NVIDIA Fall Driver Update (rel 180) and Other Treats
by Derek Wilson on November 20, 2008 8:00 AM EST- Posted in
- GPUs
Final Words
So we've got some good and some bad. The new driver does bring some long awaited features into play. We have a better interface for getting PhysX working on the hardware we want it working on. Mirror's Edge for the PC will have what looks like it could be the first really interesting implementation of PhysX in a major title. And desktop supercomputing is now a market for some major PC retailers. All this is good news for NVIDIA.
We would like to have seen the performance gains NVIDIA talked about. While we don't doubt that they are in there, it is likely we just didn't look at the right settings or hardware. Across the board performance gains are hard to come by any more, but improving performance in the corner cases and on underperforming hardware is still a good thing to do.
While not an immediate benefit to end users, getting GPU computing hardware into boxes not only from specialty computing firms but from Dell and Lenovo will go a very long way to legitimizing GPUs as a platform for computation in the eyes of industry and academia. Solidifying the idea of GPU computing in these areas will, in turn, bring about more penetration for applications that make use of the technology. This will be beneficial to NVIDIA in particular because of the exposure CUDA will get, but it will also benefit all GPU computing efforts. Our hope is that as people get excited about GPU computing, they will look towards efforts like OpenCL. Well, that or NVIDIA will relinquish control of CUDA to a standards body and help AMD implement it, but that's about as likely as it sounds.
One last bit to mention is that all production of the GTX 260 has shifted from the original version to the 216 model. While the 192 shader version will still be sold, it will trickle out of the market and be replaced by the 216. This move actually helps clear up the horrendous naming NVIDIA went with. As the 216 core part will replace the original GTX 260, there is no need to preserve the integrity of the name: the core 216 becomes the only 260 around. What this shows is that they changed their minds after the 4870 was released and decided that their never should have been a 192 core version to begin with. Which is fine, but it's really tough to un-ring that bell.
But NVIDIA believes that their GeForce GTX 260 core 216 competes well with the similarly priced Radeon HD 4870 1GB part. Well, that's not entirely true. NVIDIA believes they have a better part, but from what we've seen in the past there are definitely reasons to pick up the 4870 1GB instead (as we have recommended in the past). NVIDIA approached us last week with some information on a handful of recently released games saying that their GeForce GTX 260 core 216 was the best option in these new titles. We'll certainly see after we run all the tests, but stay tuned for an update on that area.
No matter how you slice it, this has been quite an interesting week for NVIDIA. Here's to hoping they (and AMD) can start getting us excited about new driver releases again.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
63 Comments
View All Comments
Finally - Friday, November 21, 2008 - link
Thank you Derek for your insightful posting, clarity and all.The only lesson I can extract from your writing is the common man's knowledge that you shouldn't mess around with SLI/Crossfire, ever.
@Tejas:
[quote]As a 3870X2 quadfire and 4870 Crossfire owner I can say without doubt that AMD driver support is lousy and bordering on scandalous... I still do not have a Crossfire profile for Fallout 3 and it has been almost a month."[/quote]
Stop bitching. You called for your personal grief and you got it delivered alright. If you got too much time on your hands and want to spend them on ridiculous hobbies, so be it - but don't bitch for the common man.
Finally - Friday, November 21, 2008 - link
To clarify the meaning of "calling for personal grief":Putting too many graphics cards in your rig is like hiring a motorcycle gang to beat you up with sticks and chains and all and then running around the town, showing your bruises and bloodpouring to everyone complaining how bad you are feeling after that paid-for encounter...
tejas84 - Thursday, November 20, 2008 - link
Derek Wilson is 100% right. As a 3870X2 quadfire and 4870 Crossfire owner I can say without doubt that AMD driver support is lousy and bordering on scandalous... I still do not have a Crossfire profile for Fallout 3 and it has been almost a month.I had to wait for TWO catalyst revisions until Crysis Warhead and Stalker CS had profiles as well as GRID, Assassins Creed, World in Conflict etc etc....
Nvidia put the effort to work with developers to ensure the games work with their hardware and integrate SLI profiles. AMD are arrogant and I remember an AMD moderator say that the TWIMTBP program was simply paying for a logo. For a company betting everything on multi GPU isnt it strange that AMD doesnt work with devs to get Crossfire profiles into game.
Well actually they pay so that their games work well with the latest games. AMD are lazy and cut corners just like with their CPUs and frankly I am going to sell up my AMD cards and go exclusively Nvidia from now on...
Bottom line... anyone who thinks that Derek is being harsh has NEVER OWNED AN ATI CROSSFIRE SETUP BEFORE....
Regards
Griswold - Friday, November 21, 2008 - link
Point and case why multi-GPU solution suck donkey nuts, no matter what team you depend on - you depend on them twice as much as everyone else (one for the raw driver and its bugs or lack thereof and one for the profiles). No thanks to that.Tough luck, I say. And with nvidia on, what seems to be a financial downward slope, it remains to be seen if they're willing and capable to deliver in the future. Good luck, I say.
Goty - Thursday, November 20, 2008 - link
So wait, I think you're forgetting the whole "Call of Juarez" deal. ATI had a deal with the developer there in the same manner that NVIDIA has a deal with all the developers that participate in the TWIMTBP program. NVIDIA's hardware performed like crap in the game when it was first released and everyone cried foul, saying that it was "unfair" and "anti-competitive" for AMD to do something like that.Now, if we want to talk about anti-competitive, what about NVIDIA's dubious dealings with Ubisoft and Assassin's Creed and DirectX 10.1 support? Hmmm...
tejas84 - Thursday, November 20, 2008 - link
addendum,Well actually they pay so that their games work well with the latest games- this refers to Nvidia
chizow - Thursday, November 20, 2008 - link
Its not the first, Anand recently ripped into ATI drivers in his Core i7 launch review:Its a problem that has been gaining momentum lately and has drawn a LOT of attention with the recent Farcry 2 driver debacle. First there was the issue of render errors, hitching in DX10 and overall poor performance without FPS caps. Then there were hot fixes, fixes for hot fixes and further hot fixes. Then there were CF problems with newer drivers that necessitated using drivers that had the render errors or DX10 stuttering or both. But it comes down to this, if the recommended fix for a problem is to revert to prior drivers, its pretty clear the monthly WHQL program isn't working.
ATI gets more heat because their drivers tend to be more reactive than Nvidia, who tends to be more proactive with their TWIMTBP program and driver updates that come in advance or arrive in tandem with hot launch titles. This latest round of reviews and performance in top 5 titles would confirm this.
ATI has also made multi-GPU their solution for high-end performance, which means their products rely heavily CF scaling and compatibility. A big problem here is that ATI does not have user-defined profiles for games like Nvidia, which means there is no recourse if you have poor CF scaling or performance short of workarounds like renaming game .exes.
giantpandaman2 - Thursday, November 20, 2008 - link
Where's the blame on Ubisoft Montreal? Can't a game company release a game that works with a large portion of video cards?That said, I think AMD should go to once every other month. Less overhead, more things fixed with the same amount of man hours. nVidia drivers simply take too damn long. They go to the opposite extreme if you ask me. I owned an 8800GT and it took them 9 months to get their video card fully compatible with my monitor in Vista64. That's ridiculous.
But, seriously, why do people only blame driver makers and not the fricken game makers who have easy access to the hardware?
DerekWilson - Thursday, November 20, 2008 - link
game developers are hitting a moving target as well. they don't have the drivers that will be out when their game launches until their game launches ... and it would have been final for month(s) before that.in contrast, AMD and NVIDIA can get their hands on those games months before hand and make sure that drivers work they way they should with the software.
there is developer responsibility to be sure, but a driver issue is a driver issue ... game devs can't shoulder that burden.
JonnyDough - Friday, November 21, 2008 - link
Hence, MORE STANDARDS!