Nvidia has revised the name of its graphics driver to reflect another round of confusing marketing (we weren’t particularly impressed with the naming of its newest mobile GPUs in our high-end notebook roundup). ForceWare has become GeForce. Anyone unfamiliar with the naming conventions will have trouble telling the difference between hardware GeForce GTX 280 and software GeForce 177.92.
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Chip
Code name
Memory
GPU rate
Shader
Memory rate
SPs
GeForce GTX 280
GT200
1024 GDDR3
602 MHz
4.0, 1296 MHz
2214 MHz
240
GeForce 9600 GT
G94
1024 MB GDDR3
650 MHz
4.0, 1625 MHz
1800 MHz
64
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Chip
Memory bus
Manufacturing process
Transistors
Interface
GeForce GTX 280
512 bit
65 nm
1400 million
PCIe 2.0
GeForce 9600 GT
256 bit
65 nm
505 million
PCIe 2.0
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Chip
Code name
Memory
GPU rate
Shader
Memory rate
SPs
Radeon HD 4870 CF
RV770
512 MB GDDR5
750 MHz
4.1
3600 MHz
800
Radeon HD 4870
RV770
512 MB GDDR5
750 MHz
4.1
3600 MHz
800
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Chip
Memory bus
Manufacturing process
Transistors
Interface
Radeon HD 4870 CF
256 bit
55 nm
965 million
PCIe 2.0
Radeon HD 4870
256 bit
55 nm
965 million
PCIe 2.0
Memory rate=DDR clock rate doubled, physical rate is halved DDR5 clock rate quadrupled, physical rate is a quarter SPs=stream processors, P and V=Pixelshader and Vertexshader TC=Turbo Cache HM=Hyper Memory OC=overclocked (clock rate higher than default) SLI=Parallel operation with 2 Nvidia cards 3SLI=Parallel operation with 3 Nvidia graphics chips 4SLI=Parallel operation with 4 Nvidia graphics chips CF=CrossFire parallel operation with 2 ATI cards 3CF=CrossFire parallel operation with 3 ATI graphics chips 4CF=CrossFire parallel operation with 4 ATI graphics chips R680=2xRV670 Shader 2.0=DirectX 9.0, 3.0=DirectX 9.0c, 4.0=DirectX 10, Shader 4.1=DirectX 10.1
Radeon HD 4870 and HD 4870 CrossFire ATI Catalyst 8.6 and 8.8(8.7 for Quake Wars)GeForce 9600 GT Nvidia ForceWare 175.16 and GeForce 177.92GeForce GTX 280 ForceWare 177.39 and GeForce 177.92
Operating system
Windows Vista Enterprise SP1
DirectX
10 and 10.1
Chip set driver
X38 Intel 8.3.1.1009780i Nvidia nForce 9.64
Stay on the Cutting Edge
Join the experts who read Tom's Hardware for the inside track on enthusiast PC tech news — and have for over 25 years. We'll send breaking news and in-depth reviews of CPUs, GPUs, AI, maker hardware and more straight to your inbox.
SoulLance"Unfortunately for AMD and its customers, the PowerPlay optimization for energy-efficient 2D operation is not included in the Catalyst 8.8 driver for the Radeon HD 4870. Quake Wars refuses to start using the Catalyst 8.8, but it works fine with the Catalyst 8.6 and 8.7."But neither should comments like this appear when everyone on the planet reads a labels that clearly say "Use latest drivers from manufacturer".
Can you please translate this into english?
I have no idea what you mean to say with your comment, other than the obvious (that you disagree on some level with the article)
He's saying you shouldn't criticise newer drivers because most hardware and software packaging has a label, or a section in the manual, telling you to use the latest drivers. So latest = best as far as he is concerned.
In reference to overclocking graphics cards, I'm pretty sure that XFX card warranties cover overclocking to some degree, though you'd have to double check their warranty fine print.
SneppyIn reference to overclocking graphics cards, I'm pretty sure that XFX card warranties cover overclocking to some degree, though you'd have to double check their warranty fine print.Having had experience with two failing xfx cards (both 8800gtx's actually), I've got to warn you though, that their warranty is a bit fictional. While they may actually cover broken products, you can easily risk waiting months for a replacement.
Proof of my claim in case someone unexpectedly doubts it : http://www.opel.cc/xfx8800gtx/xfx.htm
That was the first failing card. The second I haven't even bothered sending in, and just bought an 4870 instead of waiting months.
We all know there were cases in the past when "Newer drivers provided substantial performance improvements" in various applications or games. Analyzing performance with a few select driver sets can can't lead to the conclusion that drivers are irrelevant, or that from a "professional" stand point the latest drivers shouldn't be chosen.
CryogenicAnalyzing performance with a few select driver sets can can't lead to the conclusion that drivers are irrelevantBut it can lead to the conclusion that current drivers are irrelevant, or rather less relevant.
