Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

41.09 detonator drivers suck!!!

Tags:
  • Graphics Cards
  • Drivers
  • Games
  • Graphics
  • Product
Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
a b \ Driver
March 3, 2003 10:25:21 PM

I had a problem in Unreal 2 (awesome game!), with the character models being hideously deformed, I read in the readme that my 40.82 drivers cause that problem, and I need to get 41.09. OK, the problem is fixed but....
-My monitor is not recognized correctly
-The computer can't display 1024 X 768 resolution
-It takes five minutes for the PC to start up
-Whenever I run 3DMark2001 it crashes

AUGHHHHH!!! Went back to the old 30.82 drivers which work perfectly, but i lost 200pts at my 3Dmark score. Small price to pay for complete functioning. The Detonator drivers cause more problems than they solve!!!! Anyone else try these out?!?!

-I'm not stupid, I'm just big-boned!-

More about : detonator drivers suck

March 4, 2003 3:15:49 AM

Yup, I am also using the 30.82s. The new ones, WHQL as they wanna be certified, are simply unstable for my Ti200. Too many glitches and visual quality drops.

--
This post is brought to you by Eden, on a Via Eden, in the garden of Eden. :smile:
March 4, 2003 3:34:21 AM

I used the 41.09's and have been ok, but that was with a GF2 Pro

<font color=red>
<A HREF="http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?dhlucke" target="_new">The French are being described as cheese-eating surrender monkeys.</A></font color=red>
Related resources
March 4, 2003 3:36:33 AM

i'm on the 41.09s with no problems, gf 4 ti 4400
i'm probably getting unreal 2 tomorrow, so i'll let you know if it has any conflicts with them (though i know this is not your problem...i don't know why you can't display at that res etc)
try even newer ones than the 41.09s

--------------
I LOVE DANGER DEN WATERCOOLING, they went out of their way to both personalize my kit and change my order when i needed to, i had to change my sig to give them props
a b U Graphics card
March 4, 2003 6:29:06 AM

nVidia has been doing this stuff for a long time now, putting performance over compatability and stability. All in an effort to gain an edge over ATI. They are becomming more like the hidious VIA monster every day!

I noticed that they came out with a new driver that makes the 5800FX outperform the 9700 Pro in 3DMark03. That's nice, but the thing doesn't display many of the details from the fire when planes crash in Game1. In fact, the only test I can run on my two year old DX7 card is Game 1, and I get better image quality than the 5800FX does on it's latest drivers!

<font color=blue>Watts mean squat if you don't have quality!</font color=blue>
March 4, 2003 5:26:54 PM

Nvidia was cheating. They're desperate

<font color=red>
<A HREF="http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?dhlucke" target="_new">The French are being described as cheese-eating surrender monkeys.</A></font color=red>
March 4, 2003 6:07:56 PM

Use the 42.90 drivers from guru3d.com

Dell released them and guru3d modified the install files to work with all the cards instead of just the ones Dell is selling in their workstations. Using them here on several machines, absolutely excellent driver set. There's also a version 43.00 available now that PNY released, but i havnt tried it yet.

Windows is like a house of cards... One wrong move and it all comes crashing down.
a b U Graphics card
March 4, 2003 6:15:15 PM

Yes, but this one is a little more obvious than the "quack" fiasco, you don't even have to look closely to see what's missing.

<font color=blue>Watts mean squat if you don't have quality!</font color=blue>
March 4, 2003 9:56:20 PM

Check the registry.
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Windows\Currentversion\runonce\
Export any Entries then delete them.
I was having problems every second boot.
Try also turning off Nvdia driver help in Services
Anonymous
a b U Graphics card
a b \ Driver
March 4, 2003 10:22:48 PM

Thanks but no thanks, I'm just content with the old 30.82, someone was talking about 43.xx drivers at guru3d.com or something, are those really trustworthy drivers compared to the official NVIDIA ones? I'm using a GF3Ti500 by the way.



-I'm not stupid, I'm just big-boned!-
March 5, 2003 1:07:24 AM

I would ONLY, and I repeat, ONLY use the WHQL certified drivers. If the 41.09's aren't working for you, step back to the previous ones.

You don't have to be a test monkey beta tester for Nvidia.

<font color=red>
<A HREF="http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?dhlucke" target="_new">The French are being described as cheese-eating surrender monkeys.</A></font color=red>
March 5, 2003 4:26:11 PM

Ive got a GeForce 4 MX 440 64MB card...i put the 43.00 Detonator drivers on about 2 hours ago...played Some Unreal 2....Half-Life.....GTA3.....they work great......no problems at all.......the file is a bigger download....usually nVidia's driver file for there detonators have ranged from 10MB - 16MB.....this 43.00 is 22MB.......but it works well...... =)

it has 1024x768.....i can still adjust the refresh rate for my monitor...nView works fine.....and i can overide the refresh rate in D3D or OpenGL still......so its all good....

