# NVIDIA Releases GeForce 257.21 WHQL Driver Suite



## btarunr (Jun 15, 2010)

NVIDIA today released GeForce 257.21 WHQL driver suite for GeForce series graphics cards and NVIDIA ION platforms, this is the first WHQL-signed driver in its 256 series of drivers, which archives two main goals as far as driver packaging goes: unifying desktop and mobile GeForce drivers; and unifying GeForce 400 series drivers with that which supports GeForce 6 thru GeForce 300 series into one package (NVIDIA initially had a separate package for GeForce 400 series). GeForce 257.21 also packs a boatload of changes, including a large number of game-specific performance increments, new technologies, updates key extra components, and fixes bugs. 

*DOWNLOAD:* NVIDIA GeForce 257.21 WHQL for Windows 7/Vista 64-bit, Windows 7/Vista 32-bit, Windows XP 32-bit, Windows XP 64-bit 
A complete list of changes follows.



Adds support for Blu-ray 3D with NVIDIA 3D Vision technology. Learn more about the hardware and software requirements here .
Increases performance for GeForce GTX 400 Series GPUs in several PC games. The following are examples of some of the most significant improvements measured with GeForce GTX 480. Results will vary depending on your GPU and system configuration:
o Up to 14% in Aliens vs. Predator (1920x1200 noAA/AF - Tessellation on)
o Up to 4% in Batman: Arkham Asylum (1920x1200 4xAA/16xAF PhysX=High)
o Up to 5% in BattleForge (1920x1200 4xAA/16xAF - Very High settings)
o Up to 5% in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (1920x1200 4xAA/16xAF)
o Up to 4% in Crysis: Warhead (1920x1200 4xAA/16xAF - Enthusiast setting)
o Up to 24% in Enemy Territory: Quake Wars (1920x1200 no AA/AF)
o Up to 9% in Far Cry 2 (2560x1600 8xAA/16xAF)
o Up to 25% in Just Cause 2 (2560x1600 no AA/AF - Concrete Jungle)
o Up to 7% in Metro 2033 (1920x1200 no AA/16xAF - Tessellation on)
o Up to 40% in Metro 2033 with SLI ((1920x1200 4xAA/16xAF - Tessellation on)
o Up to 8% in S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call of Pripyat (1920x1200 no AA/AF - Day)
o Up to 110% in Stone Giant with SLI (2650x1600 - Tessellation on, DoF on)
o Up to 6% in The Chronicles of Riddick: Dark Athena (2560x1600 no AA/AF)
o Up to 9% in Unigine: Tropics (2560x1600 no AA/AF - OpenGL)
o Up to 5% in 3DMark Vantage (Performance and Extreme Presets)
o Up to 19% with Transparency AA (1920x1200 4xTrSS - measured in Crysis)
Upgrades PhysX System Software to version 9.10.0223.
Adds support for OpenGL 4.0 for GeForce GTX 400 Series GPUs.
Adds support for CUDA Toolkit 3.1 which includes significant performance increases for double precision math operations. See CUDA Zone for more details.
Adds support for new extreme Antialiasing modes for 3-way SLI PCs, including up to SLI48x AA for GeForce 200 series GPUs and up to SLI96x AA for GeForce GTX 400 series GPUs.
Adds support for a new 'Quality' mode for NVIDIA's Ambient Occlusion control panel feature.
Adds a new NVIDIA Control Panel setup page for SLI and PhysX for ultimate control over multi-gpu configurations.
Adds a new NVIDIA Control Panel feature for ultimate control over CUDA GPUs, allowing the user to effectively choose which GPU will power each CUDA application.
3D Vision customers can download the v257.21 3D Vision drivers here.
Includes numerous bug fixes. Refer to the release notes on the documentation tab for information about the key bug fixes in this release.

*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## erixx (Jun 15, 2010)

d-ling right now. Wil see if the random BC2 lock ups end with these.


