Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

P4 up to 114% faster with NVRef 12.10

Last response: in CPUs
Share
May 11, 2001 9:06:56 PM

http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/01q2/010511/nvidia-...

Wow, I knew the Detonator 12.10 drivers sped up Pentium 4 systems, but I had not realized the performance gain was that much. Performance improved 114% in one SPECviewperf test. Overall the Pentium 4 now beats the Athlon squarely in this benchmark. I recommend all Pentium 4 + nVidia card owners grab these drivers asap.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =

More about : 114 faster nvref

May 11, 2001 9:09:05 PM

it beats the Athlon now (well it's about f***ing time), but still not by much.

---------
I am the first and only one with a 16MB GeForce2 GTS graphics card! :smile:
a b à CPUs
May 11, 2001 10:52:29 PM

It's gpoing to be interesting at my next major upgrade to see who's on top, with all this new technology flying around! Chipsets will get better for AMD, software will get better, with a model revison, in the P4. My current system is so powerfull that I might not go with my anual major upgrade in the fall, but instead wait until next spring!

Cast not thine pearls before the swine
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
May 12, 2001 12:36:24 AM

Yup them Nvidia guys really know there stuff when it comes to drivers. Be really interesting to see what they can do with a chipset for AMD :) 

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing!
May 12, 2001 1:00:04 AM

Overall, the drivers have a significant positive impact on Athlon based machines as well. The review is in plain sight for all to read.

<font color=blue>This is a Forum, not a playground. Treat it with Respect.</font color=blue>
May 12, 2001 1:27:41 AM

Switching an Athlon system to the new drivers gave an improvement for 5 benchmark tests and decreased performance on 8 benchmark tests. Overall, you get worse performance with the new drivers on an Athlon system.

Switching a Pentium 4 system to the new drivers gave an improvement for 10 benchmark tests and decreased performance on 3 benchmark tests. Overall, this is a definate improvement.

I cannot see where you came up with your conclusion that the new "drivers have significant positive impact on Athlon based machines". Quite the reverse seems to be the truth.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b \ Driver
a b Ý World of Warcraft
May 12, 2001 1:33:16 AM

Well it looks like we'll have to see, perhaps Nvidia's chipset for athlon will be horrible, maybe it will be great, theres no way we can know. Until then, quiet.
May 12, 2001 1:37:23 AM

I agree the new drivers did not improve very good on athlon based system...I've removed them and went back to my old drivers.

P3800 geforce did not do well at all with those drivers. Made windows unusable....big black boxes around the mousepointer.

Nice to see the P4 Doing much better with some new stuff.

96.3 % of Statistics are made up.
May 12, 2001 1:39:27 AM

"Well it looks like we'll have to see, perhaps Nvidia's chipset for athlon will be horrible, maybe it will be great, theres no way we can know. Until then, quiet."

Who is discussing an nVidia chipset? I believe you have the wrong thread.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b \ Driver
a b Ý World of Warcraft
May 12, 2001 2:01:12 AM

Great. Were seeing more and more applications and hardware optimized to take advantage of P4 architecture. But most people arent thrilled about it because hardly anyone owns a P4 or even wants one right now.


(A)bort, (R)etry, (G)et a beer?
May 12, 2001 2:11:16 AM

Well if they don't care about the optimizations, why do they read threads with P4 in the subject? ;)  Perhaps they all have hopes of finding some flaw in the post that they can use to start a flame war? I hate to disappoint, but I do not write those kinds of posts.

At any rate, for those of you who do own Pentium 4 CPUs, your day is coming. This forum is a bit like a pendulum, with Intel on one side and AMD on the other. Everyone curses and wars when the technology pendulum reaches the edge and stops. Pretty soon it starts swinging in the other direction and the other company produces the best product. After a while most in the forum have one of these newer CPUs, and then the same thing repeats itself once the pendulum reaches the edge of the other side. Believe it or not there will come a time when once again Intel has the popular CPU with the enthusiast crowd. Until then just smile and nod, it drives everyone crazy.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b \ Driver
a b Ý World of Warcraft
May 12, 2001 2:23:53 AM

word
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b \ Driver
a b Ý World of Warcraft
May 12, 2001 2:40:53 AM

Personally, I’m disappointed at the way both processor platforms are right now. Intel has really disappointed me lately. The P4 has nothing great to offer, AMD CPU’s are fast and furious but the motherboards have serious compatibility problems and are unstable.
As a tech-savvy consumer who expects cutting edge performance, a half-way decent upgrade path, rock-solid stability and 99% hardware/software compatibility I feel left out in the cold. Neither platform’s can meet my expectations right now. But things aren’t so bad I still have my 700@933mhz on an i815E motherboard, 512mb of RAM and a Geforce 2 Ultra. It’ll hold me over for awhile but I’m hopeful things will look better for the Intel platform when Northwood arrives.



