Dixel

Hi , why do you need the latest driver ? Your card is like what , 5 y.o. ? It's a well known situation when Nvidia slows down the older gens in favour of the newer ones. I don't know if it's done on purpose or not , but for me it's a fact. I'm still running 344.xx from 2014 and there are no better drivers yet . I've tested almost all available. You'd better use something closer to the release date of you card or up to 1 year of it's production. Also , it's a fairytale about "newest" drivers and whatnot.

My guess is that unity games use the same TEMP folder . I've encountered weird errors and some games won't even launch and/or load the saved settings (graphics quality , etc) . What to do ? Just calm down , wait , relaunch . May resolve itself on it's own in a day or two. Also , unity engine has extensive telemetry and the logs/reports/temp files usually go into the same folder for all games . My observations that all of the above leads to numerous glitches.

SetThreadErrorMode replace with SetErrorMode , this should do. DisplayConfigGetDeviceInfo = I'm afraid you're outta luck with this one , it's a tough uncle of a bleach , otherwise the game would definitely launch. Perhaps win32 will suggest something too.

TryAcquireSRWLockExclusive can be replaced with AcquireSRWLockExclusive . GetLogicalProcessorInformationEx can be replaced with GetLogicalProcessorInformation. You need to use CFF Explorer. I'm guessing you're familiar with the procedure. If not , just scroll the extended kernel topic back. I've successfully launched the programmes I wanted to launch . Keep in mind , I'm not using the ex-kernel and I don't have it installed. If you encounter another error (the next in the queue) , you need to replace it too, with something similar , or just open the programme you want to launch in the Dependency walker and see all of that it "wants" in advance . This fix works , but not every time , of course.

My installation is a clean SP2 (slipstreamed with Nlite) with a minimum of really needed updates. VC redist , framework , DirectX , fix for HD Audio, etc. Like I said , the programme shows that PCIe gen.2 is actually used , but not to the maximum . Maybe it's the mobo that doesn't like XP , you're right. I will try to reinstall again in some days and get back with the results . This week will be busy. About the upgrade , I'm afraid it's not possible since no other motherboard will fit this housing. About Fujitsu Siemens , they are quite OK in my opinion , yes they do not support OC , but the PC feels snappy enough (at least with Vista) and I like the OLD school BIOS . Windows 7 and XP64 are slow with that PC , like really slow. Like 2x times . Maybe it was designed to run Vista only. I can understand about Win7 being slow , because it actually is slower than Vista on any PC. But about XP64 it is weird , you're right.

Well , I've finally found some time to test and compare , thanks for the programme , it's quite interesting . The results are : with XP the bandwith is approx. 25-30% lower than with Vista. It's strange because it actually tells that gen. 2.0 is used , but not to the maximum (with XP64).

Hi , I do not know if you care about the warranty . If you don't , you may just detach WinBonds' chip pins 7 and 8 from the board , it is located near the USB . The first pin is marked by a dot . So the number eight is right across . This will allow to bypass the uplink directly to the controller. This is intended for people with at least some skills , I'm sure you have them , but I'm not responsible for any damage . I did that with mine and it worked . It now shows as generic storage device with the right amount of capacity , I can format it and if I remove the HDD from the enclosure and plug into sata of my PC - all info is there . Though you will loose some "power saving" features and the drive will not stop spinning if you click safely remove. Don't worry , it will safely park itself (retract).

Thanks for the suggestion , actually GPUZ was the first thing I've tried . But any version of GPU-z starting from 0-8-5 hangs up the whole windows XP64 system to the point of hard reset . Please keep in mind that I'm talking about 64 bit , not x86. Older versions of GPU-z work fine , but they do not properly detect this GPU. By the way , Nvidia CPL must show the highest version of PCI express available, it shouldn't depend on the current load. And it shows gen. 2.0 on this exact PC with Vista x64. My card is not EVGA , I try to avoid EVGA as much as I can , I've had quite a few problems with their quality. It's just Nvidia (no other branding, from their website) , reference design. I do notice poor 3d performance with games on XP64, the same game is like 2x times faster with Vista. Hardware: GPU: Geforce GTX Titan 6GB mfg date February 2013, Motherboard: Fujitsu Siemens D3012-A11-GS3 DDR3 RAM 16GB with Intel chipset Q45 mfg date April 2011. CPU: Intel® Xeon® Processor X3370 12M Cache, 3.00 GHZ (Quad). PSU: FSP (Fujitsu Siemens Power) 600W ,rare design and size ,supplied with this PC, fits only Fujitsu/Siemens housings.

