View Full Version : GF4 and 78.03 - Less quality?

09-15-05, 12:54 AM
I just installed the 78.03 betas with my Ti4200 (old drivers were 43.45) and after tweaking the quality settings through Rivatuner to max quality, I notice LESS quality.

Textures now have a grid like overlay which looks like DXT1 compression errors or artifacts in Direct X games (GTA 3 and GTA Vice City for instance).

It has allowed me to play some newer games without texture poly or textures popping out (Cold Fear), but the overall quality is not up to par!

Newer 8xS AA mode sucks compared to the "old" 8xS in all apps!

Is there a way patch the drivers to enable the "old" AA modes and keep the same texture quality? Or am I doomed to go back to the old drivers?

FX users: are you guys experiencing these problems?

Any help appreciated!

09-15-05, 01:41 AM
Use fraps and post some screenshots

09-15-05, 02:16 AM
I wouldn't expect recent drives to work well with GF4 cards. Heck, I'm lucky if they work at all on my FX.

09-15-05, 02:22 AM
Friends FX5900 PCI-e has mass probs. lol

09-15-05, 02:26 AM
im not noticing any problems on my FX5900..no image quality problems here :)

09-15-05, 02:37 AM
im not noticing any problems on my FX5900..no image quality problems here :)

Oooo ok ill shutup dont listen to me at all , my firend is just a dumb newibie. :) :rolleyes: :cool:

09-15-05, 11:04 AM
My FX 5700 Ultra and 5800 Ultras have no apparent decrease in image quality with 7x.xx drivers.

Oddly, though, starting with 72.14, playing FarCry on 6800 Ultra (SLI and non-SLI) gives me image quality significantly worse than FX 5x00 image quality. I haven't yet found any satisfactory setting for FarCry image quality and 6800 with 7x.xx drivers.

09-17-05, 01:11 PM
Users of the old cards (up to the FX line) should use the 65.73 (WHQL) found on Guru3D.

They're not the fastest but they've the best quality of all the Forceware drivers I've ever seen. Too bad they don''t support NV4x and newer cards :(

09-17-05, 04:19 PM
but at least are the performance improved or not?

09-19-05, 03:15 AM
Read what I said... "They're not the fastest". I do wonder about people obsession with performance. It's not that a couple of frames more or less is going to change your life.

If you're after quality they're the best. There was quite a few threads on the matter in this forum about a year ago. There was also a nice article with benchmarks and pics comparison.

09-19-05, 10:56 AM
i use zp 6766 on my wifes g4 ti4400. work great. have not seen a release since that gives as good of a balance of iq/speed/stability as that driver for that gpu.

09-22-05, 05:32 PM
I believe the older 45.23 drivers are the best for the Geforce4 series, however 66.93 is a viable alternative. The whole 5x.xx series and early 6x.xx series were full of random graphical glitches in a different game of mine every time I tried a new driver set. Finally, the 66.93 drivers worked great and did not have any issues, and I continue to use those today.

I also have a FX5700 and the 66.93 drivers are also the best I have used so far. Although, I moved to the 77.77 set because I really enjoy the display optimization wizard.

09-22-05, 11:09 PM
I've always used the latest drivers on my FX 5950 Ultra. I'm currently using the 78.01 official set. I did, however, like the 53.03 set back in the day. I would still use them, but newer games don't like that set. I will admit that some of the 6x.xx series gave better performance, but also corrupted the snowflakes in Ghost Recon, which at the time, was the main game I was playing. I basicly went from the 53.03 to the 7x.xx. Oh, and I used to use the Omega 53.03 at that. Damn fine set.

Holy Smoke
09-24-05, 05:00 PM
I noticed the same thing a couple of years ago, when I upgraded from 30.82 to 40.41. The 40-series were advertised as "performance unleashing" drivers, which they were, but at the cost of IQ. I particularly remember Day of Defeat looking much worse.