ForceWare 174.74, the 9800GTX secret helper???
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Ok, I tried to make the title as eye-catcher as possible to get a few people to spend a few seconds to read this.
Since yesterday's release of the 9800GTX, many threads opened about whether or not go for a 9800GTX (either for a new system or EVGA's Step-Up program) over a 8800GTS; I myself wondered if I should pay the 45$ it would cost me to step-up my 512-P3-N841-A3 (8800GTS factory clocked @ 670MHz).
Looking to various reviews, I noticed that most tests were made using the cards "official" drivers, that is 169.25 for GF8 and 174.74 for GF9. Yeah, you see where I'm going with that ... Being a numbers freak, I did a little comparison, on my own system of how the 174.74 drivers would impact my performance (got the here).
I did my tests with Crysis (Crysis benchmark Tool) on Windows Vista Ultimate x64, 5 passes for each test. These tests were made on a recent installation of Vista (2 weeks old, not much installed yet), but not in a strictly controlled environment (still had AVG, Pidgin, ... running in background). Here is a summary of the results:
![]()
I encourage anyone to try it out (even on a few resolutions) and post their findings.
For those who want to know my rig's spec, just look in my profile, it's all there.
Since yesterday's release of the 9800GTX, many threads opened about whether or not go for a 9800GTX (either for a new system or EVGA's Step-Up program) over a 8800GTS; I myself wondered if I should pay the 45$ it would cost me to step-up my 512-P3-N841-A3 (8800GTS factory clocked @ 670MHz).
Looking to various reviews, I noticed that most tests were made using the cards "official" drivers, that is 169.25 for GF8 and 174.74 for GF9. Yeah, you see where I'm going with that ... Being a numbers freak, I did a little comparison, on my own system of how the 174.74 drivers would impact my performance (got the here).
I did my tests with Crysis (Crysis benchmark Tool) on Windows Vista Ultimate x64, 5 passes for each test. These tests were made on a recent installation of Vista (2 weeks old, not much installed yet), but not in a strictly controlled environment (still had AVG, Pidgin, ... running in background). Here is a summary of the results:
I encourage anyone to try it out (even on a few resolutions) and post their findings.
For those who want to know my rig's spec, just look in my profile, it's all there.
More about : forceware 174 9800gtx secret helper
As far as I know the 8800GTS 512 (G92) has exactly the same GPU as the 9800GTX, just with slower clocks. It has been a long time (Dec 2007) since nVidia has released a new driver for the series 8 cards. I am sure once they roll up the driver improvements found in the 174 driivers into the unified driver, all the G92 core GPU's (possibly G80 as well, depending on whether the improvements are general application improvements or architectural improvements) should see the same sort of improvements.
Related ressources
- HELP! Low FPS w/ 9800 GTX on Age of Conan - Forum
- 9800 GX2 Performance Gain With new Drivers - Forum
- Should I step-up 8800GTS 512 to 9800 GTX? - Forum
- Now the 8800GTS EOL? Whats next? - Forum
- GTX 285 with a 9800GTX OK PhysX on a 750W ?? - Forum
Anybody remembers the Geforce2 "Ti" series? The new cards were rebranded and boasted a 28-50% performance improvement over the regular model's performance upon release, but anybody with an older model could update their card's driver and get those same performance improvements for the price of a download (as a side note, even older chips - like my TNT, NV4 - got a definite boost from the driver update).
More recently, we had the Geforce6 and Geforce7 families; asking people who seem to know quite a lot about these (the Xorg Nouveau staff, currently writing a reverse engineered driver, with working 3D for these cards), Geforce6 (especially later chip revisions like 6600) and Geforce7 have a lot in common, and are in fact addressed by the official driver as being the same family -just different chip revisions.
Having tested both NV1x chip revisions (as the "ti" chip was, indeed, slightly tweaked), I'd say that the G9x could (if the parallel persists), indeed, contain some fixes over erratas and may indeed be much better performing in as of yet unseen corner cases, but that's it - if you already have a top-notch G8x chip, don't upgrade (except if it's a 8600, as the 9600 does indeed leave it in the dust). Remember, if you were the proud owner of a 6600GT, getting a 7600 card wasn't really worth the money...
For those wondering: the "ti" chip revision for Geforce2 (NV1x family) seems to perform much better on some VRAM-intensive operations (like GL_EXT_texture_from_pixmap) than the original, with the very same driver revision. Said extension was added to the NVIDIA driver 2 years ago, so...