----------



## trt740 (Jun 15, 2010)

erixx said:


> d-ling right now. Wil see if the random BC2 lock ups end with these.



wow!!! some seriuos performance increases


----------



## Mussels (Jun 15, 2010)

trt740 said:


> wow!!! some seriuos performance increases



remember that they're always exaggerated.

2FPS more at 2560x1600 with max settings can give quite a good 'percentage' boost to FPS (10FPS to 12FPS oh wow, 20% faster!)


----------



## claylomax (Jun 15, 2010)

It's time to update, I've been using the drivers that came with the card since I installed it (197.03) LOL!


----------



## Helper (Jun 15, 2010)

btarunr said:


> o Up to 19% with Transparency AA (1920x1200 4xTrSS – measured in Crysis)



That's for Fermi, right? If that applies to GT200, then it's AWESOME. My GRID performance in main menu goes from 170 to 90 FPS with 8X Transparency SS AA. (1920X1440) I also max out everything for highest quality. Why would they measure it in Crysis... whatever I WANT THAT %20! 



btarunr said:


> [*]Adds support for a new ‘Quality’ mode for NVIDIA’s Ambient Occlusion control panel feature.



HELLYEAH better looking Ambient Occlusion. Nvidia had that driver which forbid GPU OC and other one that slowed down fan speeds in 190s. It seems like their driver improvements are much better now in 250s.


----------



## LiveOrDie (Jun 15, 2010)

these drivers are a let down all runs are mine


----------



## Fitseries3 (Jun 15, 2010)

similar results here... i cant get 45k like i did with the betas


----------



## LiveOrDie (Jun 15, 2010)

yer its abit of a let down the 257.29 beta was the same they must of changed some thing.


----------



## erixx (Jun 15, 2010)

but BC2 with oc'ed processor seems to work now, been playing it for 2 hours


----------



## LiveOrDie (Jun 15, 2010)

erixx said:


> but BC2 with oc'ed processor seems to work now, been playing it for 2 hours



i never had a problem playing BC2 with my card overclocked


----------



## erixx (Jun 15, 2010)

there is a bug, if you change something in the PhysX part, a window opens telling you to close "the following" programs, but there is none. You can't close anything and you can't 'apply' or 'continue'.
I have never submitted a bug to them and don't know how I could.


----------



## trt740 (Jun 15, 2010)

Mussels said:


> remember that they're always exaggerated.
> 
> 2FPS more at 2560x1600 with max settings can give quite a good 'percentage' boost to FPS (10FPS to 12FPS oh wow, 20% faster!)



could be but in the newer reviews the geforce cards are starting to smoke the AMD cards. With the exception of the 5970.


----------



## Gzero (Jun 15, 2010)

trt740 said:


> could be but in the newer reviews the geforce cards are starting to smoke the AMD cards. With the exception of the 5970.



"smoke", interesting choice of words to express your view 
The prices of both side of the fence are bumped up too high for the performance gains at the moment, not to mention the farce that dx10 turned out to be, I wonder why people still clamber for first gen cards.


----------



## TheOnlyHero (Jun 15, 2010)

How these drivers work on 9 Series ? somebady have tested them already ?  is there any improvement on 9 series.


----------



## Eva01Master (Jun 15, 2010)

Any noticeable improvement on GT200 series?


----------



## Helper (Jun 15, 2010)

Eva01Master said:


> Any noticeable improvement on GT200 series?



What would you like to know? I can do a few tests on 257.15 then 257.21. I have to reinstall SLi profiles, applications for GPU, sweep drivers... any suggestions?


----------



## crow1001 (Jun 15, 2010)

trt740 said:


> could be but in the newer reviews the geforce cards are starting to smoke the AMD cards. With the exception of the 5970.



What like the below review, silly boy.



