Official Detonator 40.41 out!

[Chakotay]

ok thats the effect of mozilla being laggy... I think....

Can someone delete those?

 

[klah]

With 30.81 I had 10,596 3dmarks.
With 40.41 I have 11,090 3dmarks.

The ORB is down right now so I can't post links to my results.

My nature score went from 58.2 to 74.4.
My DragothicLow score went from 181.5 to 199.3.
The rest of the scores decreased by 2 to 4fps.

 

[DeathKnightMaF]

Figures I lose about 300 3DMarks

 

[DeathKnightMaF]

Just tweaked a few things that I had set wrong and got around 400 3DMarks higher than my previous highscore I think people are seeing nice improvements in the Nature test including myself who got about a 20fps increase.

 

[LouPoir]

Hey - got a 10% improvement in performance - and its free.

 

[SupermanCK]

Originally posted by: LouPoir
Hey - got a 10% improvement in performance - and its free.

that's why i posted at hot deal forum...anything free is hot...especially a free video card upgrade

 

[CubicZirconia]

Do these drivers not work for windows 98?

 

[Rand]

Personall I'm rapidly losing confidence in these drivers as anything other then 3DMark Performance boosters.
The two sites I've seen thus far with any benchmark comparisons done arent reporting any significant gains in real world applications.

FWIW...

From Rage3D:
GLQuake - Tenebrae mod
1024x768x32 - NoAA, NoAniso

30.82 = 43.1fps
40.41 = 43.4fps

Tiger Woods 2002

1024x768x32bit - NoAA, NoAniso
30.82 = 63.045
40.41 = 63.125

1280x1024x32bit - NoAA, NoAniso
30.82 = 48.137
40.41 = 48.109

F1 2002

1024x768x32bit - NoAA, NoAniso
30.82 = 97.872
40.41 = 98.965

1600x1200x32bit - NoAA, NoAniso
30.82 = 65.880
40.41 = 66.524


From VR-Zone:

3DMark 2001SE

30.82 = 55.29
40.41 = 54.3

Comanche 4

30.82 = 65.880
40.41 = 66.524

Quake 3

30.82 = 271.4
40.41 = 277.7

RTCW
30.82 = 160.4
40.41 = 162

Serious Sam SE
30.82 = 107.8
40.41 = 108.3


8 benchmarks and the only one that showed any signifcant differential was 3DMark.
And with so many people reporting image quality issues in this thread it doesnt seem much of a "benefit" at all.


I don't suppose anyone else has anything besides 3DMark benches to report?

 

[Jeff7]

All I can say of them is that the refresh rate fixes don't seem to work now - people reporting NVRefresh 1.0 doesn't work, and I can tell you that Rivatuner's fix doesn't work either. Plus I think I see how the scores are going up - the LOD is lowered, and the anisotropic filtering is drastically reduced; I think it was actually turned off on my system. Plus my Rivatuner tweaks don't work now; I'll have to wait until there's an update to Rivatuner to really try out these drivers.
One good thing I notice:
In the Settings -> Advanced Adapter -> Adapter -> List All Modes section, there are now more refresh rate choices - ones that were usable in Win98SE, but then apparently removed in WinXP, are now back. I was limited to 120Hz refresh at 800x600, and 60Hz at 1600x1200 (examples). I can now do 144Hz at 800x600 and 72Hz at 1600x1200. Now to wait for the utilities to actually make Windows USE these higher rates.

 

[Mem]

This refresh fix works ok for me,infact it`s the only that does work for me with 40.41 drivers ,RefreshLock 2.02 .

 

[CubicZirconia]

So am I stupid or do these drivers really not work in win98?

 

[Mem]

So am I stupid or do these drivers really not work in win98?

They are for 2K/XP only.

 

[klah]

I ran GLExcessv1.2 at 1600x1200x32 using both drivers. Every test increased in fps by 1 -7. The average increase was 2fps. Has anyone seen an increase in any 3dmark game tests other than Nature and Dragothic?

 

[CubicZirconia]

Originally posted by: Mem

So am I stupid or do these drivers really not work in win98?

They are for 2K/XP only.

So is this the end of the line as far as win98 driver support goes?