More recently, we had the Geforce6 and Geforce7 families; asking people who seem to know quite a lot about these (the Xorg Nouveau staff, currently writing a reverse engineered driver, with working 3D for these cards), Geforce6 (especially later chip revisions like 6600) and Geforce7 have a lot in common, and are in fact addressed by the official driver as being the same family -just different chip revisions.
Having tested both NV1x chip revisions (as the "ti" chip was, indeed, slightly tweaked), I'd say that the G9x could (if the parallel persists), indeed, contain some fixes over erratas and may indeed be much better performing in as of yet unseen corner cases, but that's it - if you already have a top-notch G8x chip, don't upgrade (except if it's a 8600, as the 9600 does indeed leave it in the dust). Remember, if you were the proud owner of a 6600GT, getting a 7600 card wasn't really worth the money...
For those wondering: the "ti" chip revision for Geforce2 (NV1x family) seems to perform much better on some VRAM-intensive operations (like GL_EXT_texture_from_pixmap) than the original, with the very same driver revision. Said extension was added to the NVIDIA driver 2 years ago, so...
I've been running 174.20's for about 6 weeks or so now.
After installing my 2nd GTX I was getting big lock-ups in CoD4 the moment I had turned SLi on, so as recommended by pauldh (thanks!![:)]( ":)")
) I tried the drivers from Guru3D. Performance was much, much better and I didn't have all the damn locking up either! I should add I was running the 169.21's prior to that, at the the time the mose up-to-date, and I was getting lock-ups, thanks Nvidia! ![:kaola:]( ":kaola:")
I'll try the 74's later I think![:)]( ":)")
After installing my 2nd GTX I was getting big lock-ups in CoD4 the moment I had turned SLi on, so as recommended by pauldh (thanks!
) I tried the drivers from Guru3D. Performance was much, much better and I didn't have all the damn locking up either! I should add I was running the 169.21's prior to that, at the the time the mose up-to-date, and I was getting lock-ups, thanks Nvidia! 
I'll try the 74's later I think
nkarasch said:
I ran those beta drivers with my 8800gts and saw a 3dmark improvement of about 200. I dont know if that adds anything to this topic because I cant say I understand it completely.
lol. I will keep her for a long time. I will be getting one of these Q9450s however though.
http://en.expreview.com/2008/04/03/geforce-9800gtx-review/12/
Wow!
The 9800GTX will definately have more headroom and beat the GTS when overclocked but the GTX is a waste of time. My GTS overclocked to 820 core, I wonder how high the 9800 will go
Wow!
The 9800GTX will definately have more headroom and beat the GTS when overclocked but the GTX is a waste of time. My GTS overclocked to 820 core, I wonder how high the 9800 will go
mitch074 said:
Anybody remembers the Geforce2 "Ti" series? The new cards were rebranded and boasted a 28-50% performance improvement over the regular model's performance upon release, but anybody with an older model could update their card's driver and get those same performance improvements for the price of a download (as a side note, even older chips - like my TNT, NV4 - got a definite boost from the driver update).More recently, we had the Geforce6 and Geforce7 families; asking people who seem to know quite a lot about these (the Xorg Nouveau staff, currently writing a reverse engineered driver, with working 3D for these cards), Geforce6 (especially later chip revisions like 6600) and Geforce7 have a lot in common, and are in fact addressed by the official driver as being the same family -just different chip revisions.
Having tested both NV1x chip revisions (as the "ti" chip was, indeed, slightly tweaked), I'd say that the G9x could (if the parallel persists), indeed, contain some fixes over erratas and may indeed be much better performing in as of yet unseen corner cases, but that's it - if you already have a top-notch G8x chip, don't upgrade (except if it's a 8600, as the 9600 does indeed leave it in the dust). Remember, if you were the proud owner of a 6600GT, getting a 7600 card wasn't really worth the money...
For those wondering: the "ti" chip revision for Geforce2 (NV1x family) seems to perform much better on some VRAM-intensive operations (like GL_EXT_texture_from_pixmap) than the original, with the very same driver revision. Said extension was added to the NVIDIA driver 2 years ago, so...
"Remember, if you were the proud owner of a 6600GT, getting a 7600 card wasn't really worth the money..."