I have found the source of the problem with HDMI . In case you will ever use Nvidia's HDMI (Azalia) or any other HD drivers you have to install KB901105 x64 before the drivers. V3 worked for me . It's very important to install this KB before. Still , I do not know why the Nvidia CPL shows gen.1 PCI express . Could you look at yours ?

That may be true if you're using some sort of repack (the file may have been replaced already). But repacks may vary , so it's better be safe than sorry.

@UCyborg, I wanted to ask you , does Nvidia's HDMI work fine for you with XP64 and these drivers ? EDIT . My mobo has PCI express gen.2 . Windows Vista shows gen.2 , but with XP64 Nvidia CPL shows that it's gen.1 only. Any idea why is that ? Also , tried some DX9 games and the performance is much worse on the same hardware and with same driver versions. I'm not going to use it , of course , it's just out of curiosity . Thanks.

For that matter there is a folder named "swiftshader" with these files : libGLESv2 and libEGL . So one may may safely delete them from the main folder . I tried it with version 13 and works fine with your test om my 8 years old GPU. I don't have anything older at the moment. And I'm sorry , but you're wrong , please do read before posting . "SwiftShader is a high-performance CPU-based implementation of the Vulkan graphics API12" "NOTE: SwiftShader's OpenGL ES frontend is no longer supported, and will eventually be removed." https://github.com/google/swiftshader It has nothing to do with GPUs . It's CPU only . Besides , it's to be used with Vulkan only. Who has this "vulkan", I mean users with 360 !? So one can safely delete them , at least from the main folder. The less chinese dlls , the better. Also , my advice to you and all English speaking : replace icudtl.dat with the original file from Chrome with the corresponding version.

It's junk , just delete it . Seems like yet another spying "feature" . The only needed dlls are : audiomute.dll chrome.dll chrome_elf.dll d3dcompiler_47.dll libEGL.dll SnapPlugin.dll

@GTAGAME , adblocker works for you with this chromium 90 ? By the way , you can still use English extensions.

I have a huge 120hz TV, 24' 85hz monitor, and a 27' 60hz monitor from circa 2007. All running absolutely fine with Titan and Windows Vista .

Hello all , does anyone have a good working guide on on how to get rid of SSDP traffic in Windows Vista ? I have an old programme (a video player with mdns casting "feature" which I don't use/need). I've blocked it with windows firewall and tried to block it with several third party firewalls too , yet I still see lots of ssdp traffic coming from this programme (both ways). I have blocked all inbound traffic too , of course. I have these services disabled , yet it doesn't help to stop ssdp. Computer Browser SSDP Discovery UPnP Device Host Function Discovery Resource Publication Function Discovery Provider host These artices that came up first in the search are useless too. https://its.uiowa.edu/support/article/3576 https://tweaks.com/windows/37087/completely-disable-universal-plug-and-play-upnp/ https://alferkwok.wordpress.com/2011/07/20/disable-network-discovery-by-gpo-windows-vista-or-later/ Thanks in advance.

With the newest kernel Chromium 90 64bit (installed Ublock ver. 13.x.x) doesn't actually block ads . It says it blocks , but that's not the case. Internal adblock logger says : Uncaught (in promise) IO error: ...: Could not open/read directory (ChromeMethodBFE: 20::GetChildren::1)

Yes , it sure does . And what about the adblocker ? I assume you have it installed. Does it work for you ? Actually blocking ads , not just writing that they are blocked.

I'm not sure how GTX750ti is relevant to this discussion , being lower end and from another series. Yeah , I know it's the first gen. of Maxwell , but still another series . Btw, artifacts in Unique Heaven oftenly tell that somethig's wrong with the videocard itself . No such issue for me with high end 900 series and 344 drivers. What about the other issue with displays ? Besides , what version of XP you were using ? 32 or 64 bit ?