(A)bort, (R)etry, (G)et a beer?
May 12, 2001 12:11:15 PM

I tried them with my GeForce3 and the P4 after I saw the article ... maybe the numbers look better in a few benchmarks, but when I ran some tests, such as with 3DMark 2000, the results were worse than with the 7.58's. And when in 1024x768x32, the whole screen shifted over to the right about an inch and a half. On my system, nothing is centered on the screen unless the monitor refresh rate is at least 85Hz ... something the 12.10's cannot support. Or so it appears.

In fact, I'm having trouble finding a Win2k nVidia driver for the GeForce3 that supports anything higher than 75Hz.

Oh, yeah, just in case somebody thinks about it ... yep, I've got the right monitor driver installed.

Now ... I've heard a rumor that one of the nVidia .inf files can be edited to change this ... any truth to it? And if so, exactly how is it done?

Toejam31

<font color=purple>If there was a reason for everything, having faith would be redundant.</font color=purple>
May 12, 2001 12:29:53 PM

The Improvement in for Athlon in the OpenGL part of the Drivers. Keep in mind it isn't completed yet to be released as final. Maybe they have some AMD routines still to be Added.


<font color=red>"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and dispair!"</font color=red>
May 12, 2001 1:49:40 PM

Ncogneto mentioned the nVidia chipset up above.
May 12, 2001 2:28:05 PM

I think it will be pretty ok, with one of the best memory architectures out there. The only thing is that both chipsets will have integrated graphics.



<font color=red>"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and dispair!"</font color=red>
May 12, 2001 2:30:40 PM

Well i have a radeon 32mb ddr. Guess what i dont use NVRef drivers. I like care about them. This is a why for you people just to flame each other. Heck im in the middle cuz im the nice intel guy. I refuse to put flame posts.

The only nice Intel guy.
May 12, 2001 2:35:18 PM

It would make sense not using the nvidia drivers on your ATI. :wink:

flame? Where?


<font color=red>"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and dispair!"</font color=red>
May 12, 2001 3:33:52 PM

Great that you guys are getting a little boost here but is that the only page you looked at? The results on the rest of the pages aren't near as exciting. So wheres this 90% boost again? You guys are aware that this may improve video performance a little but not processing power right? These are video drivers after all...
May 12, 2001 3:42:56 PM

Aren't we jumping the gun with this just a bit? These are beta drivers and as others have reported the improvements come with issues. You should wait until some Whql drivers are released by Nvidia to make such a claim. As for now all users that choose to use them do so at there own risk. I have seen beta drivers before that have caused people to need to reformat to get things back to normal. As of this moment, I admit it does look promising, but it very well could be that after the "issues" have been cleared up the performance increases will not be nearly as substantial. Your claim of "114%" certainly does grab attention. However, improvements must be measured across the board, not just on one synthetic app.

And once agian remember that we are comparing a P4 clocked at 1.7 gig compared to a Athlon clocked at 1.33 gig. Hardly a fair comparison. The p4 costing at current prices $356.00 to a athlon costing $197.00. Even your Rdram to cas2 DDr ram argument is no longer relevant as Cas 2 DDR is cheaper than Rdram as well. How will these new drivers fair across platforms when comparing the two processors at a clock for clock or dollar for dollar comparison?

we could compare a p4 @1.4 gig to a athlon at 1.33

Or we could compare a p3@1gig ($199.00) to an athlon at 1.33 gig ($197.00). Now this would truley be a sight to behold now wouldn't it? How many Intel users would scream bloody murder that this was not a fair comparison when in fact it was much more so when looking at total cost?

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing!
May 12, 2001 3:50:00 PM

<font color=red>I think it will be pretty ok, with one of the best memory architectures out there. The only thing is that both chipsets will have integrated graphics.</font color=red>

True, however, just like the I815 ( good board by the way ) it will also allow the user to add a agp card and disable the onboard graphics. In addition the onboard graphics will definatly be much better than the onboard graphics offered in the I815 ( not that many of us care). What this will allow is a decent, cost effective integrated solution allowing AMD more penetration into the business sector ( ie secretary, word processing et all), while at the same time makeing it very attractive to gamers and the like as well by offering the option to upgrade the graphics. In retrospect it looks to be Amd's version of the I815 to some extent.


A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing!
May 12, 2001 5:29:04 PM

The Graphics Chip will be the nv17. The specs arent out yet, but it will be GeForce 2 Class with the memory architecture of the GeForce 3. Perhaps it eill have some other features aswell.


<font color=red>"My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and dispair!"</font color=red>
May 12, 2001 6:14:32 PM

~ This forum is a bit like a pendulum, with Intel on one side and AMD on the other. Pretty soon it starts swinging in the other direction and the other company produces the best product. ~

This is so true, it is actually very good that the two companies are out of synch. Currently AMD is generally the best bang for the buck, but Intel will go to 0.13u first and the software will be better tuned by then and P4 (Northwood) will rock AMD's world fo a while. Then AMD's Thoroughbred will turn up and the pendulum will swing again all to the consumers advantage.

The only thing I hate is that currently we have Intel nuts (like Fugger, AMDMeltdown and crew) trying to justify the P4 when it is obviously not 'ripe' yet. On the other hand as soon as the P4 does reach it's potential we will get AMD nuts (yet to be named) trying to claim that an aging Athlon core is better just because it's not Intel.

Let us congratulate nVidia for juicing up the P4 and urge them to do the same for the Palomino.

<font color=blue> The Revolution starts here... as soon as I finish my coffee </font color=blue> :eek: 
May 12, 2001 7:25:17 PM

"You should wait until some Whql drivers are released by Nvidia to make such a claim."

First off it's not a claim but a measurement made by Tom. Second, everyone in this forum loves tweaking their system. I'd call overclocking a processor about on par with installing beta drivers as far as stability is concerned. I did say the 114% was in one test. I'm sorry I couldn't fit everything into the subject, but there's a limit to the length of the subject lines. ;) 

"And once agian remember that we are comparing a P4 clocked at 1.7 gig compared to a Athlon clocked at 1.33 gig. Hardly a fair comparison."

Completely fair in my opinion. These are the best offerings from each company. Not only that, but clock speed is not indicative of performance. Average instructions per second (MIPS? BIPS?) is a true measurement of performance. This is obtained by multiplying clockspeed by average instructions per clock (IPC). One cannot say comparing a 1.7GHz CPU with a different type of 1.33GHz CPU is unfair merely by looking at the clockspeed alone. Additionally, we all know to look at the price differences. The fastest Pentium 4 currently performs better than the fastest Athlon, but you always pay a premium for having the fastest. (In this case it's a $159 premium for the CPU. RDRAM and CAS2 PC2100 are about equal in price. The best Asus motherboards for P4 and Athlon are about equal in price.)

At any rate, this thread wasn't really about P4 vs. Athlon, but about how to get your Pentium 4 system to perform better by adding some new drivers.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
May 12, 2001 10:53:30 PM

<font color=red>At any rate, this thread wasn't really about P4 vs. Athlon, but about how to get your Pentium 4 system to perform better by adding some new drivers.</font color=red>

Excuse me then if this was the case then why did you add the following to your opening post?

<font color=red> Overall the Pentium 4 now beats the Athlon squarely in this benchmark</font color=red>

If you do not want to make it a p4 vs athlon subject then don't make statements like this in the context!

Secondly, real world applications are where we measure superiority not in any synthetic benchmarks, bar none.

Third cas2 DDR and pc-800 rdram are not simularly priced any more, I have already shown you this, would you like to see a link in which the new pc2400 ddr was tested? Stable all the way up to 160 FSB ( 320 ddr) at Cas 2. And when comparing a 256 meg stick of Rdram to a 256 meg stick of DDR the difference is more than 60 bucks. That my friend is a savings of over 30 percent, hardly what I would call neglidgable.

<font color=red>
I'd call overclocking a processor about on par with installing beta drivers as far as stability is concerned. </font color=red>

Ok I can give you that, but should I show you where in numerous post you advised against overclocking a processor? something about running out of Spec and the like. Now you are advising people to use beta drivers, which you liken to overclocking, which you advise against?

