New nVidia 256.15 beta drivers fix DX11 load time

Spear

While I can't imagine there are many running Fermi based cards, but the newest nVidia beta drivers fix the DX11 loading time bug, and also provide some major speed increases, and add multimonitor gaming support.

http://www.hardocp.com/news/2010/05/24/nvidia_beta_256_drivers_released/

Wonda-Boy

Must....resist.....making ....FERMI....jokes....about.....heat....and....power....etc...etc...etc....

argggggggggggghhhhhhhhh:P

Spear

Wonda-Boy wrote: »

Must....resist.....making ....FERMI....jokes....about.....heat....and....power....etc...etc...etc....

argggggggggggghhhhhhhhh:P

Meh, go nuts if you wish, they do pour out a lot of heat.

Performance is nice though, spot where they kick in on these charts.

http://boincstats.com/stats/boinc_user_graph.php?pr=bo&id=da76b9eb5c21ea5616beebcaf800e239

Wonda-Boy

They not THAT bad but 6mths late and a inferior product, and this coming from an nVidia fan.

On average about €100 dearer, alot more noise, alot more heat and only 10-12% increase in performace over a STANDARD non clocked (and they all clock very well) 5870 :eek:

If it did not have the extra memory it would perform the same...nah thay dropped the ball on this one.

Wonda-Boy

Well the 5850* & 5870 are also ripping games to shreds.....and with alot less power and noise. Dont get me wrong its a nice card but about a year to late to the party.

Enjoy.

*Depending on res you play it

5uspect

betafrog wrote: »

Well tbf, they may well be, but they don't support 3D Vision, they don't support PhysX and they don't support CUDA, the last 2 being fairly big in the future in games and the first allbeit a gimmick, but one that I enjoy and likely sells a good few cards. I can understand that ATi cards are on par and sometime ahead of Nvidia cards in terms of performance, but they seem to lack any interest in the latest techs.

PhysX and CUDA are both propitiatory nVidia products. How do you imagine ATi can possibly support them? Why can't my GTX275 run the the latest Catalyst drivers? :rolleyes:

In terms of compute ATi have their Stream technology to match CUDA.

Ultimately these have limited bearing on games at the moment. nVidia seem too focused on the HPC GPGPU market and on future gaming tech that very few games actually use. They still have to fight off a reborn Larrabee, a platform that is conveniently based on x86 unlike Tesla. Since many people in the HPC community hate change my money is on Intel. (The amount of Fortran code used today is staggering)

By the time a lot of new games heavily use the kind of sophisticated physics and other CUDA capabilities the current Fermi chips will be obsolete.

nVidia seem to have thrown away this generation of GPUs in favour of reinventing their architecture while AMD have stuck to evolution over revolution.
Perhaps the long term gamble will pay off for nVidia but at the moment ATi is on top.

Wonda-Boy

Mate, you have classic "Need to Defend" my latest GPU syndrome. Trust me, the GTX480 is nothing special in fact every hardware review site out there has said that while its not a bad product its no where near the GPU it should have been.

I have had every top GPU for the last 5 yrs the day of release including this year (I have a 5970 clocked to 5870 speeds and it runs at less then 60 degrees gaming!) and all others were nVidia. I do prefer nvidia but this edition of cards are bad design and badly implemented....they just had to release "SOMETHING"

I would prefer a Toxic 5870 clocked to its limit which would be FASTER use LESS ENERGY and be CHEAPER then the 480.

5uspect

betafrog wrote: »

Nvidia have said all along that ATi can have access to PhysX and Cuda whenever they want it.

They don't need it, they have Stream.

They are already making there way into main stream games, Just Cause 2 makes use of Cuda for it's water simulations, and PhysX has been used in many games for years.

Of course it has, long before nVidia bought them. And so has Havok et al. But that's not what we're talking about here. High end GPU based PhysX is pretty new. Look at the Navier Stokes solvers for fog in Batman:AA. Nice effects but hardly game changing. These are effects that currently don't need accurate physical simulation. Dumb animations could just as easily be used.

I like nVidia GPUs my self but they've blown this one.

shootermacg

I dunno what all the fuss is about. My 8800 GTX still owns all your monkey asses!!!

Wonda-Boy

Yeah in SOLITARE...:cool:

shootermacg

Wonda-Boy wrote: »

Yeah in SOLITARE...:cool:

:D:D

Wonda-Boy

Pac-man at a push.....lmao.

Only messin mate....the 8800GTX was one of the best cards around and still does a very good job.

I had the 6600 series then the 7800GTX w/ Quadro Cooler and the 8800GTX then the GTX295 (which went faulty) so had no choice but to get the 5970

POOOR OLD ME!!!!

spooky donkey

well Im still running twin 8800s also and I have no intention in upgrading them any time soon. Ive gone through every incarnation of the Nvidia range up to that but the only upgrade I would concider now is to get a quad core, over my dual core. seems BF is more CPU then GPU dependant.
Buying a new card for future games seems pointless. Wait till them future games come out and then get your card for half the money.
If there are any more future games the PC gaming secene seems to be dieing off. Every xfire release these days seems to have less and les new games supported.

Wonda-Boy

spooky donkey wrote: »

well Im still running twin 8800s also and I have no intention in upgrading them any time soon. Ive gone through every incarnation of the Nvidia range up to that but the only upgrade I would concider now is to get a quad core, over my dual core. seems BF is more CPU then GPU dependant.
Buying a new card for future games seems pointless. Wait till them future games come out and then get your card for half the money.
If there are any more future games the PC gaming secene seems to be dieing off. Every xfire release these days seems to have less and les new games supported.

Twin 8800's will do a grand job mate, but it does depend on the size of the display you are running. A high end dual core is good but 99% of games do utilize all FOUR cores now so it would be a good investment but if you are thinking of upgrading dont do it now, with all the new 4 cores and 6 cores about to go live.

I have been waiting for ages to upgrade my Quad 9450 (3.6ghz) but the i7's would not have given me much of an improvement in games. I already have a 5970 running at 5870 speeds with very good and fast DDR2 RAM. So when the SANDYBRIDGE CPUs are out I am gonna move to that.

spooky donkey

yeah but Im thinking ill pick up a quad core chip and bord cheap enough, when all you lads buy your sandy beaches and such and are selling off yer old loot.

Wonda-Boy

OSI wrote: »

You're looking at at least Q4 before the Sandy Bridge CPU's are released which means Q2 2011 before they are widely available at a decent price... A whole year is a good while to wait for a CPU.

So what is the alternative....pay stupid money in performance terms for a i7-930 and get about 10-15% increase over the setup I have now! I am still maxing out every game I play at 1920x1200 res on a 24" TFT with over 60FPS (play all games with VSYNC) so OF COURSE I am gonna wait till Q4 (I will pay launch price) for a setup that will actually give me a decent performance increase.

It not that long TBH, looking at the scales of things.

5uspect

Wonda-Boy wrote: »

...play all games with VSYNC...

Triple buffering I hope?

EDIT: Back OT somewhat the 257.21 drivers are now WHQL.

Wonda-Boy

Yep. X3 trip to the buff.....MOST DEF - YOU FEELIN me DAWG.

(Sorry just start watching THE WIRE again :rolleyes: )

5uspect

heh, I just started Season 3.

Wonda-Boy

You should also watch "The Shield" its just brilliant. More action then the wire and a TOTALLY UBER storyline.

5uspect

257.21 = BSOD with flash 10.1, ugh.