<A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?id=13597" target="_new">-MeTaL RoCkEr</A>
March 5, 2003 5:40:11 PM

Dhuckle,

42.90 is an official driver, feature complete, released by Dell, the only thing guru3d did was to edit the ini to allow it to be used for all GeForce cards instead of using Dells custom .ini which allowed certain cards sold with Dell workstations.

43.00 is an official release from PNY for all GeForce Cards which is feature complete.

Both releases appear to be recognized as WHQL certified as neither raised the usual flag warning on my systems.

Both drivers work well, 42.90 is slightly better laid out and slightly faster, though. I high recommend it.

Both driver packs are feature complete wheras none of the leaked driver packs are. Both include all the Dual View and nView files as well which were missing from some leaked versions.

The 43.00 has more files than i've ever seen in aother release, i believe they may be related to the FX. According to the config file this driver pack supports four different FX series models.

I recommend use of the Dell release DL'ed from guru3d (version 42.90) Works flawlessly so far. It ran 3dmark03 fine for me.

Windows is like a house of cards... One wrong move and it all comes crashing down.
March 6, 2003 4:22:16 PM

Ah, that's interesting. Why would they have proprietary drivers though? What's different and why wouldn't Nvidia release a new WHQL driver on their own?

<font color=red>
<A HREF="http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?dhlucke" target="_new">The French are being described as cheese-eating surrender monkeys.</A></font color=red>
March 6, 2003 4:49:09 PM

Not being the actual producer of the storebought graphics cards, nvidia's driver maintenence has always differed from ATI.

Because we're in the enthusiast market we like to play with reference drivers. But the primary method of distribution and driver packing has ALWAYS been for the 3rd party manufacturers like PNY to put together their own custom driver packs and distribute them.

Why they do it this way i'm not entirely sure, except it allows companies to intruduce custom features if they want. Regardless, 42.90 and 30.00 from Dell and PNY are the best releases i've seen yet.

In reality, all drivers released on the nvidia website or leaked from nvidia are just a bonus, its these manufacturer released drivers that are official.

We also know from Toms review that the 43.00 are in fact REAL GeForce FX drivers....all effects work properly with them. (its 3dmark score is a topic for another thread=D)

Windows is like a house of cards... One wrong move and it all comes crashing down.
March 6, 2003 9:01:02 PM

I'm running 41.09 Detonators in WinXP with my Geforce 4 Ti4600 (non-8x version) from Gainward. No issues with Unreal 2 at all graphics-wise.

dinoX aka BlackDog
March 8, 2003 10:55:10 AM

Im worried about my setup...

Ive got a new dell 4550 (PIII - 2.53, 512mb 333mhz) which I put my ti4400 in when I got it. My first 3dmark 2001 score was around 4500! So I did a fresh install of xp, and rerun 3dmark (using new 41.09 drivers) and got just over 8000... (how I got such an improvement is beyond me, the pre-install must have been real bad)

After running c&c generals and noticing it wasnt running well I had a look a dxdiag and noticed 'agp texture accleration' was greyed out. Is this a bad thing? Do all geforce cards have this disabled for some hardware reason? In my quest to enable this, Ive upgraded to dx9, and tried using drivers 42.90 and 43. These dont enable it, but have reduced my scores to 6500 and 5500 respectively...

So, is it dx9 that has reduced my score, and I should still use the later drivers over 41.09 (and go back to to dx8.1)? Should I pay any attention to 3dmark2001 scores?

My head hurts, any wisdom greatly appreciated :) 

cheers
grinner.
March 8, 2003 3:21:29 PM

Ive seen this before, But don't remmeber what I did to fix it. Check to make sure you have your BIOS set to AGP not PCI and if you have onboard graphics, disable them. Try installing any chipset drivers for the motherboard


Crap, all the good ones are already taken.
March 8, 2003 9:50:32 PM

Have anybody tried 41.13 drivers? It seems better than 40.72 in both performance and compatibility. It gave me 1.11% performacne boost in 3DMark 2001SE and I had a game that refuseed to work with DX9 installed. This driver solved the problem.

My rig-

Duron 1 GHz
MSI K7N420 Pro (nForce 420-D)
Integrated GeForce2 MX
256 MB (2 x 128 MB) PC2100 CL2.0 DDR

Submit your opinion <A HREF="http://forumz.tomshardware.com/community/modules.php?na..." target="_new"> Should Tom Fire Omid? </A>
!