You are a very knowedgable man Rayston. I give you that. However you play both sides of the fence, which ever suits your argument of the moment to make your point. Most of the time you only tell half the truth and leave out the rest of the story.






A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing!<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Ncogneto on 05/12/01 07:01 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b \ Driver
a b Ý World of Warcraft
May 13, 2001 12:29:59 AM

I've been thinking about upgrading from my Duron based system to the P4, and these new benchmarks help quite a bit. I'm especially going to make sure I don't get a VIA based motherboard again, I've been having random crashes with the one I have, a problem I never had with a BX motherboard.
May 13, 2001 12:59:43 AM

"Excuse me then if this was the case then why did you add the following to your opening post? 'Overall the Pentium 4 now beats the Athlon squarely in this benchmark'"

Because it does.

"Third cas2 DDR and pc-800 rdram are not simularly priced any more"

$79 for 128MB RDRAM, $68 for 128MB PC2400 CAS2 DDR. These prices are pretty much on par. Both will continue to drop.

"should I show you where in numerous post you advised against overclocking a processor"

I don't think I've ever done that. Feel free to point out any posts.

"you play both sides of the fence, which ever suits your argument of the moment to make your point. Most of the time you only tell half the truth and leave out the rest of the story."

I'm sorry if you feel this way but it's not true at all. You take posts written by others and attribute them to me. You then claim I argue both sides. This is not the case at all. Additionally, I never tell half truths. All of these claims are based off your assumption that I've said you should not overclock your processor. I run an overclocked processor here at home, so I do not know from where you get your information.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b \ Driver
a b Ý World of Warcraft
May 13, 2001 1:06:43 AM

Out of all fairness to Rayston I think he just tells it like it is. Some people may not agree with him all the time but he is usually 100% accurate on his technical data. I have yet to see anybody prove him wrong on his information. He is more impartial then most ppl on this board and if you want to criticize anybody it shouldn’t be him.
Just my 2 cents.



(A)bort, (R)etry, (G)et a beer?
May 13, 2001 3:53:50 AM

<font color=red>$79 for 128MB RDRAM, $68 for 128MB PC2400 CAS2 DDR. These prices are pretty much on par. Both will continue to drop.</font color=red>

or if you like $121.00 for 256 meg of pc2400 and $189.00 for rdram....now in my book 189 - 121 = 68 dollars!

You reply " because it does" does not yet answer the question, your opening coment did suggest an argument of p4 vs athlon and anyone can plainly see that!

<font color=red>I run an overclocked processor here at home, so I do not know from where you get your information.</font color=red>

Maybe I should have reworded it did you not suggest against overclocking the memory? I should have said overclocking in general, my error. I do not think I need to point you in the direction of that thread or do I? So, I guess that in your opinion overclocking the cpu is fine, but overclocking your memory is not? But wait! Seeing how you run a p4, and you overclock aren't you running your memory out of spec then as well? You strongly advised against user of cas 2.5 DDR running there Ram at cas 2 but now you say you are doing the same thing? Or do you have a very rare unlocked p4 that allows overclocking by means other than the front side bus?

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing!
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b \ Driver
a b Ý World of Warcraft
May 13, 2001 4:45:09 AM

Overclocking memory can be done in two ways. First the most common way is increasing the FSB speed i.e. running PC133 memory at 140mhz. The other way is running the CAS speed out of spec i.e. running CAS3 memory at CAS2, that type of overclocking is a big no-no because in most cases it doesn’t work, the computer will have all kinds of weird errors if it even runs at all. I believe Raystonn was referring to this type of overclocking when he advised against it.


Relax, its only ONES and ZEROS!
May 13, 2001 5:05:00 AM

Both ways of overclocking your memory achieve the same results. This is why it is vary common to see pc-133 rated at cas3 at 133 mhz and cas2 at 100 mhz.

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing!
May 13, 2001 6:17:38 AM

For 256MB of memory, the $121 is a pretty good deal. For RDRAM you'd get 2 of the 128MB modules for a total of $158. So there is a $37 price difference between the two. Is that a lot? That's up to the individual to decide.