> So two months later, both AMD and Nvidia have delivered new drivers for their current generation GPUs and very little has changed. The GeForce GTX 480 is still very fast, on the expensive side, and very power hungry. The Radeon HD 5870 on the other hand is almost as fast, it's a better value per dollar, and much more fuel efficient. For those reasons alone the Radeon HD 5870 still gets our seal of approval.


http://www.techspot.com/review/283-geforce-gtx-400-vs-radeon-hd-5800/


----------



## Assimilator (Jun 15, 2010)

> Adds support for new extreme Antialiasing modes for 3-way SLI PCs, including up to SLI48x AA for GeForce 200 series GPUs and up to SLI96x AA for GeForce GTX 400 series GPUs.



Holy crap... and I used to think SLI32x AA with two 7950 GX2s was awesome...


----------



## trt740 (Jun 15, 2010)

crow1001 said:


> What like the below review, silly boy.
> 
> 
> http://www.techspot.com/review/283-geforce-gtx-400-vs-radeon-hd-5800/



Maybe unoverclocked but when all the gpus are maxed oced the 480 gtx and 470 gtx are pulling away big time and since that review came out there have been driver updates. AMD is not the top value, a good value yes but the 5850 is starting to fall away from the 470 gtx and these drivers make even more so. This is comparing a 470 gtx with a 5870.

Like here silly boy http://www.legitreviews.com/article/1315/1/


Here is a small part of the review

*NVIDIA has a monster on their hands, that is for sure. The preliminary reports from their beta 256 series drivers also hint at a lot of potential performance being unlocked as the drivers mature. I think people conveniently forget that AMD has been refining their HD 5870 drivers for six months. With a few revisions I imagine the GTX 470 will easily outperform the HD 5870 and quite possibly the super HD 5870 like the Gigabyte SuperOverclock and MSI Lightning. Only time will tell on this front but I'm confident performance will not degrade.*


----------



## crow1001 (Jun 15, 2010)

that review you posted up is getting stick all over the net for being the most Nvidia bias review out there, the guy that did the review is quiting doing anymore reviews over it,



> Well,
> 
> I just talked with Chris on AIM and he is going to throw in the hat after finishing up a motherboard review that he is working on.
> 
> ...



http://forums.legitreviews.com/about28235.html

Now take a look at a " proper " review like the one I posted up.


----------



## TheOnlyHero (Jun 15, 2010)

here is one quick benchmark compering the drivers 197.13 and the new one  257.21. 
its W7 Dx10 -the details are set to ultra . i dont see any big difference. game-Dirt 2


----------



## Helper (Jun 15, 2010)

Assimilator said:


> Holy crap... and I used to think SLI32x AA with two 7950 GX2s was awesome...



It sounded awesome, but in practice hardware wasn't capable of running most intensive games of that time at those settings. I remember 7950 GX2 Quad-SLI getting 1 or 2 FPS in Oblivion at 2560X1600. (32X ?) 

Same thing should apply to what we have now. You won't be able to play Metro 2033 totally maxed out at 96XAA or would you? Fits try it 

But 32XQ SLi AA works very well in HL2 on my setup. I usually get over 100 FPS. I believe it only helps in older games. At that setting, first card renders the scene, others do AA only.  Grestorn says that in nHancer, he says it's just useful in old games, to make use of unused SLi power. Makes sense, I get hundreds of frames in those games...

BTW these settings are new, they just came in latest drivers so you haven't missed anything at all.


----------



## trt740 (Jun 15, 2010)

crow1001 said:


> You silly little fanboy, that review you posted up is getting stick all over the net for being the most Nvidia bias review out there, the guy that did the review is quiting doing anymore reviews over it,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



looks to me like a bunch of people unfairly went after a guy for doing a review, because they didn't like it , however, back on topic these drivers appear to gain performance at higher resolutions. and not at 1680x1050 as hero shows. Why do I have to be a fanboy if I don't agree??? and one forum is hardly all over the net.


----------



## crow1001 (Jun 15, 2010)

Well I suppose him coming to the conclusion that a 470 will PWN even an overclocked 5870 based on two synthetic benchmarks and crappy hawx is just a wee bit biased lol.





> With a few revisions I imagine the GTX 470 will easily outperform the HD 5870 and quite possibly the super HD 5870 like the Gigabyte SuperOverclock and MSI Lightning.





