nvidia 5.14 drivers, check the main page, they are on there.

[Arin 0]

if you dident know or see, the nvidia 5.14 drivers are on the main page.

[AcidDrone 0]

Anyone else tried them?

I think the 5.13 ones were a bit better I seem to get slight texture tearing in q3. no big deal but thats the only bug ive noticed so far.

[FrogMaster 0]

Just gave them a short try!

There is real improvement over 5.13 because the infamous Q3DM9 level is now playable in 32 bit @ 1024x768, everything max'd out!

UT runs smoother in 32-bit D3D, for example on the huge Leandri DM level where I had some stuttering before with all settings maxed @ 1024x768.

They seem to be stable.

One bad point is that SMP still locks Q3A randomly, but I wonder if SMP is really usefull for this game (2-3 fps faster only when it works).

I'll keep these for more testing.

Nvidia seems to be on the right track.

[Llion 0]

Hello,

 

where the hell did you find them?????

 

Have fun

 

Llion

 

--------------------------

 

Forget about that - sometimes the REFRESH-button can offer miracles [auuuhhrrrgrrrnnn]

 

Llion

 

[This message has been edited by Llion (edited 15 April 2000).]

[badboy 0]

Hi there I am now running the new Nvida beta 5.14 drivers on a Guillemot Maxi gamer Gforce 256 non DDR they seem slightly better than build 5.13,Q3 is opening at the moment without hard locking ! there dosn't seem to be quite as much tearing in Q3 as on the 5.13 drivers thumbs up for 5.14 leaked drivers

[Summoner 0]

I installed the 5.14 on my oc celeron 450, but i get this wierd prob that there is no d3d available, with any driver version...the opengl is fine, and so is the control panel. anyone know how to get d3d working again?

 

------------------

If it doesn't work, PLUG IT IN!

[Pagongski 0]

How about performance under q2? With the 5.13 i had nice performance with Q3 but the fps came to half with q2| :-P I had 59fps at 640 in q2 with the 5.13 and i had 151fps q2 with 5.08. :-P

Anyone care to show some q2 benchmarks, please?

[ledzeppel 0]

Ha! Not possible! Sounds like you have Vsync (or Sync every frame) enabled in q2. In 640x480 in q2 32 bit color, I get 225 frames per second with 5.14 drivers, at 800x600 I get 172, and at 1024 x 768 I get a whopping 119.5! How about that! And in q3 with everything to the max (trilinear included) @1024x768, I get 65 fps. Anybody care to topple these numbers??

 

Coppermine 733

Asus P3B-F

GeForce DDR Prophet @89 MHz AGP

PC133 Ram Cas3

[FrogMaster 0]

Here are my Q3A figures with 5.14 :

- demo001 : 64 fps

- demo002 : 67 fps

@ 1024x768, 32 bits, all settings maxed

 

These fps are clearly CPU-bounded and the GeForce DDR is not fillrate limited on this rig

 

 

 

------------------

Abit BP6 - QQb1 bios - 2*Celery@583 MHz - 192 MB Pc100 Ram - Seagate 6 GB - Seagate 4 GB - HPT66 IBM 20 GB Ultra 66 - Iomega // Zip100 - Toshiba DVD SD-M1212 - CDR Sony CDU 928E - HP Deskjet 815C - Philips Vesta Pro Webcam - NIC Realtek Fast - Elsa Erazor X2 GeForce 256 DDR - Sound card Yamaha Sax - Alcatel 1000 ADSL - Dual boot WIN2K RC3 "Free" and Win 98

[haute 0]

Had to go back to 3.81, when im in IE5 the 5.14 drivers cause my computer to freez up or reset

[GrannyPantyRaider 0]

I had to go back to the 5.13 drivers and even those cause quake3 to drop dead after 15 mins of playing occasionally. Its hit or miss. The performance gain was incredible.

 

Quake2 640x480 5.13 is 209fps

Quake2 640x480 5.14 is 217fps

Quake3 640x480 5.13 is 96fps

Quake3 640x480 5.14 is 99fps

 

My setup is Athlon 650@750, Guillemot GeFroce SDR standard clock, 256 cas pc133 ram, K7Pro MObo, SbLive, Intel Pro 10/100 NIc, USB up da wazzu etc etc.

 

Maybe I need a Bios upgrade? Im running ver 1.3 MSI bios.

 

Anything beats losing work cause the desktop crashed like in th 3.81 drivers.

 

Direct 3D works fine however. If only the Sims would play without that annoying skipping music under win2k.

 

BTW I can play some quake 3 @ 800MHZ 1.75 volts then I get screen corruption and then I gotta close down and reboot. Cache problem? Maybe I should buy a cache mod for this thing? Its a week 10 650 .18 chip that didn't even get hot at 800.

 

GPR

[Seldzar 0]

I wouldn't complain, the 5.13 drivers cause q3 to run at 1 fps and SOF works fine......the 5.14 caused ANYTHING opengl to not function(couldn't create a gl context for the window in q3), going back to the 3.81 drivers q3 would load fine but played horribly slow as well and the gamma was messed. Being that I just got a tnt2 recently I have to be missing something.

[Dragon-Lord 0]

geforce 256/ddr here under an SMP P3 system. The 5.14 betas finally allowed me to get past the open animation (the ID logo) on Q3 under SMP. The game still froze after a few minutes of online play and there was obvious texture management problems and corruption.

 

Under non-SMP (grin), directx (unreal tournament), showed marked improvement in texture management/playablity. I was able to throw all the texture settings to high, and return to 1024x768, with improved playability over 5.13 and before.

