Jump to content

WinXP Drivers for GTX 9xx and 10xx video cards


Mike100
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 1/14/2021 at 7:49 AM, TrevMUN said:

if you can get a driver and a 10xx card to play nice with XP64, you're likely going to be seeing worse performance than you would with a 9xx card.

 

On 1/15/2021 at 12:49 AM, ScrapMechanicFan2016 said:

i modded the 368.81 driver. and on startup it bluescreened with the System file i mentioned listed as the cause(nv4_mini.sys)

If you use Pascal (10xx) videocard on windows XP with successfully modded drivers you will get no 3D-perfomance. I just want to clarify this to people who will read it in the future:  NO 3D Perfomance.

This is cause THERE IS NO PASCAL DRIVER FOR WINDOWS XP that is capable to do 3D-perfomance. Because Nvidia did not create that driver.

However i want to say something unusual. Since there is interest for so many people for XP Pascal Driver maybe some measures can be done?

368.81 for XP does not support Pascal. However 368.81 for more modern Windows system support Pascal videocards. So MAYBE it is possible for experienced programmers to modify XP version, using Win7 version of a driver as donor? Like yea, i know it's hi-tech stuff. But there is programmers that work on wine, reactOS etc. Could they be attracted or hired through crowdfunding? Maybe the size of a work not so big? I know it sounds crazy, but who knows, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


3 hours ago, Rod Steel said:

 

If you use Pascal (10xx) videocard on windows XP with successfully modded drivers you will get no 3D-perfomance. I just want to clarify this to people who will read it in the future:  NO 3D Perfomance.

This is cause THERE IS NO PASCAL DRIVER FOR WINDOWS XP that is capable to do 3D-perfomance. Because Nvidia did not create that driver.

However i want to say something unusual. Since there is interest for so many people for XP Pascal Driver maybe some measures can be done?

368.81 for XP does not support Pascal. However 368.81 for more modern Windows system support Pascal videocards. So MAYBE it is possible for experienced programmers to modify XP version, using Win7 version of a driver as donor? Like yea, i know it's hi-tech stuff. But there is programmers that work on wine, reactOS etc. Could they be attracted or hired through crowdfunding? Maybe the size of a work not so big? I know it sounds crazy, but who knows, right?

Honestly I don't see the point.  NVIDIA are so far on from 10 series now and even the lowest machines have 16xx or above.  Most graphics cards above 7 or 8 series do work much better on Windows 10 (even on older MBs) although it does take a while ploughing through various driver versions and combinations.  Of course, if the graphics chipset is newer than XP era drivers then it is unlikely to give any performance / quality advantage as the game or software was never made or tested on it.  NVIDIA spends not its time in driver production but in condition testing, the performance "devil" is in the very fine detail.  The highest performance graphics card I found to work with XP 32ps3 & x64 was 780ti with a ASUS Z77-V motherboard and an i7 or Xeon depending on the software's multi-threading capability.  Replacing the boot drive with an SSD (HyperX fury or Samsung EVO) made far more difference than any changes I made to GPU or configuration.  If you use Ghost to transfer the data, then you don't even have to reinstall anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/21/2021 at 12:31 AM, Rod Steel said:

 

If you use Pascal (10xx) videocard on windows XP with successfully modded drivers you will get no 3D-perfomance. I just want to clarify this to people who will read it in the future:  NO 3D Perfomance.

This is cause THERE IS NO PASCAL DRIVER FOR WINDOWS XP that is capable to do 3D-perfomance. Because Nvidia did not create that driver.

However i want to say something unusual. Since there is interest for so many people for XP Pascal Driver maybe some measures can be done?

368.81 for XP does not support Pascal. However 368.81 for more modern Windows system support Pascal videocards. So MAYBE it is possible for experienced programmers to modify XP version, using Win7 version of a driver as donor? Like yea, i know it's hi-tech stuff. But there is programmers that work on wine, reactOS etc. Could they be attracted or hired through crowdfunding? Maybe the size of a work not so big? I know it sounds crazy, but who knows, right?

i know. i still need to find another used GTX560. as for the guy who replied to you mentioning windows 10. dont mention windows 10 to me. that is asking for me to ragepost...

Edited by ScrapMechanicFan2016
Windows 10 is the Buggiest Piece of Crap i ever used
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/21/2021 at 12:36 PM, LincolnG said:

Honestly I don't see the point.

Then why are you posting here? Move along! This is XP subforum, not W10!

On 1/21/2021 at 12:36 PM, LincolnG said:

Of course, if the graphics chipset is newer than XP era drivers then it is unlikely to give any performance / quality advantage as the game or software was never made or tested on it.

This is ridiculous statement. Games like Metro 2033 or Metro Last Light would run great on GTX 980Ti, for example. And Between first Metro and 980Ti is more than 5 years, in which XP era was ended.

On 1/21/2021 at 12:36 PM, LincolnG said:

The highest performance graphics card I found to work with XP 32ps3 & x64 was 780ti with a ASUS Z77-V motherboard and an i7 or Xeon depending on the software's multi-threading capability.