Even the site owner called it a bad review, it's one of the worst I and many others have read.


----------



## trt740 (Jun 15, 2010)

crow1001 said:


> Well I suppose him coming to the conclusion that a 470 will PWN even an overclocked 5870 based on two synthetic benchmarks and crappy hawx is just a wee bit biased lol.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



and really lets leave that to their forum. He didn't use these drivers so lets wait for one that does and you can discuss that review on that forum. The only reason I posted it is because it was the newest review in our review section. So lets move on


----------



## crow1001 (Jun 15, 2010)

Yeah sorry if you are offended by my ever so abusive name calling  I'm glad we agree I'm right regarding our little disagreement.


----------



## MuhammedAbdo (Jun 16, 2010)

http://www.behardware.com/articles/792-2/geforce-gtx-480-and-release-256-performances.html


----------



## Eva01Master (Jun 16, 2010)

It's both laughable and regrettable how many enthusiasts bash at reviewers just because they doesn't share their particular viewpoint. I believe enthusiasts should not behave like regular users and that includes attitudes like bashing and fanboyism, (I'm not sure if that's a proper word, but gets the idea across so I'll use it) you disregard the opinions in the review, express it consistently by presenting facts, not bashing nor trashing the reviewer and his opinion.


----------



## Bjorn_Of_Iceland (Jun 16, 2010)

erixx said:


> but BC2 with oc'ed processor seems to work now, been playing it for 2 hours


Nothings wrong with the driver, its your OC thats probably messed up. I had the same issue before. Try running 20 iterations of intel aburn test maximum to see if its stable.


----------



## LiveOrDie (Jun 16, 2010)

MuhammedAbdo said:


> http://www.behardware.com/articles/792-2/geforce-gtx-480-and-release-256-performances.html
> http://www.behardware.com/medias/photos_news/00/28/IMG0028899.jpg
> http://www.behardware.com/medias/photos_news/00/28/IMG0028900.jpg
> http://www.behardware.com/medias/photos_news/00/28/IMG0028901.jpg



wrong driver


----------



## Tatty_One (Jun 16, 2010)

As I understand it, across the board,in all resolutions the HD5870 is some 9% faster than the GTX470 as at April 2010.........

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GeForce_GTX_470/30.html

Now that is with fairly mature drivers for the HD 5870 and pretty new drivers for the GTX 470, so what we should be asking ourselves is simple really....... over a driver development period of say 6 months, can at least a 9% performance improvement be found through drivers alone, the answer to that is yes, we see it most of the time and on those odd rare occasions 15% plus (ATi's 2900XT back in 2007, NVidia's G92 8800GTS hit about 13% I think).

All thats left to determine is though, will ATi get significantly more performance from their drivers over the next couple of releases, if they do, the 470 may still lag behind a little, if they don't.... it may be close.


----------



## crow1001 (Jun 16, 2010)

I prefer to look at performance on an individual game basis, not a performance chart that has games benched such as quake 4, prey and some other very redundant titles,  in the majority of games the 5870 easily beats the 470, my link again below.

http://www.techspot.com/review/283-geforce-gtx-400-vs-radeon-hd-5800/

Regarding drivers, as you can see by Nvidia's latest release there is no real performance increase noticeable to fermi owners, benches around the web show basically no difference, Nvidia's performance figures have always been dodgy, when they say up to 25% increase in a game it could mean at one certain point not an overall increase. Nividia drivers for fermi are already very mature, what do you think they were doing the 7 months fermi was delayed??


----------



## Mussels (Jun 16, 2010)

Tatty_One said:


> As I understand it, across the board,in all resolutions the HD5870 is some 9% faster than the GTX470 as at April 2010.........
> 
> http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/ASUS/GeForce_GTX_470/30.html
> 
> ...



its more likely to be a 2% boost, than a 9% boost. driver enhancements tend to fix compatiblity issues more than performance.... the drivers that really boost performance are few and far between.


----------



## Bundy (Jun 16, 2010)

trt740 said:


> looks to me like a bunch of people unfairly went after a guy for doing a review, because they didn't like it , however, back on topic these drivers appear to gain performance at higher resolutions. and not at 1680x1050 as hero shows. Why do I have to be a fanboy if I don't agree??? and one forum is hardly all over the net.



fanboi you are not. I,d rather read a post from someone who sees potential than one that is critical coz they think it,s cool.


----------



## MuhammedAbdo (Jun 16, 2010)

Techspot used a very inaccurate method which is a 30-sec fraps run , now I have no problem with fraps as a benchmark tool .. but really a 30 second run ? that accomplishes what exactly? , not to mention that the reviewer did some mistakes regarding Just Cause 2 , he tested it with Bohek Filter and GPU Waters enabled on Geforce cards , and of course they were disabled on Radeons , that shows that he has a limited experience on the benchmarking field , or that he doesn't double-check settings or results .

Here is a more mature review from hardwarecanuks showing GTX470 completely annihilating HD5850 thanks to the new driver :

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...g-methods-investigated-fact-vs-fiction-3.html



> wrong driver


Why wrong ? that is the beta driver of the same version ..


----------



## Mussels (Jun 16, 2010)

MuhammedAbdo said:


> Why wrong ? that is the beta driver of the same version ..



same number means nothing, the internals often change between WHQL and betas, even with the same build number.


----------



## Tatty_One (Jun 16, 2010)

Mussels said:


> its more likely to be a 2% boost, than a 9% boost. driver enhancements tend to fix compatiblity issues more than performance.... the drivers that really boost performance are few and far between.



I would expect to see at least that (2%) between the first and second driver release for much new hardware, in fact I think we did for the 5850 & 5870, I seem to recall a few reveiw sites re-running benches because of the driver > performance ratio improvement..... I may have got that wrong though so I will do a bit of research.  I could have added a lot more than just the 2900XT or the 8800GTS in my earlier post, like the HD3870 and the HD3850 but that was not hard, seeing as ATi actually released the HD3870 without a proper driver set at the time.


----------



## francis511 (Jun 16, 2010)

Just to confirm , these do NOT have the physx "feature" from the betas then ?


----------



## crow1001 (Jun 16, 2010)

Hardwarecanucks been in Nvidia's back pocket for a long time now, I'll stick with the neutral sites.


----------



## W1zzard (Jun 16, 2010)

Mussels said:


> same number means nothing, the internals often change between WHQL and betas, even with the same build number.



shouldnt .. when done properly every single change to the code changes the build number


----------



## erixx (Jun 16, 2010)

Eva01Master said:


> It's both laughable and regrettable how many enthusiasts bash at reviewers just because they doesn't share their particular viewpoint. I believe enthusiasts should not behave like regular users and that includes attitudes like bashing and fanboyism, (I'm not sure if that's a proper word, but gets the idea across so I'll use it) you disregard the opinions in the review, express it consistently by presenting facts, not bashing nor trashing the reviewer and his opinion.



ABSOLUTLY!!!!! A real 'enthusiast' should not even know 'brands', etc.... just look for facts.

Fuck the fanboys everywhere and in every way possible!!!!!! haha


----------



## Mussels (Jun 16, 2010)

W1zzard said:


> shouldnt .. when done properly every single change to the code changes the build number



well, remember the beta that allowed ATI + physX? they replaced it with a modified file with the same version number. its happened before (Differences in WHQL vs beta with same name) so it could happen again.


----------



## Helper (Jun 16, 2010)

francis511 said:


> Just to confirm , these do NOT have the physx "feature" from the betas then ?



They released a driver that only put back restriction right after betas and they have also changed the betas. It's gone.


