Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 25

Thread: nVidia GeForce GTX 970 (or any 900 series) under Windows 7 32 bits: issues?

  1. #11

    Default

    What video driver version are you using under Win 7 64 bits?

  2. #12

    Default

    359

  3. #13
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    94

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark15 View Post
    359
    That's interesting. Trying to find the most stable driver with an old game proved a nightmare for my other sim..I settled on 350.16, but if 359. ?? works well, I may give that a go.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    863

    Default

    The Nvidia 368.xx drivers have corrected a number of issues recently; I'm running 368.22 on a GTX960. Besides MSTS, I do a fair bit of retro-gaming and haven't had any video driver issues.


    MSTS-Roundhouse

    On hiatus and moving to a new host -- Probably in 2021
    (Because 2020 has turned out to be b0rked beyond belief...
    )

  5. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chrisjw View Post
    That's interesting. Trying to find the most stable driver with an old game proved a nightmare for my other sim..I settled on 350.16, but if 359. ?? works well, I may give that a go.
    Yeah, 359 I'm running across over 40+ games on my system! Games ranging from the 90's through to quite recent. Only game with an issue I came across was the very old Viper Racing. The black areas in the car dash have become mostly transparent but every other game has zero issues. I've stuck with 359 for this very reason. If I ever want to use Viper Racing again, then I'll consider what EricF has posted and maybe try the 368's.

  6. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark15 View Post
    359
    Thanks.


    Quote Originally Posted by EricF View Post
    I'm running 368.22 on a GTX960. Besides MSTS, I do a fair bit of retro-gaming and haven't had any video driver issues.
    EricF, what operating system are you using?

    And is it 32 or 64 bits?
    Last edited by Alex_80; 06-08-2016 at 03:11 AM.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    863

    Default

    64-bit Windows 10 Pro here -- so I have to stick with a current or fairly recent driver with such a new OS. The 35X.xx series seemed to be the buggiest Nvidia has put out in a while with respect to Windows 10 itself and recent games. Generally, Nvidia's support for DX9 and its backward compatibility for even older DirectX is fairly static. It's just a matter of staying (at least reasonably) current with any patches to your OS that can affect how software and the driver interact.

    On this system, MSTS will max out at about 70FPS. More than fast enough, and it seems like it's a case of the software hitting a wall and refusing to go any faster, as the CPU is an i7 overclocked to 4.9GHz, and MSTS doesn't care about video card capabilities. On the other hand, Open Rails will achieve ridiculously high frame rates if I don't limit it with Vsync at 60 fps.

    Where I've seen the most issues in old games come up haven't been with the video driver or DirectX, but rather with older video formats that get leveraged by game engines -- like QuickTime. Or CPU-bound graphics in obscure formats where the video driver can't do anything but throw the CPU-processed graphics onto the screen. Some of those work poorly in modern Windows (even XP) and must be run in some form of emulator, wrapper or VM. And it's kind of a moving target as OSes take patches and updates.

    I tend to like old point-and-click adventure games. That genre seems to have its own particular set of quirks with graphics engines -- often because they overlay full-motion video on top of a bitmapped area, and interactives can be mapped to either, or both.

    I used to run an old Mac Mini from 2009 that had a GeForce 9400M in it; the machine dual-booted OS X and Windows. On the Windows side, it could run quite a bit of old stuff and I kept the Nvidia driver current. Outside of one or two buggy driver families (like with the recent 35X family on newer hardware) it never seemed to have driver-related problems. I also have a ThinkPad Z61t which uses old Intel GMA 950 graphics. It's a bit irregular on how it handles games -- sometimes it's spot-on, sometimes it just won't cooperate. Keeping the driver updated never had much effect; Intel video just does what it wants. MSTS ran fine on both systems, but Open Rails would only run on the Mac hardware with the Nvidia chipset. The Thinkpad and Intel GMA 950 can't handle Open Rails.

    This all reminds me -- I have to get Combat Flight Simulator installed on the new PC. Under Win10, it ran fine on the Mac Mini hardware, but on the ThinkPad it would run fine but always crash on quitting. Same OS, similar Core2 Duo processors. But vastly different graphics chipsets. Old software interacts with the hardware in interesting ways...
    Last edited by EricF; 06-08-2016 at 07:32 AM.


    MSTS-Roundhouse

    On hiatus and moving to a new host -- Probably in 2021
    (Because 2020 has turned out to be b0rked beyond belief...
    )

  8. #18
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    94

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EricF View Post
    64-bit Windows 10 Pro here -- so I have to stick with a current or fairly recent driver with such a new OS. The 35X.xx series seemed to be the buggiest Nvidia has put out in a while with respect to Windows 10 itself and recent games. Generally, Nvidia's support for DX9 and its backward compatibility for even older DirectX is fairly static. It's just a matter of staying (at least reasonably) current with any patches to your OS that can affect how software and the driver interact.