From this post it seems that you even don't know that all Maxwell videocards, including  980Ti and Titan X, work with XP cause Nvidia drivers support them until summer 2016. You might be surprised bye posts of bluebolt in XP64 subforum here, warning SSD, CPU and GPU that running fine on XP64 may shell-shock you.

I also check all your 5 posts on this forum in first 4 you talking about running different low-end videocards on XP, in your last post your argue with me. I really annoyed by your last 2 posts, especially including with this quote:

On 2/5/2020 at 8:51 PM, LincolnG said:

Also, where I did get 10x to actually load they were either extremely unreliable or were easily out-performed by older fully compatible cards.  For my own system I went for a Palit GTX 750 ti which has proved to work very well and infact much better than some 10x cards I tested.

It is obviously from this post of yours that you still do not fully understand that 750 not "outperfoming" 10XX on XP, But 10XX just run in VGA compatibility mode - without 3D and, probably, 2D acceleration. Please, stop giving other people advises and opinions without, at least partially, understanding the problem.

Now finally i wanna explain why i write my first post here. You see, i read articles last years about how very skilled programmers make old games work better by write a lot of code, or finish never finished and never released games for old consoles, or write new games for consoles etc. A lot of this stuff is on reddit retrodev. One guy create a lot of patches for NFS3 by himself and wrote tonshit of code for that. This is impressive. So i ask myself - if some guys for free write A LOT of hi-skill code for abandoned games and platforms, maybe somebody in the world can examine both 368 drivers and say could it possible, with relatively low effort, adapt XP 368 to Pascal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Rod Steel said:

Then why are you posting here? Move along! This is XP subforum, not W10!

This is ridiculous statement. Games like Metro 2033 or Metro Last Light would run great on GTX 980Ti, for example. And Between first Metro and 980Ti is more than 5 years, in which XP era was ended.

From this post it seems that you even don't know that all Maxwell videocards, including  980Ti and Titan X, work with XP cause Nvidia drivers support them until summer 2016. You might be surprised bye posts of bluebolt in XP64 subforum here, warning SSD, CPU and GPU that running fine on XP64 may shell-shock you.

I also check all your 5 posts on this forum in first 4 you talking about running different low-end videocards on XP, in your last post your argue with me. I really annoyed by your last 2 posts, especially including with this quote:

It is obviously from this post of yours that you still do not fully understand that 750 not "outperfoming" 10XX on XP, But 10XX just run in VGA compatibility mode - without 3D and, probably, 2D acceleration. Please, stop giving other people advises and opinions without, at least partially, understanding the problem.

Now finally i wanna explain why i write my first post here. You see, i read articles last years about how very skilled programmers make old games work better by write a lot of code, or finish never finished and never released games for old consoles, or write new games for consoles etc. A lot of this stuff is on reddit retrodev. One guy create a lot of patches for NFS3 by himself and wrote tonshit of code for that. This is impressive. So i ask myself - if some guys for free write A LOT of hi-skill code for abandoned games and platforms, maybe somebody in the world can examine both 368 drivers and say could it possible, with relatively low effort, adapt XP 368 to Pascal.

Firstly, you are very rude and there is no reason to be so. Secondly, I as many most from my experience. If you bothered to research who people are then you would know that when I am talking about running software on XP that I am unlikely to be talking about games.  There are, in fact other and better reasons why users may wish to continue with XP other than waste their lives playing old games.  Thirdly, I have managed to get a 1030 running on XP,  we do happen to know when a card is only running compatibility mode.  It was rubbish, probably not helped because 10xx cards are rubbish.  Fourthly, have you seen the cost of a second-hand GTX980ti, you can get new 1660s cheaper. Why would you want to do that now, this post was started more than 5 years ago when 10xx card actually mattered. If you want to grasp my interestest, tell me that you got a 16xx or 20xx running on XP.  I am sure there are many users reading these post thinking "Could I do it, I mean get 10xx working on XP" and the answer is yes, and somebody already probably did.  Was it any good?  Was it good enough to justify building an installer package etc etc , Am I going to get paid ? Is it worth it when I can get something good for a fraction of the read-world cost. Read what people have written here, they are clever guys.  But finally, don't be rude.  That is never going to get you the answers you want.

Edited by LincolnG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, UCyborg said:

Something else worth mentioning, newer XP drivers have some regressions when it comes to proper monitor detection, see this thread on VOGONS for details.

Yes.  However XPs monitor detection was never one its strong points, often a manual resolution / refresh rate had to be manually added through the NVIDIA control panel and then the screen scaling wouldn't work properly either, especially at higher resolutions, leaving the text unreadable or windows that you could enevr get to the OK button. PnP monitors actually made this worse in some cases, locking the screen into a high res. interlacing mode that flickered like hell.  I hate Windows 10, it's terrible, XP also had its crazy moments. 

Myself, I'm having some "artifact" problems with 1650 (studio drivers) on displayport running 4k on a LG monitor, WIN 10 PRO x64 20H2 - I'd love to find a solution to that ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/14/2021 at 2:49 PM, ScrapMechanicFan2016 said:

does XP64-bit get a Extended kernel?

From what I understand there's one in the works for the whole XP family, OneCore API. Originally @Dibya was working on ExtendedXP, but cancelled it in favor of OneCore API.

I believe that OneCore API is designed so that you can compile it to work on XP64, but I'm not quite sure how far along they are. I've heard they've got Windows Server 2003 running DX10 games though. You can see the discussion about it here.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

With all due respect to XP , I just don't understand why would anyone need to use 1000 series cards in combination with XP. There are simply no games that would run on XP that require powerful GPUs at all. I think even GTX780 is way over the roof . My advice would be purchasing a used GTX680 and be done with it ! There are really good drivers for that card available for windows XP (prob. free).

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Dixel said:

With all due respect to XP , I just don't understand why would anyone need to use 1000 series cards in combination with XP. There are simply no games that would run on XP that require powerful GPUs at all. I think even GTX780 is way over the roof . My advice would be purchasing a used GTX680 and be done with it ! There are really good drivers for that card available for windows XP (prob. free).

Very nice drivers indeed. And sane advise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Dixel said:

With all due respect to XP , I just don't understand why would anyone need to use 1000 series cards in combination with XP. There are simply no games that would run on XP that require powerful GPUs at all. I think even GTX780 is way over the roof . My advice would be purchasing a used GTX680 and be done with it ! There are really good drivers for that card available for windows XP (prob. free).

If the projects to extend the XP family's kernel and APIs have any success, you will be seeing increased interest in running games developed after XP's support cycle. Getting bona fide DirectX 10 support on XP has been a holy grail for anyone who's wanted to use XP for gaming, whatever their reasons. OneCore API's site (I'm not sure if I can even link to it, given the comments made in the discussion I linked to) shows promise in that regard, as they have some evidence of games running in DX10 mode.

Suffice to say, that's definitely going to pique interest in newer GPUs. And anyway, speaking as someone who specifically got the GTX TITAN X because it's the most powerful nVidia card supported by the last known XP-compatible drivers, I can tell you there are XP-friendly games out there which will benefit from that kind of horsepower.

And anyway, I think it's a good idea to try and find or develop compatibility for XP with newer hardware. I don't think we can expect hardware natively compatible with XP to be in supply whenever we want it, the further away we get from the 2000's~2010's. Old parts get destroyed or recycled, or succumb to the capacitor plague. I'm not saying that there won't be any XP-friendly hardware in the foreseeable future, just that for an XP enthusiast, it will become a pain in the butt sourcing them. Especially if you want something specific. This has been an increasing problem for the Windows 9X gang, and as evidenced by this thread, there's a lot of obstacles to getting 9X working on modern hardware.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dixel said:

Please name a few.

From personal experience? Chivalry: Medieval Warfare, Metro 2033, Final Fantasy XIV. Particularly any online game where you can have a lot of people in the same place (e.g. 32, 64 and even 128-player matches in Chivalry, alliance raids in FFXIV) the TITAN X handles it like a champ. I imagine I'd also see a huge benefit with Verdun with the TITAN X compared to when I played it last on the older setup. Hawken also really benefited, even after accounting for the graphics optimization they did.

If you do a lot of modding in games like Skyrim, especially if you're shooting for photorealism, you'll also see a massive benefit.

Even when it comes to games that a GTX 680 can handle at 1080p and 60+ FPS on maximum settings, the TITAN X can do it without the fans so much as ramping up. Mind you, I didn't get a TITAN X just for gaming. As I'd mentioned in other threads, I do multimedia production with my rig. It's the primary reason why I was willing to go all out; I found that the TITAN X outperforms even having an older versions of the FirePro and Quadro lines.

Edited by TrevMUN
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TrevMUN said:

From personal experience? Chivalry: Medieval Warfare, Metro 2033, Final Fantasy XIV. Particularly any online game where you can have a lot of people in the same place (e.g. 32, 64 and even 128-player matches in Chivalry, alliance raids in FFXIV) the TITAN X handles it like a champ. I imagine I'd also see a huge benefit with Verdun with the TITAN X compared to when I played it last on the older setup. Hawken also really benefited, even after accounting for the graphics optimization they did.

If you do a lot of modding in games like Skyrim, especially if you're shooting for photorealism, you'll also see a massive benefit.

Even when it comes to games that a GTX 680 can handle at 1080p and 60+ FPS on maximum settings, the TITAN X can do it without the fans so much as ramping up. Mind you, I didn't get a TITAN X just for gaming. As I'd mentioned in other threads, I do multimedia production with my rig. It's the primary reason why I was willing to go all out; I found that the TITAN X outperforms even having an older versions of the FirePro and Quadro lines.

I see . Gaming without fans ramping up is comfortable , I agree. TITAN X doesn't have 16x and 32x CSAA , as far as I know. How do you live with that ? I still have the original TITAN from 2013 and it has 32x AA, pretty nice for gaming.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Dave-H changed the title to WinXP Drivers for GTX 9xx and 10xx video cards

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...