----------



## W1zzard (Jun 16, 2010)

Mussels said:


> well, remember the beta that allowed ATI + physX? they replaced it with a modified file with the same version number. its happened before (Differences in WHQL vs beta with same name) so it could happen again.



nothing has been replaced (i assume you are talking about 257.15 beta). just checked by downloading from nvidia and comparing to the file at tpu downloads


```
# wget http://us.download.nvidia.com/Windows/257.15/257.15_desktop_winxp_32bit_english_beta.exe
2010-06-16 08:54:45 (558 KB/s) - `257.15_desktop_winxp_32bit_english_beta.exe' saved [86749616/86749616]
# md5sum /tmp/257.15_desktop_winxp_32bit_english_beta.exe
4dbf5b17a552059b63ab488d47d4e47a  /tmp/257.15_desktop_winxp_32bit_english_beta.exe

# md5sum 257.15_desktop_winxp_32bit_english_beta.exe
4dbf5b17a552059b63ab488d47d4e47a  257.15_desktop_winxp_32bit_english_beta.exe
```


----------



## Mussels (Jun 16, 2010)

W1zzard said:


> nothing has been replaced (i assume you are talking about 257.15 beta). just checked by downloading from nvidia and comparing to the file at tpu downloads
> 
> 
> ```
> ...




then why did people report hte file being updated/changed, and the ATI physX no longer working? You sure the TPU one has the working PhysX?


----------



## W1zzard (Jun 16, 2010)

Mussels said:


> then why did people report hte file being updated/changed, and the ATI physX no longer working? You sure the TPU one has the working PhysX?



i downloaded it on the sunday that the bug was discovered. link me to a version that you think is unfixed please.

if nvidia actually fixed the bug without changing anything else it would be the best thing to happen


----------



## MuhammedAbdo (Jun 16, 2010)

crow1001 said:


> Hardwarecanucks been in Nvidia's back pocket for a long time now, I'll stick with the neutral sites.


Whatever , it is your loss mate ..
And even if that is true , their latest review is topnotch , in fact it is one of the best ever.


----------



## LiveOrDie (Jun 16, 2010)

MuhammedAbdo said:


> Why wrong ? that is the beta driver of the same version ..



 thats not the beta version of this driver thats the 257.15 beta not the 257.21 beta  they change and fix problems making that review a waste of time.


----------



## Mussels (Jun 16, 2010)

W1zzard said:


> i downloaded it on the sunday that the bug was discovered. link me to a version that you think is unfixed please.
> 
> if nvidia actually fixed the bug without changing anything else it would be the best thing to happen



couldnt tell you sorry, i'm stuck with one PCI-E slot for now


----------



## Helper (Jun 16, 2010)

W1zzard said:


> i downloaded it on the sunday that the bug was discovered. link me to a version that you think is unfixed please.
> 
> if nvidia actually fixed the bug without changing anything else it would be the best thing to happen



Here is mine

http://rapidshare.com/files/399675797/257.15_desktop_winxp_64bit_english_beta.exe

I got it on 27th of May. You can compare that to the newest ones on Nvidia's site.


----------



## W1zzard (Jun 16, 2010)

Helper said:


> Here is mine
> 
> http://rapidshare.com/files/399675797/257.15_desktop_winxp_64bit_english_beta.exe
> 
> I got it on 27th of May. You can compare that to the newest ones on Nvidia's site.



and that driver is confirmed to be working with physx on ati ?


----------



## Helper (Jun 16, 2010)

Not by myself, I have a GTX 285 SLI setup but this will give you an idea 

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=123304&page=4

Read after half of page 4 till the end of 5th page. I got it before, it has to do ATi Physx.


----------



## MuhammedAbdo (Jun 16, 2010)

Live OR Die said:


> thats not the beta version of this driver thats the 257.15 beta not the 257.21 beta  they change and fix problems making that review a waste of time.


I don't care about some ridiculous semantics , obviously these are the same core driver , they bring about the same performance improvements , and I posted the behardware pictures to refute techspot's claim that the new driver didn't bring noticeable performance improvements.


----------



## trt740 (Jun 16, 2010)

crow1001 said:


> Hardwarecanucks been in Nvidia's back pocket for a long time now, I'll stick with the neutral sites.



what nonsense  that site is one of the best there is and that review is very comprehensive.


