PDA

View Full Version : Did Nvidia Drop The Ball?


Pages : [1] 2

Mr Bigman
05-29-07, 02:39 PM
Ive been hearing and reading some conflicting reports that Nvidia is suffering in its driver devision, which explains why they haven't got it right as of late.

People are still having issues with vista and BSOD's, and they have failed with getting more supported drivers for XP.

This is a down turn for them and they might have to get more geeks in there driver team to fix the crap they been releaseing. In the sub 100 series the 2 best drivers made were the 30.82's and 84.21's. What happen to them?

Nvidia desn't have a competitor to shake them up no more it seems.

Arioch
05-29-07, 02:44 PM
Vista sucks in general right now and the XP drivers are okay IMHO.

rewt
05-29-07, 03:06 PM
Well, I wouldn't say Vista sucks. It is a good OS. It does still give me some problems though, so I stick with XP as my main gaming OS. At least until performance matches XP and/or Crysis arrives ;)

Forceware drivers do seem faster and more feature-rich on WinXP.

8800gtsfan
05-29-07, 04:56 PM
Vista sucks in general right now and the XP drivers are okay IMHO.


QFT

Arioch
05-29-07, 06:29 PM
Well I am dual booting at the moment and will probably continue to do so until Vista drivers are as good as XP drivers, so that may be a while. I will probably only put DX10 games on my Vista partition in the near future.

[EOCF] Tim
05-30-07, 03:29 AM
Every time people complained about drivers, I've never had a problem. Vista is great, the drivers are good too at this precise moment, performance isn't fully there yet , but c'mon, XP took a lot longer then Vista, but Vista at this moment is almost just as fast, I think that's a great feat.

rewt
05-30-07, 04:05 AM
QFT

How can you QFT a subjective statement?

Obviously, there are many people who now prefer Windows Vista to XP. (Not that I am currently one of them)

Don't get me wrong, as I've never really been one to defend Microsoft, but I just don't think it's fair to call Vista a sucky product. I mean, think about it, could you make something better?

XxDeadlyxX
05-30-07, 04:18 AM
Vista wouldn't suck as much if it had DV :rolleyes:

Ok I'll shut up :D

rewt
05-30-07, 04:19 AM
DV works on my 6600s.

That's one of nvidia's problem with Geforce 8.

mynakedrat
05-30-07, 01:20 PM
i have vista. never had a blue screen? vista is much preferable for my dual core and 2gb ram. i dont run sli. i dont want DV. i have 8800. i am happy. thank you nvidia, thank you micorsoft.




.......(let the beatings commence)........

six_storm
05-30-07, 01:44 PM
Since I had surgery a few weeks ago, I've been able to really get some use into my copy of Vista Business. I dunno who is to blame, but even for a game like Counterstrike Source, the performance under Vista was TERRIBLE. I know my rig isn't the latest and greatest, but why does CSS run so much better in XP right now and not working BETTER in Vista? I actually just installed XP Pro over Vista as of this morning just to get some better performance.

Slammin
05-30-07, 02:48 PM
Ive been hearing and reading some conflicting reports that Nvidia is suffering in its driver devision, which explains why they haven't got it right as of late.

People are still having issues with vista and BSOD's, and they have failed with getting more supported drivers for XP.

This is a down turn for them and they might have to get more geeks in there driver team to fix the crap they been releaseing. In the sub 100 series the 2 best drivers made were the 30.82's and 84.21's. What happen to them?

Nvidia desn't have a competitor to shake them up no more it seems.


What are you on about?

I run Vista64 exclusively now for everything. The only time I boot into XP these days is to do comparisons when I'm curious, but other than that, it's Vista for me.

swaaye
05-30-07, 02:55 PM
Just look to drivers in the early days of Win2K to see how things aren't really too bad with Vista right now. Not a lot better, though. I actually wonder if 98 is still way faster, with its VXD drivers, than 2K/XP even today with WDM. People just conveniently let that slip from their minds once all the advantages of NT 5 became apparent.

I'm not going to use Vista though until the games that need it are really out there. And when I have a machine with 4 GB RAM. I will not put myself onto a 2 GB Vista machine when XP and 2 GB is actually iffy for some of what I do right now.

I think Vista's prefetching and a crapload of RAM would make for a VERY smooth computing experience, though. Way faster app loads than XP. But for gaming, I'm definitely not as convinced.

SeriTonin
05-30-07, 03:05 PM
You're asking this on an nvpage? Ha! Naturally it's the fault of the OS (vista) which is why ATI's drivers work pretty much flawlessley on the same OS...gawd...

