Jump to content

nVidia Forceware driver 77.72 patch for 512MB VGAs


xrayer
 Share

Recommended Posts

As you know, R.Loew made nvidia videomem size patch for >256MB cards, that modifies NVCORE.VXD of 82.69 drivers. A friend of mine asked me if the patch can be backported to 77.72 drivers because he claims the newer drivers renders artefacts in some games on his GF7800. I never had GF7800, only GF7600 and GF7900 and had no problems with 82.69 drivers (except shutdown problem). So I tried to look what the patch changed on NVCORE.VXD ver 82.69. I found 3 code hooks by JMP/CALL that referenced a piece of new code added in a caveat near EOF. I tried to find similar code in ver 77.72, patched it, copied new code and modified the offsets to match. I'm not sure that I found the right matching code and how much the 77.72 differs but some parts looked pretty similar. I only don't know what to do with 3 changed Bytes at offset 144-146h. I thought it may be a checkusm in LE header but it's further and my tool says the checksum is 0 even in original file. I hope Windows would not complain and load the driver anyway.

I cannot test it and he too coz his GF7800 had died. So if someone interested plese test it on GF7800/512MB and let me know how it works. Patched driver is temporarly permanently uploaded here

http://windows98.xf.cz/index.htm#NV7722PATCHED

Install original 77.72 driver and then replace NVCORE.VXD by this patched one from the package.

 

Edited by xrayer
Link to comment
Share on other sites


I can test it on a 7600 512MB and 7300 512MB but 77.72 had not supported these cards. The inf does not include 7 series cards, have you a modified inf. Also is the NVCORE.VXD of 82.69 drivers already modified or does the R.Loew patch need installing. I have no trouble with the 82.69 drivers on the 512MB cards, I did not modify the NVCORE.vxd that was downloaded. Using WinME OS.

Edited by Goodmaneuver
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd bought a 7900GT 512 some years ago. But I never tested it. It's in a box. I have little hope for 7 series and 77.72, because 81.98 is not compatible either. AFAIK only the driver 82.69 is compatible with the complete 7 series. 82.16 is compatible with GF7800xx.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have one desktop system with a 7800GTX PCI-e, and a laptop with a 7800gtx- Both are 256mb but  both have artifacts with NFS games: underground 2 & most wanted 2005 with 82.69

I'll test when I can

I've recently started switching my systems over to ATI, I prefer better openGL than more framerates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

I have a 7800GTX, but 77.72 drivers don't have a line for it in NVAML.INF. So I replaced NVAML.INF with the one from 82.69, and the drivers worked. No problems so far.

Edited by tyukok
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 1/10/2021 at 11:47 AM, tyukok said:

I have a 7800GTX, but 77.72 drivers don't have a line for it in NVAML.INF. So I replaced NVAML.INF with the one from 82.69, and the drivers worked. No problems so far.

 

Hi, more info please. What memory size is on your 7800GTX? Did you tried to replace original 77.72 NVCORE.VXD with my patched one? Did the unpatched driver work too or made a BSOD?


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, xrayer said:

 

Hi, more info please. What memory size is on your 7800GTX? Did you tried to replace original 77.72 NVCORE.VXD with my patched one? Did the unpatched driver work too or made a BSOD?


 

My 7800GTX only had 256MB. I replaced the original 77.72 NVCORE.VXD with the patched one before installing it, didn't try to use the unpatched one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