"did you not suggest against overclocking the memory"

Yes, I do plainly recommend against overclocking CAS2.5 memory to CAS2 at this time. As there is a shortage of CAS2 memory on the market right now, you will currently not find companies underclocking CAS2 chips to sell at CAS 2.5 at a lower price point. Thus, you really are running memory chips that have failed the manufacturer's CAS2 test and doing so at CAS2. Your results will vary by just how badly the chips failed, but this will most likely lead to an unstable system.

Basically, my view is that overclocking any hardware to a point where you know it failed the manufacturer's test is not advisable. Running any software that you know failed the developers' tests is also not advisable. However, we know nothing about these version 12.10 drivers that would indicate they failed any kind of tests.


"Seeing how you run a p4, and you overclock aren't you..."

When did I say I was overclocking a Pentium 4 system? I am not. You do not know what system I own, and therefore cannot presume to know how I manage any of them.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
May 13, 2001 6:22:57 AM

"Both ways of overclocking your memory achieve the same results. This is why it is vary common to see pc-133 rated at cas3 at 133 mhz and cas2 at 100 mhz."

Completely incorrect. That is like comparing a harddrive's seek time with its ATA66 throughput. CAS3 adds an additional waitstate, increasing the latency (seek time) of the memory. Increasing the frontside bus increases the bandwidth (throughput) of the memory, but does not affect the internal latency of the memory device.

Overclocking your memory's CAS rating is a very dangerous thing in terms of stability and data integrity, and does not affect the actual performance of your system all that much. I recommend against it.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
May 13, 2001 2:08:10 PM

Interesting...all this information and now you say that you d onot own a p4 yourself? Or you own more than one and the one you overclock is not a p4?

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing!
May 13, 2001 2:14:54 PM

No sir I am not incorrect at all. My choice of words may not be the best but FSB and Cas rating of your memory are directly related. An increase in FSB Decreases the actual time of the wait state itself which in effect lowers the Cas rating of the Dram chip.There is an additional wait state when comparing Cas3 to Cas2, which is correct, but this "state" is in terms of a "cycle" this cycle is reduced when you up your FSB.

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing!
May 13, 2001 2:21:06 PM

<font color=red>For 256MB of memory, the $121 is a pretty good deal. For RDRAM you'd get 2 of the 128MB modules for a total of $158. So there is a $37 price difference between the two. Is that a lot? That's up to the individual to decide.</font color=red>

Well that would limit you to the atual amount of Ram you could install in your system now would'nt it? And if you needed larger amounts of Ram in the p4 system going this route would also increase you latency by adding more of the smaller 128 meg chips rather than choosing the larger 256 chips as well. this would seem to be not a very wise choice for an owner of a p4 if he needed large amounts of Ram for say video editing or image rendering ( the knd of app the p4 really shines at) so, suggesting to use 128 megs sticks merely to make your point of a price difference would only appoly if the user had small Rdram requirements.

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing!
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b \ Driver
a b Ý World of Warcraft
May 13, 2001 5:29:31 PM

Whoopdy doo!!! Like your eyes can differentiate a handful of fps....
May 13, 2001 6:25:58 PM

They can.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
May 13, 2001 6:30:45 PM

Name the amount of system memory you'd like installed and we can compare prices using the optimally priced solution. Remember that you incur a slight additional latency for adding more memory to a channel. Both initial RDRAM modules are each the first on their channel, so there's no latency issue yet.

There really isn't that big of a difference between memory prices at this time. The difference in today's prices is more than made up for by the fact that you get more bandwidth from today's RDRAM systems.

-Raystonn

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my employer. =
May 13, 2001 7:10:29 PM

So would you advise someone to get a p4 system right now?

If I needed a computer right now...what would you advise?

96.3 % of Statistics are made up.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
a b \ Driver
a b Ý World of Warcraft
May 13, 2001 7:13:57 PM

i would have to say if yer short on cash go Athlon it cheap for a reason so watch out. Or spend a tad more for a p3. But i would wait on the P4 till northwood thats what im doing.

SPUDMUFFIN

<font color=red>Being Evil Is Good. Cause I Can Be A Prick And Get Away With It.</font color=red> :lol: 
May 13, 2001 8:48:25 PM

I would say anyone spending the money on a p4 would probably be a power user and thus would be in the nieghborhood of 512 or greater.

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing!
May 14, 2001 12:02:39 AM

Omg Spudmuffin u gave an answer without the word `monkey` in it.

Your new hardware is out-of-date
!