Yes, nvidia dropped the ball and the faster the community admits that and stops defending them, the sooner nvivida will fix it.

kevJ420
05-30-07, 03:52 PM
Since I had surgery a few weeks ago, I've been able to really get some use into my copy of Vista Business. I dunno who is to blame, but even for a game like Counterstrike Source, the performance under Vista was TERRIBLE. I know my rig isn't the latest and greatest, but why does CSS run so much better in XP right now and not working BETTER in Vista? I actually just installed XP Pro over Vista as of this morning just to get some better performance.
I think gabe newell may be to blame.

jAkUp
05-30-07, 04:21 PM
The latest drivers finally put my performance close to XP performance.

Mr Bigman
05-30-07, 04:56 PM
Whats strange is there still November drivers up on Nvidia.com for XP. Now they keep releasing drivers for vista hoping each release gets it right but who knows. I think by the Fall we will see things in order and working the way they should.

Im still using the 93.71's being they work but could be better for new stuff.

jAkUp
05-30-07, 06:00 PM
Maybe for single card performance but SLI is still slower here.

For me it is very similar. I am talking 5-8FPS difference in FEAR from XP to Vista. Previously it was like 20FPS :o

Here are my results:

Fear

WinXP - 158.22
Min: 76
Avg: 153
Max: 462

Vista - 158.24
Min: 57
Avg: 99
Max: 188

Vista - 158.42
Min: 78
Avg: 145
Max: 453

Ancient
05-30-07, 06:16 PM
imo, there's a difference between dropping the ball and trying to wrap their head around the new Vista driver model. NVIDIA is not the only ones having problems. ATi is having a lot of problems as well after having months to be prepared for the R600 release and seeing all the grief NVIDIA got from bad drivers.

It shouldn't take much longer to get things straightened out. The driver transition took a while from Win98 to 2000 as well and video cards/drivers weren't nearly as complicated back then. Soon enough few will even remember the initial driver issues.

SLINROB
05-30-07, 06:39 PM
For me it is very similar. I am talking 5-8FPS difference in FEAR from XP to Vista. Previously it was like 20FPS :o

Here are my results:

Fear

WinXP - 158.22
Min: 76
Avg: 153
Max: 462

Vista - 158.24
Min: 57
Avg: 99
Max: 188

Vista - 158.42
Min: 78
Avg: 145
Max: 453


The min frame rate went up 2fps for you under vista. Nice.

six_storm
05-30-07, 10:33 PM
The latest drivers finally put my performance close to XP performance.

Using the "Video Stress Test" on CSS and the latest drivers from Nvidia.com, here was my results on a 7600GT:

XP
Avg - 129.9FPS

Vista
Avg - 91.3FPS

I think it depends on your hardware . . . no duh? Vista does *somewhat* require you to have some amazing hardware in the first place compared to XP, therefore XP is still faster on somewhat older hardware.

Mr Bigman
05-31-07, 01:58 PM
You know through it all, i don't think Nvidia looks at user input or gives a damn about what we think.

Its a panal of there so called experts that make the banking decision whether its good or not. basically **** us, the public.

t3hl33td4rg0n
06-10-07, 09:31 AM
imo, there's a difference between dropping the ball and trying to wrap their head around the new Vista driver model. NVIDIA is not the only ones having problems. ATi is having a lot of problems as well after having months to be prepared for the R600 release and seeing all the grief NVIDIA got from bad drivers.

It shouldn't take much longer to get things straightened out. The driver transition took a while from Win98 to 2000 as well and video cards/drivers weren't nearly as complicated back then. Soon enough few will even remember the initial driver issues.

It would have been nice if they fixed all the current problems in the XP drivers! :thumbdwn:

Mr Bigman
06-10-07, 12:33 PM
Not Likely,

PaiN
06-10-07, 01:45 PM
I'm speaking up for Vista and nV Forceware, too
I resisted switching to Vista for a long while, because of all the crap I've heard about it. Once I broke down an got it..I love it, I've had less "issues" than I've ever had with XP...In fact, I've had only one, the PC wouldn't come out of sleep without a full reboot...which corrected with the 158.45 installed.
As for Forceware...not one app, game, demo or benchmark I've run has failed, BOSD'd or crashed due to software\OS. If there is a difference in performnce between XP and Vista, its minimal at best....I have run enough on both OSs, to be sure its a lame arrgument..... and more "netphobia" than fact.