The first time I tested your VXD was after I had the 8269 drivers installed on my 7800GTX 512MB, I had removed all 8269 files from the system. The displayed RAM size was 512MB on the nVidia control panel but this is just an indicator. For example Direct X 8.0 is displayed on all versions of recent drivers ie 7772, 8198, 8216, 8269 in the control panel of nVidia when Direct X 9c is installed. The second time I tried the 7772 drivers it displayed 256MB in the control panel. This was after I had a 256MB card installed. I tried both your VXD 16th 2nd 2021 and the original and there seems to be no difference in both the size reported throughout the system diagnosis programs 512MB and the nVidia panel 256MB and performance. I tried Alias with all options ticked anistotropic, antialiasing, shadows, and high quality skins. Normally these settings if 128MB card is used the config utility would report not enough RAM if a setting of over 848x480 pixel frame size is selected. I ran the game at 1600x900 and all OK. I had 1920x1080 running at one stage but my north-brige or CPU struggles a bit and it now balks playing the intro file if I go over 1600. The videos and in-game ones are antialiased as well and slow down with higher frame settings. The game has its own multiVMR9.dll, There was no difference between your VXD and the original. If 8269 drivers are used then the nVidia control panel indicates 512MB. The disadvantage of 7772 drivers are that Prince of Persia: the Sands of Time does not render the 3D properly. It shows video that exhibits no or very little luminance range showing a setting about half way on the luminance scale so the 3D is white mainly. I think that the 7772 driver also has only OpenGL 1.1 extensions. The reflection details are not there either. The waitress costume shows this difference in Alias. The plus to 7772 driver is that the control panel color layer setting progress into games that do not continually refresh them. With Race Driver 2 nothing can be done as it refreshes the gamma every 1 sec approx. The other drivers do not write the gamma/color curve into the games. I have wrote a new INF for the drivers that include more devices, refresh rates and resolutions. This INF will be good for drivers 7772, 8216 and 8198. It is not acceptable for 8269 as it uses a different setup and not everything will work properly if this INF is used. Use original for 8269. I believe I have found the error in 8198s INF that stops the 6200 PCI (not PCIEX) cards from working. The manufacturer ID field order has to match the description field order for the INF to work and the 6200 description and device ID orders do not line up in correct sequence. The upload is the INF used and pictures for reference. I am using WinME operating system. The 7772 driver is no longer available from nVidia but can be downloaded from Guru3D.com link 4. It is the English version but still has the International files inside. My INF is an international one. The international files can be taken from 8198Int also.

INF.zip

Edited by Goodmaneuver
corrected error
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have modded the 8269 INF and uploaded it. The refresh rates between 8 bit and 32 bit resolutions were almost identical. The Crush 11/12 and Crush 17/18 integrated north-bridge chips are Geforce2 MX and 3 respectfully and the 10 chip refresh rates to that of the 30 chips were almost identical so I simplified the INFs. The 63 minimum refresh rate for lower resolutions is explained here.

https://msfn.org/board/topic/152080-getting-the-ati-mobility-firegl-v5000-mobility-radeon-x700-to-work-w/?do=findComment&comment=1201585

I am using a TV so to gain all modes available update the monitor to the default monitor. The monitor INF for generic TV filters the modes to that which were estimated in 2000 or 2001 if XP INF's are used but my monitor is 4K capable and has a 30Hz -75hz vertical refresh range where 30Hz is needed at high resolutions. Nearly all monitors will report to the OS the refresh and resolution ranges it can handle so only the modes within the reported ranges will be displayed.

Usually if your north-bridge is OK it is the processor output pins not toggling if the graphics card is artifacting with large textured triangle or elongated rectangle shapes. Small non-textured rectangles or squares are graphics card GRAM or system RAM. The north-bridge and any chips will be damaged if let get too hot. If graphic chips have been overheated then they will most likely be creating a problem for the mother board/CPU. Graphics cards can be placed away working but then after several years placed in machine can then not work. Atifacts can be created from the graphics card if worn-out by strong machine and GPU had been running too hot:- (ATI9700- 9800 series- not big enough heatsink). In a case like this sometimes preheating the GPU can get it to display properly. Preheating can make the required voltage for operation be less. The 7800GTX has a large heatsink and therefore a good card. The large heatsink was employed as it was the GPU with the most transistors in it at the time.

If the game starts to artifact with large textured triangle or elongated rectangle shapes then stop the game and reload it/restart. If you are lucky then it will be OK again. If you can change video settings within the game then it will reload the video driver settings and this can get it working again also. Perhaps the color correction into 3D games will come good later if I am lucky, it certainly works with EVR and DXVA2 rendering. It comes off the settings when there is a resolution or refresh rate change.

NVAGP.INF

Edited by Goodmaneuver
There was an error in NVAGP.inf only will be consequential if using 2560,1280 mode @75Hz and has been corrected.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

My TV will sync down to 21 hertz so I have uploaded what I am using at present. To get use of the new modes you need to remove all traces of the old inf and go into Safe Mode and remove all the monitor drivers. If you do not remove them it will not up date the monitor and so you will not be able to use 25Hz if your monitor says 25 is OK back to the operating system.  I have removed the 63 and 57Hz modes.

NVAGP.zip

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...