Well , that's at least 3 by you and a couple by me . I can confirm all mentioned by you and add these to the list. 1 - Significantly decreased performance starting with 35.x 2 - Problems with idle modes on GTX980/970 , GTX780 (new revision, reissue with another chip) , Titan Black. Though, the first GTX 780 (from May 2013) and the original Titan did not behave oddly during idle. Mind you , this happened on both , Vista and XP , so XP has nothing to do with it , it's the drivers themselves. My opinion : 344 series are the best for XP. If someone wants newer , 364 drivers seem to be OK , but not as fast 344.11 and they need to be modded to work with 9xx series. For some raging publishers : I didn't test with Titan X , so no comment. EDIT : I did not test with lower end cards .

1 - Whoa , whoa , that's not "my" driver. I'm not the manufacturer/developer. 2 - Yes , Titan Kepler is included in that driver too , of course (obviously). 3 - I'm giving this information for all visitors of this website . If you are not interested in this driver , just ignore . 4 - Low end cards means exactly what it says , we were talking about high end cards only , weren't we ? 5 - Problem free means no glitches , no crashes , no BSOD , you may wanna scroll back and read the posts by UCyborg . 6 - By whose definition GTX980 is not an enthusiast card ? lol "GeForce GTX 970 and GTX 980 taking the enthusiast market by storm." https://www.techpowerup.com/review/msi-gtx-980-gaming/ "NVIDIA Unleashes Desktop GeForce GTX 980 GPU into Enthusiast Notebooks" https://www.tweaktown.com/articles/7359/nvidia-unleashes-desktop-geforce-gtx-980-gpu-enthusiast-notebooks/index.html I've lost my interest in talking to you , you seem quite unfriendly/hostile.

Yeah , thanks , but those are international (much larger file-size with unneeded languages) . Though I somewhat like them since they have proper English spelling , like display colour , etc . In any case, let them be here.

Some more links to 344.11 ( XP and server 2003 ) in case the preivious are down. https://drivers.softpedia.com/get/GRAPHICS-BOARD/NVIDIA/NVIDIA-GeForce-Graphics-Driver-34411-for-XP.shtml https://drivers.softpedia.com/get/GRAPHICS-BOARD/NVIDIA/NVIDIA-GeForce-Graphics-Driver-34411-for-XP-Server-2003-64-bit.shtml

You said "...nVidia ... didn't intend the high-end and enthusiast 9xx cards ... to work with the Windows XP...". Nothing personal , but this may be misleading for people , esp. with limited skills in modding . I'm saying: top cards from GTX 900 series do work without modding > out of the box < if using this driver 344.11. Here is the proof, a small section from .inf file: NVIDIA_DEV.100C = "NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Black" NVIDIA_DEV.1005 = "NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN" NVIDIA_DEV.13C2 = "NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970" NVIDIA_DEV.13C0 = "NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980" And here they are : the official drivers for 32 and 64 bit Vista and XP from a reputable source. https://www.guru3d.com/files-details/geforce-344-11-whql-driver-download.html I had discovered these rare drivers quite a long time ago and have had enough time to test them. Despite the common belief, these drivers do work as intended with 900 series . And are problem free, in my opinion. Much faster and more reliable than the latest XP drivers , @UCyborg pointed that out too. So I think it may be a good idea to add "and 900 series" to the name of this topic , for those who are looking for them. Or just create a new one . That's up for our dear moderators to decide. @Dave-H , maybe it needs your attention. P.S. They do not work with cheap/low end 900 series cards.

Excuse me , that's not entirely true . I really didn't like what Nvidia had done to AA , they are being punished by me , so I boycott them . But top tier 900 series do work with XP and officialy supported . I had tried this driver (a long time ago) and it worked without any modding with GTX980. I don't have the card anymore , so I can't provide the screens , sorry. But please check for yourself. https://drivers.softpedia.com/get/GRAPHICS-BOARD/NVIDIA/NVIDIA-GeForce-Graphics-Driver-34411-for-XP.shtml