    On this system, MSTS will max out at about 70FPS. More than fast enough, and it seems like it's a case of the software hitting a wall and refusing to go any faster, as the CPU is an i7 overclocked to 4.9GHz, and MSTS doesn't care about video card capabilities. On the other hand, Open Rails will achieve ridiculously high frame rates if I don't limit it with Vsync at 60 fps.

    Where I've seen the most issues in old games come up haven't been with the video driver or DirectX, but rather with older video formats that get leveraged by game engines -- like QuickTime. Or CPU-bound graphics in obscure formats where the video driver can't do anything but throw the CPU-processed graphics onto the screen. Some of those work poorly in modern Windows (even XP) and must be run in some form of emulator, wrapper or VM. And it's kind of a moving target as OSes take patches and updates.

    I tend to like old point-and-click adventure games. That genre seems to have its own particular set of quirks with graphics engines -- often because they overlay full-motion video on top of a bitmapped area, and interactives can be mapped to either, or both.

    I used to run an old Mac Mini from 2009 that had a GeForce 9400M in it; the machine dual-booted OS X and Windows. On the Windows side, it could run quite a bit of old stuff and I kept the Nvidia driver current. Outside of one or two buggy driver families (like with the recent 35X family on newer hardware) it never seemed to have driver-related problems. I also have a ThinkPad Z61t which uses old Intel GMA 950 graphics. It's a bit irregular on how it handles games -- sometimes it's spot-on, sometimes it just won't cooperate. Keeping the driver updated never had much effect; Intel video just does what it wants. MSTS ran fine on both systems, but Open Rails would only run on the Mac hardware with the Nvidia chipset. The Thinkpad and Intel GMA 950 can't handle Open Rails.

    This all reminds me -- I have to get Combat Flight Simulator installed on the new PC. Under Win10, it ran fine on the Mac Mini hardware, but on the ThinkPad it would run fine but always crash on quitting. Same OS, similar Core2 Duo processors. But vastly different graphics chipsets. Old software interacts with the hardware in interesting ways...
    Hope this isn't off topic Eric, but when setting fps, v-sync, AA etc, are you setting those via the game, or Nvidia Profile Inspector?....I ask, because I've been playing with the NPI settings (linked to ORTS.exe & also MSTS.exe) & I seem to be getting a better FPS (currently around 80) with it.......Being a newbie, I'm still experimenting with everything MSTS & ORTS related.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    863

    Default

    I'm pretty lazy with my MSTS settings -- I just run all the settings sliders in MSTS all the way up to max. MSTS doesn't expose a lot to tweak -- it's just DirectX taking the CPU-rendered graphics and mapping to screen resolution. You can do some post-processing in the video driver's handling of DirectX but that's it, really. But then, I don't run in MSTS much any more -- I use Open Rails to run trains. And given the fairly basic graphics of MSTS, I tend to be content with the Nvidia driver settings themselves for OR. As OR develops, it may become more useful to tweak it with NPI, but it's awfully good on its own with just the main driver controls.

    Now for Flight Simulator X, on the other hand, I use NPI to tweak it. There's really no better way to get a good handle on FSX graphics performance with Nvidia hardware.

    Oh, and I just got done re-installing CFS 3 on my new system -- no crash on exit, so that's definitely a quirk of the old Thinkpad's Intel video. Interesting.


    MSTS-Roundhouse

    On hiatus and moving to a new host -- Probably in 2021
    (Because 2020 has turned out to be b0rked beyond belief...
    )

  10. #20
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    94

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EricF View Post
    I'm pretty lazy with my MSTS settings -- I just run all the settings sliders in MSTS all the way up to max. MSTS doesn't expose a lot to tweak -- it's just DirectX taking the CPU-rendered graphics and mapping to screen resolution. You can do some post-processing in the video driver's handling of DirectX but that's it, really. But then, I don't run in MSTS much any more -- I use Open Rails to run trains. And given the fairly basic graphics of MSTS, I tend to be content with the Nvidia driver settings themselves for OR. As OR develops, it may become more useful to tweak it with NPI, but it's awfully good on its own with just the main driver controls.

    Now for Flight Simulator X, on the other hand, I use NPI to tweak it. There's really no better way to get a good handle on FSX graphics performance with Nvidia hardware.

    Oh, and I just got done re-installing CFS 3 on my new system -- no crash on exit, so that's definitely a quirk of the old Thinkpad's Intel video. Interesting.
    Yes, I'm an avid FS9 user myself & incorporating Nvidia Profile Inspector has really bought the sim alive. I've been using driver version 350 for ages, until I stumbled upon this thread. When I built the pc (WIN 7, GTX750Ti) a couple of months ago, I installed the latest drivers for it, but found FS9 wouldn't run properly with it.....so, using the 350 drivers, I installed NPI & after altering a few settings & adding a few tweaks it runs beautifully now. Yesterday, I installed the 359 drivers & altered a few NPI settings to accomodate, it's also running & looking really good.....But having read your post, I will now d/l the latest drivers again & it should perform perfectly with some NPI adjustments.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •