Jump to content

WinXP Drivers for GTX 9xx and 10xx video cards


Mike100
 Share

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, Rod Steel said:

Hm. Maybe it cause to old GPU driver version. Or more fresh Visual Studio needed to be installed.

Here they state that for XP GPU-Z ver 2.22.0 is recommended.

Or maybe your XP-64 version screwed up...

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.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


14 hours ago, Dixel said:

I'm afraid it's not possible since no other motherboard will fit this housing.

Then change housing and PSU. I recommend Bequiet brand. They Power Supply and housing in elite version have SilentWings ventilators with hydrodynamic bearing that are almost eternal (300.000 hours) and completely silent. I have one of these - it is amazing.

 

14 hours ago, Dixel said:

I will try to reinstall again in some days and get back with the results .

I seriously recommend slipstreamed version that i talk about. It is considered the best. Your slipstream will probably change nothing, because you will just repeat current installation. If you install that slipstream you will know that it not your XP64, but all XP64 work bad on your motherboard. Anyways, i am not forcing you to anything, just want to help fellow XP user.

Edited by Rod Steel
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/23/2021 at 8:18 AM, Dixel said:

In case you will ever use Nvidia's HDMI (Azalia) or any other HD drivers you have to install KB901105 x64 before the drivers.

Yeah, was already installed, my onboard sound wouldn't work without it.

On 2/23/2021 at 8:18 AM, Dixel said:

I do not know why the Nvidia CPL shows gen.1 PCI express .

Could you look at yours ?

Says "PCI Express x16", no info about which generation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

@asdf2345 , what does your Nvidia CPL say about PCI-e version with this GTX980 ? 

Forgot to say , I've tested not only with GTX980 , but with Titan too , it's all the same . At first one member suggested that it could be something wrong with my mobo , but looks like the mobo is just fine , as you can see,  at least three members , now including you , have reported the similar readings.

Edited by Dixel
added info
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, asdf2345 said:

26nkpf.png

So as mine and Ucyborg's . It shows ordinary PCI-e (1.0). Something's wrong with the detection of PCI-e in XP64 . I'm gettiing poor performance in games .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dixel said:

So as mine and Ucyborg's . It shows ordinary PCI-e (1.0). Something's wrong with the detection of PCI-e in XP64 . I'm gettiing poor performance in games .

Name a game, and I can try testing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, asdf2345 said:

Name a game, and I can try testing it.

It's with all DX9 games that I play (not just one) .  Vista works fine with the same  driver versions , XP64 has like 30-45% slower framerate. 

No wonder , 'cause it shows PCI-e 1.0 only...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Dixel said:

XP64 has like 30-45% slower framerate. 

No wonder , 'cause it shows PCI-e 1.0 only...

I think you are mistaken. Here is a test that i read in 2012. I barely find it in 2021, but i found it!:cool:

As you can see on a page below on powerful Kepler videocard (as well as on 7970) PCIe x16 v1.1 not much slower than on PCIe x16 v2.0

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/intel-ivy-bridge-pci-express-scaling/23.html

 

Note that Test System there is much faster then your F-S Xeon system. They use 4.7Ghz (!) Core i7-3770K + ASUS Maximus V Gene Intel Z77.

So your "30-45% slower framerate" is probably from your F-S system as i explain earlier. I rest my case.

perfrel_1920.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Rod Steel said:

I think you are mistaken. Here is a test that i read in 2012. I barely find it in 2021, but i found it!:cool:

As you can see on a page below on powerful Kepler videocard (as well as on 7970) PCIe x16 v1.1 not much slower than on PCIe x16 v2.0

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/intel-ivy-bridge-pci-express-scaling/23.html

Note that Test System there is much faster then your F-S Xeon system. They use 4.7Ghz (!) Core i7-3770K + ASUS Maximus V Gene Intel Z77.

So your "30-45% slower framerate" is probably from your F-S system as i explain earlier. I rest my case.

 

First off , I'm not the only one who is "mistaken" ,  scroll back and you will see the same issue has been reported by uCyborg and asdf2345 .

Their Nvidia CPL also shows PCI-e ver. 1.0.

Second : why would you even mention Kepler cards ? It is off-topic . This is only about 900 and 1000 series, asdf2345 and I have tested on GTX 980.

Forget about my Titan , it was used only to confirm the issue with XP64 not detecting PCI-e 2.0,  besides , asdf2345 has tested on a laptop.

As you can see , it has nothing to do with my mobo. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Rod Steel said:

And about this "test" : these are the weaker cards , much weaker than GTX 980. So PCI 1.1 is enough in this case. 

GTX980 is like 80% faster than GTX680. Don't forget about the onboard VRAM . 8GB vs 2GB . See the screenshot by asdf2345.

https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-980-vs-Nvidia-GTX-680/2576vs3148

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Dixel said:

And about this "test" : these are the weaker cards , much weaker than GTX 980. So PCI 1.1 is enough in this case. 

GTX980 is like 80% faster than GTX680. Don't forget about the onboard VRAM . 8GB vs 2GB . See the screenshot by asdf2345.

https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-980-vs-Nvidia-GTX-680/2576vs3148

Desktop 980 is 4GB

Also

lswafh.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, asdf2345 said:

Desktop 980 is 4GB

Also

lswafh.png

Yes , I know , thanks cap. My GTX 980 is 4GB , yours is shown as 8GB. And the dude is talking about 600-series ancient cards in the wrong topic.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/27/2021 at 11:13 PM, UCyborg said:
On 2/23/2021 at 8:18 AM, Dixel said:

I do not know why the Nvidia CPL shows gen.1 PCI express .

Could you look at yours ?

Says "PCI Express x16", no info about which generation.

I checked with GPU-Z 2.36.0, it switches between 1.1 and 2.0 modes, depending on the load.

I rarely play games these days, last DX9 game I played a while ago was Prototype and it definitely played smoother on my Windows 10 install than on XP. The difference is significant that no FPS meters and such were needed to detect the difference. Surely the driver on 10 install is newer (in 430.xx range), but I haven't noticed any speed difference with the older 368.81 in games in general on Win7 and later systems.

I remember when DOOM (2016) came out and it was unplayable on the 368.81 driver, so couldn't stay on that version forever.

Anyway, back to XP, there is another game that feels as smooth as should be on both XP and 10; Wolfenstein: The New Order, though this one uses OpenGL.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...