Mate I had both a 6600gt and a 7600gt and the difference was ENORMOUS. If you meant 6800gt then yeah fair enough.
techgeek said:
As far as I know the 8800GTS 512 (G92) has exactly the same GPU as the 9800GTX, just with slower clocks. It has been a long time (Dec 2007) since nVidia has released a new driver for the series 8 cards. I am sure once they roll up the driver improvements found in the 174 driivers into the unified driver, all the G92 core GPU's (possibly G80 as well, depending on whether the improvements are general application improvements or architectural improvements) should see the same sort of improvements.If thats true that nvidia hasn't made a driver for G80 cards since december, then thats pretty shocking indeed. The 174 drivers inflate the 9800gtx & gx2 scores a bit against the old gtx and newer 512mb gts. The 9800gtx sooo isn't worth the premium when you could be a good brand factory oc'd gts and up the clocks a bit more.
nkarasch said:
http://en.expreview.com/2008/04/03/geforce-9800gtx-review/12/Wow!
The 9800GTX will definately have more headroom and beat the GTS when overclocked but the GTX is a waste of time. My GTS overclocked to 820 core, I wonder how high the 9800 will go
Probably about the same... 820/2008/2204 is what my 8800GTS 512 will do.
Shadow703793 said:
side note: The 174.74 drivers don't work right with Rivatuner/AtiTool with XP/Vista x64. The OCing tools are unable to stick the OCing changes. They revert back to stock.nkarasch said:
http://en.expreview.com/2008/04/03/geforce-9800gtx-review/12/Wow!
The 9800GTX will definately have more headroom and beat the GTS when overclocked but the GTX is a waste of time. My GTS overclocked to 820 core, I wonder how high the 9800 will go
I mentioned this back in the GTX review thread. It is good to see someone else bring this up. It is comparing apples to oranges when doing a vs benchmark test if you give the GTX fresh drivers. It produces a false sense of performance gains.
I am sticking with the name 8800 GTS v3.0, I refuse to recognize it as a GTX.
I am sticking with the name 8800 GTS v3.0, I refuse to recognize it as a GTX.
To their defense, they might have optimized the PCB and improved some component's quality so I consider this a bit more than simple rebranding. What I have trouble with is the price difference; to me, the value of a 9800GTX over a 8800GTS is about 25$ top.
Other than that, I would like to see how far the 9800GTX overclocks. If it can be pushed farther than 8800GTS, then it might be "worth it" (like DDR2-800+ might be for some overclockers).
Other than that, I would like to see how far the 9800GTX overclocks. If it can be pushed farther than 8800GTS, then it might be "worth it" (like DDR2-800+ might be for some overclockers).
Here you go,
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=109507
This is suppsoed to be on stock cooling, I don't believe that,,
850/2160/2376
So a little better over clock yes but, I might be able to volt mod mine and get that,,,
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=109507
This is suppsoed to be on stock cooling, I don't believe that,,
850/2160/2376
So a little better over clock yes but, I might be able to volt mod mine and get that,,,
NightlySputnik said:
If I read right, even tough the 174.74 mention only supporting the new 9 series of GeF VPU, I can install it for my 8800GT? I'm on Vista 64-bit, if that change anything. I'm getting fed up of using the same old Dec2007 169.25 driver, I'll be more then glad to upgrade to this one if possible.
It's called better process over time. As time pass better yields which equate to better stock clocks and overclocking ability.
8800gts have better stock clocks so it overclocks a little better than 8800gt and 9800gtx does the same with 8800gts.
9800gtx is still based on G92 chip. Maybe a little tweak or not even.
8800gts have better stock clocks so it overclocks a little better than 8800gt and 9800gtx does the same with 8800gts.
9800gtx is still based on G92 chip. Maybe a little tweak or not even.
Anyone knows how he was able to get his VRAM to 1100MHz, watercooling or something?
. Related ressources:
- ForumPlease help me choosing a GFX Card
- Forum9800gtx or HD3870x2?
- Forum9800GTX worth the step up from EVGA?
- Forum9800GTX real benchs are out
- Forum9800GTX SLI or 8800 GT AKIMBO SLI
- Forum9800GTX review 3way SLI vs 3870x2 CF vs 3850x2
- ForumHomemade 9800GTX review
- Forum9800GTX now available.
- ForumBenchmarks with 9800 GX2 Drivers 174.74 - Homemade!
- ForumWheres the 9800GTX?
- More resources
Read discussions in other Graphics & Displays categories
!