 

Not perfect yet, but getting closer every day...

 

:}

 

PS Someone should check to see if the Special Enhanced Antialiasing settings now work under DirectX. Under 5.13, this setting was kept for opengl but lost for dx.

[Dragon-Lord 0]

Frogmaster,

 

I agree with your assessment. However, at 1024x768 with all settings maxed, your FPS is probably fill rate limited by the bandwidth of the system/card itself. With or without SMP, you aren't likely to get significant improvement at those settings. However, if you dropped to 640x480, SMP might make a substantial difference.

 

When SMP is more stable, I am looking forward to dropping to 640x480, enabling Anti-Aliasing, and still getting 60+ fps...

 

Have you looked at the AA on? 640x480 looks as good/better with AA than 1024x768 without...gorgeous.

 

:}

 

PS For me, even without SMP on, I still notice a huge "smoothness" difference playing under W2K over w98. I assume that is because much of the system/OS chores are shared/offloaded as part of W2K.

[Arin 0]

i looked at aa in 640x480 and i thoguth it looked crappy. it wasent what i expected at all. but then again, i was running it in 1280x1024 with everything up at around 70 fps, and it was so much better.

 

------------------

Athalon 500

196mb Ram

3D prophet ddr-dvi geforce

SB Live! sound card.

biostar m7mka mobo

20 gig maxtor and 3.5 gig fireball

32x tosheba, and adaptec scsi mitsuia cdr 2x4x

ms internet keyboard pro

ms intellimouse explorer

640k DSL on wintell modem with linksys dsl router

100mbit dlink nic w/wol

[slkh 0]

Running 640x480 at FSAA is no difference at running 1280x960 without FSAA.

 

If I were you, I would run it at 1280x960.

[Dragon-Lord 0]

yeah, I am still running at the higher res, but I just thought it was mighty pretty with the AA on...

 

:}

[Stephen Van Siclen 0]

The 5.14 drivers just brought me to a black screen and the alarm on my motherboard went off. As well as my speakers connected to an sblive squealling at the same time. I am running default drivers for win2k except for geforce drivers. Thought it might be my card. No go - the geforce in my wifes computer also produced the problem as well as my daughters guillemot prophet. Tried removing all other pci devices so I had only my video card and nothing else. Still no luck just black screen and motherboard alarm. I am jealous of all of you that have had success with these drivers. Any way any of you with no problems can let me know what hardware you are running on so I can replicate it and join in the love of these new 5.14 drivers?

 

I have:

tyan trinity 400 motherboard

geforce ddr (creative) AGP

sound blaster live! slot 3

3c905 nic slot 4

promise ultra66 slot 5

[Arin 0]

I am jealous of stephen having that many computers with geforces in them!

 

and slkh there is a totaly huge difference between 640x480 w/ fsaa and 1280x1024 w/o fsaa, the higher resolution looks alot better, and you see more on the screen. fsaa is not all that i thought it would be, it is kinda crappy, not blury on edges enough.

[phly allegory 0]

Yep its black screens all round with this new driver,we have black screens and more black screens and for a limited time we'll throw in some freaky sounds for your speakers.Dont forget about those black screens.

 

AMD K62 500

VIA MPV3

128 MB

LEADTEK GEOFORCE 256

[FrogMaster 0]

Dragon-Lord,

For me, image quality is better at 1024x768 without FSAA than at 640x480 with FSAA (given playable fps).

On my 19" monitor, 640x480 is simply ugly!

Lower res maybe relevant though on 14/15".

I believe next generation rigs commonly available in a few months (1 GHz+ cpus plus SLI'ed NV15/20 or whatever) will allow 1600x1200 and above without problem.

At such high res, FSAA will have less impact.

 

I could be wrong. Not sure.

[Dragon-Lord 0]

I am running on a 21" monitor and I just really like an AA image. I am running 1024x768 (no AA) for Q3A but I thought the AA made 640x480 a mighty tasty option. It will be interesting to see if the new voodoos can give us AA, motion blur, *and* hi resolution at playable speeds...

 

:}

[slkh 0]

There is no advantage of having low resolution of FSAA turn on.

 

What Nvidia is trying to do is just supersampling. Render the screen at high resolution and resize it back to 640x480 or whatever resolution that you are using. When resizing back to smaller size, you get less zigzag. But is no better/worse than the original size without FSAA.

 

FSAA only come effective when the resolution at which Nvidia driver is rendering can't be supported by your monitor. I mean, lets say your monitor can't do 2048x1536. And you turn on FSAA at 1024x768. You will notice a significant improvement of less zigzag.

 

But here comes the problem, you don't have enough Graphics memory to perform this task at high resolution FSAA. Second problem, you don't have enough fill rate for this stuff.

 

FSAA only possible at high resolution if we have enough fillrate, perhaps GeforceII GTS (NV15)?

[Dragon-Lord 0]

yes, it is just supersampling. The fact that the new voodoos do this in hardware, and support multipass motion blur, etc. with the higher fillrate should be very interesting indeed.

 

:}

[slkh 0]

Voodoo5 boasted about its 1.47 Gpixel/sec and FSAA. Infact they can only have one of them only. 1.47 Gigapixel/sec w/o FSAA or 366 megapixel/sec with FSAA (which translate.

 

I am not sure about the coming NV15 fillrate, should be be below 1 Gigapixel/sec or above? I remember I read somewhere before, but I think it has been taken down.