----------



## Tatty_One (Jun 16, 2010)

crow1001 said:


> I prefer to look at performance on an individual game basis, not a performance chart that has games benched such as quake 4, prey and some other very redundant titles,  in the majority of games the 5870 easily beats the 470, my link again below.
> 
> http://www.techspot.com/review/283-geforce-gtx-400-vs-radeon-hd-5800/



What you mean on say metro 2033? where in the TPU review the 470 beat the 5870 in every resolution from 16XX res upwards in DX11?  Now that would be misleading because I know the 5870 wins many more than it loses..... thats why I  never quote on an individual game basis..... it's too easy to distort and mislead.


----------



## crow1001 (Jun 16, 2010)

LoL you couldn't find a bigger nvidia supported and optimized game than metro anywhere.


----------



## Robert-The-Rambler (Jun 16, 2010)

*Hey Wizard. They changed their minds.*



W1zzard said:


> i downloaded it on the sunday that the bug was discovered. link me to a version that you think is unfixed please.
> 
> if nvidia actually fixed the bug without changing anything else it would be the best thing to happen



Nvidia liked the positive response from the beta drivers probably by tracking sales of various GPUs and the betas at their website 257.15 still support ATI plus Nvidia PhysX. I purposely downloaded from Nvidia to test my latest Hybrid PhysX rig and it works fine with no hacks just like the link at TPU. I've been playing Metro 2033 and loving it but God Damn that game makes me long for MUCH more powerful video cards in the future. I want to play everything on very high. Oh well...... Anyhow it definitely works because I pulled a 48 FPS average in Batman AA with a Phenom 9600 rig with crossfired Radeon 512 meg 4850s and a 9800 GT and 4 gigabtyes DDR 2 1066 RAM with the drivers straight from Nvidia in Windows 7 32 bit.


----------



## subhendu (Jun 17, 2010)

is this driver good for 8800gt ? planning to try it ..please advice


----------



## LiveOrDie (Jun 17, 2010)

MuhammedAbdo said:


> I don't care about some ridiculous semantics , obviously these are the same core driver , they bring about the same performance improvements , and I posted the behardware pictures to refute techspot's claim that the new driver didn't bring noticeable performance improvements.



no the 257.21 doesn't preform as well as the beta in some things so the performance are different once again like i am saying! you cant compare the 197.45 to the 197.75 both have improvements that are different!


----------



## Tatty_One (Jun 18, 2010)

crow1001 said:


> LoL you couldn't find a bigger nvidia supported and optimized game than metro anywhere.



Is that not the exact point why we shouldnt look at one particular game as you said you did?


----------



## Radi_SVK (Jun 23, 2010)

*Nvidia 257.21 driver issue?*

HI people,I've got a question for you.recently I've updated the driver package for my Gainward GTX470 to 257.21 and after few days a realised one strange behavior of the package.might be not the software,but what else then?..Ok,so I open the Nvidia control panel and after I've customized the 3D settings,I (obviously) press apply to save the settings and now the issue comes:wether I reopen the control panel immediately or after any time passed,the 3D settings are *Reseted*.I've tried all sort of settings,its the same scenario...any idea?thanks in advance!


----------



## Radi_SVK (Jun 23, 2010)

*I think I figured it out now*

If the same thing happens to you,it seems that after all its not any issue.You just have to follow couple of steps. first go to *3D settings*,then *adjust image settings with preview* and click on *use the advanced 3D image settings *and then *apply* to save.And now you are free to play with the 3D setting and after saving them it wont reset.like in my case...so basically my conclusion is,that if you jump between the 3 settings, *Let the 3D aplication decide*/*Use the advanced 3D image settings*/*Use my preference emphasizing:* to quickly do some settings and previously not apply one of those 3 basic categories of settings,your settings will reset...Well may be its bit silly,but we could call it a small glitch,cos as a ATI Catalyst user I've never had to worry about such a thing.As soon as I did a change in settings,they changed and remained as *Custom settings* no matter If I did them in one of the Preset setting...


----------