 

[esun]

6848 to 8315 3DMarks (1280x1024x32). I didn't bother staring at the textures to see if there were any image quality flaws, so eveything looked fine to me. I can't connect to ORB either, though.

 

[klah]

So is this the end of the line as far as win98 driver support goes?

Well microsoft is not doing any more WHQL certification for windows98 drivers, and these new detonators are only Beta drivers, but I am sure that as long as a large win98 user base exists Nvidia will continue to create drivers for them.

 

[Insidious]

Another vote for (GRRRRRRRRRRRRR) refresh rate problem right back to where it was and seems to be every time new drivers come out. I WON'T play at 60Hz. Why can't these boobs figure this one out.

If that's not enough, I lost 1280X960X32 screen resolution setting. Now, I realize not too many people use this for their desktops, but it is the one that I am used to and the one I like......... GIVE IT BACK!

I Didn't even get far enough along to bother with a benchie, but I suspect this is a CHEAP stunt of reducing our quality to raise our benchmarks. (I hope I am wrong)

Luckily, I've been plodding along happily with 30.82 and will stay right here for now.

 

[Dragon365]

Be wary, you probably won't gain much on a gf2 of gf4mx card. They did nothing for me.

 

[Cat13]

Got a 1000 point increse in my score with the new drivers. Really saw an improvment in my nature score.

 

[jdogg707]

I went from 12549 3D Marks to 13819 in 3D Mark 2001 SE Pro:

Processor: Pentium 4 2.26 @ 2.66GHZ
FSB: 628MHZ QDR
RAM: 392MHZ DDR
Video Card: Leadtek A250TD Ultra 320/720

Sweet!!!!!

Loving the new driver interface too...much less to deal with in the way of tabs...everything laid out right in front of you.

 

[d1rX]

Originally posted by: Rand
Personall I'm rapidly losing confidence in these drivers as anything other then 3DMark Performance boosters.
The two sites I've seen thus far with any benchmark comparisons done arent reporting any significant gains in real world applications.

FWIW...

From Rage3D:
GLQuake - Tenebrae mod
1024x768x32 - NoAA, NoAniso

30.82 = 43.1fps
40.41 = 43.4fps

Tiger Woods 2002

1024x768x32bit - NoAA, NoAniso
30.82 = 63.045
40.41 = 63.125

1280x1024x32bit - NoAA, NoAniso
30.82 = 48.137
40.41 = 48.109

F1 2002

1024x768x32bit - NoAA, NoAniso
30.82 = 97.872
40.41 = 98.965

1600x1200x32bit - NoAA, NoAniso
30.82 = 65.880
40.41 = 66.524


From VR-Zone:

3DMark 2001SE

30.82 = 55.29
40.41 = 54.3

Comanche 4

30.82 = 65.880
40.41 = 66.524

Quake 3

30.82 = 271.4
40.41 = 277.7

RTCW
30.82 = 160.4
40.41 = 162

Serious Sam SE
30.82 = 107.8
40.41 = 108.3


8 benchmarks and the only one that showed any signifcant differential was 3DMark.
And with so many people reporting image quality issues in this thread it doesnt seem much of a "benefit" at all.


I don't suppose anyone else has anything besides 3DMark benches to report?

Oh gawd! Thank you for pointing that out You made my day by saying it I hate 3DMark sooo much.

I ran GTA3, Mafia and SOF2 without any performance boost.
This new set seems like another crapola heheh

 

[MrPeepers]

Why get excited when a benchmark score goes up? Real games matter, unless you play benchmarks.

 

[jcarson]

I have been playing the 1942 Multiplayer demo (sweet), and noticed a DROP in frame rates with these drivers. Hold on. I got a big raise in scores in 3dmark, BUT a DROP in real world performance. I imagine they just improved the pixel shaders or something that 3dMark relys heavily on.

Nice tabs though, but not a 25% gain here.

GF4 4200.

 

[NOX]

Well, couldn't get it to work with Riva Turner, and that is important to me. So I reinstalled 29.42, which works great with RivaTurner, and play all my games just the way I like them (high fps, 100% stability).

The new interface is cool though.

 

[fluxquantum]

yes these are nice drivers. 3dmark scores went up a couple hundred points.