmad]

Eh? The drivers increase the CPU score too? Interestingly SM2.0 went up more than HDR/SM3.0

Thats a really interesting observation. Someone should test with different clock speeds. Say, 3.0GHz conroe vs 3.5GHz/3.6GHz.

If CPU score doesn't go up, maybe they are simulating the CPU tests on the board itself??

I wish I had a G80 to do more testing.

[Cordovader]

Anyone has tried SLI with these drivers?

I´ve installed them yesterday (i have 2 8800GTX). The installation went ok but after rebooting each time i arrived at win i got a BSOD about de NV4-disp (or something like that) driver.

Maybe i´m missing anything?

[fornowagain]

http://downloads.guru3d.com/download.php?det=1616
http://www.nvidia.com/object/winxp_2k_158.19.html

158.18/158.19 XP

Same performance ect as the 158.16?

[lionel57000]

yes

i try them with my 8800gtx, seems very stable .

edit : 158.16 under xp 32

[mascaras]

http://downloads.guru3d.com/download.php?det=1616
http://www.nvidia.com/object/winxp_2k_158.19.html

158.18/158.19 XP

Same performance ect as the 158.16?

158.18 its for VIsta Only

for XP its 158.19



new XP driver:

158.16 (beta/beta)
158.19 (Official Betal)
165.01 (beta/beta)



new Vista Driver :

158.18 (Official Beta)
165.01 (beta/beta)




regards

[Solarfall]

very interesting, downloading it now

mascaras do you know is there any differences in performance with these xp drivers
158.16 (beta/beta) 158.19 (Official Betal) 165.01 (beta/beta)

[mascaras]

very interesting, downloading it now

mascaras do you know is there any differences in performance with these xp drivers
158.16 (beta/beta) 158.19 (Official Betal) 165.01 (beta/beta)

158.19 and 158.16 are the same driver with same performence , but 158.19 are official beta and 158.16 are beta/beta



158.16 --- 3dmark 2005@ BFG 8800GTS 320mb default >>> 17633 marks
158.19 --- 3dmark 2005@ BFG 8800GTS 320mb default >>> 17643 marks


the 165.01 are beta/beta i didnt try yet but for the users feedback its seems they are not very good


my advice is :

for VISTA >> 158.18
For XP >> 1587.19


BTW: in my opinion in terms of image quality the new drivers are not so good (maybe thats why better performence )



i also saw other ppl with same opinion :

Boas


both driver on TDU 1280/1024 4XAA HDR Full Details .

Forceware 97.94



Forceware 158.19





look at the left wall and also the colors

regards

[Solarfall]

ok i have been testing this beta driver for a while now and i really have to say that this 158.19 version kicks serious ass.

[Mikesnav]

Anyone know how to control the fan speed with these drivers in Vista?

I doubt nTune works with these drivers. nTune in Vista is crap, too.

[Solarfall]

Anyone know how to control the fan speed with these drivers in Vista?

I doubt nTune works with these drivers. nTune in Vista is crap, too.

you might want to try speedfan. works with most mobos.

[Mikesnav]

Probably shoulda clarified that, but Speedfan works with the GPU's fan?

[Solarfall]

lol i thought that you meant in general.. sorry but it does not work as a gpu fan controller

[BenchZowner]

RivaTuner v2,0 and force the drivers detection to 97.02

[mascaras]

hi guys


with new 158.19 i have + 1000 marks in 2005 and +600 marks in 2006 than with 97.94





E6600@3600mhz -- BFG 8800GTS 320mb DEFAULT





E6600@3600mhz -- BFG 8800GTS 320mb DEFAULT





hehehehhee



regards

[fornowagain]

for XP its 158.19

I put 158.18/158.19 XP cos theres a typo on the Guru3d page

http://downloads.guru3d.com/download.php?det=1616

[Vapor]

Is anyone able to corroborate the increase in CPU scores from post #52? If a driver can increase CPU scores from 06, I'll be damned....insanely interesting if it's true though. Those tests are supposed to be completely software based, no hardware acceleration.

[theteamaqua]

man the 158.19 from nv's driver page sux big time ... .16 is better atm

[SrJabardo]

mascaras entao rapazola ta tudo??

Well, people, can someone give me a direct download link for the drivers?

Btw, wich drivers have you used mascaras? the modded ones or the "untouched" ones?

Say something


Hugs and kisses

[DilTech]

Is anyone able to corroborate the increase in CPU scores from post #52? If a driver can increase CPU scores from 06, I'll be damned....insanely interesting if it's true though. Those tests are supposed to be completely software based, no hardware acceleration.

Better driver-level threading is the likely cause. As in, less overhead on the cpu from the drivers.

[mascaras]

mascaras entao rapazola ta tudo??

Well, people, can someone give me a direct download link for the drivers?

Btw, wich drivers have you used mascaras? the modded ones or the "untouched" ones?

Say something


Hugs and kisses

im using 158.19 for WIn XP 32 bit



Forceware 158.19 XP 32bits

Forceware 158.19 XP 64bits



for Vista :

Forceware 158.18 Vista 32bits

Forceware 158.18 Vista 64bits

man the 158.19 from nv's driver page sux big time ... .16 is better atm

i tryed Both (they are the same driver but 158.19 are official ) and i have same 3dmark 2005/2006 score , when you say 158.19 sux and 16 are better ,are you talking about what??? Image quality ???


because in performence they are the same ........



97.94 and 97.92 in image quality are better ..... (maybe thats the reason of 158.xx scores better in benchmarks)

regards

[nuclearjock]

My benchies have increased as well.

But in Flight Simulator 2004, I ran 8XQ AA with 97.94 and all was well.

With 158.19 8XQ AA looked like no AA at all..

Also, the profile for Aquamark 3 F*&d up when I tried to disable AA, started giving me windows error messages...

165.01 did the same.

Back to 97.94 for now.....

[kiwi]

These beta are really great for benching, improved 3dmarks a lot

[RADCOM]

They seem to be official and on the Nvidia website now ....mine wouldn't install though.......nice!

[Hicks]

yeah, these are on the site now:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/winxp_2k_158.19.html