# [GeForce] NVIDIA 310.90 WHQL Certified Driver



## Mad Pistol

Someone test this and please report back if it fixes the framerate stutter in BF3 for Kepler GPUs. That's the main thing that irked me about the 310.70's.


----------



## Kaldari

Quote:


> Updated NVIDIA Control Panel ambient occlusion support for Guild Wars 2


Only took them 4 months after the release of the game.


----------



## brasco

Glad to see some 3D raytracing getting some love


----------



## 47 Knucklehead

Well, I'll take a chance.


----------



## jprovido

thank god. 310.70 was a horrible driver. ima try this when I get home


----------



## zephiK

updating now, thanks


----------



## Skrillex

Can any of you guys let me know how BF3 does ?


----------



## cam51037

Aww, no amazing improvements for 670's. Nonetheless, I can't wait to get mine back from an RMA.


----------



## B!0HaZard

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kaldari*
> 
> Only took them 4 months after the release of the game.


If you read the release notes properly, this has been in all R310 drivers. So it's been there since 310.33 from Oct 23. Don't spew nonsense.

http://www.geforce.com/drivers/results/50294


----------



## zephiK

surprised no one is talking about,
Quote:


> Adds a security update for the NVIDIA Display Driver service (nvvsvc.exe).


thats the huge in driver update.

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-gpu-security-driver-exploit,20039.html


----------



## EnticingSausage

680 improvements apply to 670 aswell.


----------



## juryan

I just did a clean install of these drivers after having problems with the 310.70 drivers. I was having problems with almost every game (Far Cry 3, Assassins Creed 3, Team Fortress 2, etc.) crashing to desktop and couldn't get Far Cry 3 to run for more than a few minutes without crashing. So far I've been playing for an hour with no issues.

Edit: This is with 680's in SLI


----------



## Kaldari

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *B!0HaZard*
> 
> If you read the release notes properly, this has been in all R310 drivers. So it's been there since 310.33 from Oct 23. Don't spew nonsense.
> http://www.geforce.com/drivers/results/50294


Spewing nonsense.. really? Someone woke up with their knickers in a bunch this morning.

Anyway, I've been using 310.54 for a while, which came after the drivers you linked, and I've still had to keep ambient occlusion off in the control panel because of issues with GW2. If this release changes nothing since that mention in the notes, then I guess we're in for more of the same.

Even if it was fixed with that release, which it wasn't, that would still put them at 2 months after the game release. "If you read the release notes properly," you would still see that's a pretty long time for textures to be randomly disappearing if ambient occlusion wasn't disabled in the driver control panel.


----------



## nizda

Hah yup @zephik, your the only one so far who saw through the fluff. I saw the code on christmas day before Nvidia had it taken off any website they could. It was a very nice full remote exploit, worked on all current drivers, any version of windows. Only caveat was the user had to have file sharing on, which the average user predominately does. Honestly the way Nvidia has been with there lackluster drivers recently, did anyone really think they cared enough to work through the holidays to really improve the driver. That's why the security update to the service is right at the top cause they finally fixed it and added in whatever else they had ready at the time. The funny thing is the researcher reported this vulnerability months ago and nvidia never even so much as sent him an email back.


----------



## B!0HaZard

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kaldari*
> 
> Spewing nonsense.. really? Someone woke up with their knickers in a bunch this morning.
> Anyway, I've been using 310.54 for a while, which came after the drivers you linked, and I've still had to keep ambient occlusion off in the control panel because of issues with GW2. If this release changes nothing since that mention in the notes, then I guess we're in for more of the same.
> Even if it was fixed with that release, which it wasn't, that would still put them at 2 months after the game release. "If you read the release notes properly," you would still see that's a pretty long time for textures to be randomly disappearing if ambient occlusion wasn't disabled in the driver control panel.


NVIDIA release notes have a section for updates in that particular driver and a section for things they've fixed since the last major update. The release notes clearly state that nothing was done about GW2 AO support in 310.90, but that something has been done in R310 drivers. It is not my point that they've fixed it (I wouldn't know), my point is that this driver does nothing about it compared to 310.70 and that the release notes make no such promise so I wouldn't get my hopes up.


----------



## Blooddrunk

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *juryan*
> 
> I just did a clean install of these drivers after having problems with the 310.70 drivers. I was having problems with almost every game (Far Cry 3, Assassins Creed 3, Team Fortress 2, etc.) crashing to desktop and couldn't get Far Cry 3 to run for more than a few minutes without crashing. So far I've been playing for an hour with no issues.
> Edit: This is with 680's in SLI


You too? I just upgraded to a 660 and I have the same exact issue. Doing a clean install seemed to fix it, now I'm reluctant to upgrade to this till I hear if they are good or not. I don't have the games they did the major optimizations on so its not a big deal regardless.


----------



## naved777

Hope they have fixed the crashing issue with this one.....310.70 was horrible !


----------



## juryan

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Blooddrunk*
> 
> You too? I just upgraded to a 660 and I have the same exact issue. Doing a clean install seemed to fix it, now I'm reluctant to upgrade to this till I hear if they are good or not. I don't have the games they did the major optimizations on so its not a big deal regardless.


Before these drivers I pretty much gave up trying to play most games. Even Team Fortress 2 which has run flawlessly for years was crashing regularly. It's only been a few hours but I had to try these and so far there have been zero issues.


----------



## RobotDevil666

Awww man Far Cry 3 still stuttering , it seems bit better and scaling is much better but still stuttering , gonna test BF3 now.


----------



## Blindrage606

Fixed all Microstutter w/Far Cry 3! Buttery smooth @1440p!









310.70 was HORRID.


----------



## amstech

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> thank god. 310.70 was a horrible driver. ima try this when I get home


I've played about 20 titles, old and new and have not had a single issue with any Nvidia's last 3 driver releases.


----------



## Crooksy

I never had an issue with the .70's.

Will download the new ones now though as i'm sure that there is an improvement to be had.


----------



## kcuestag

No issues with 310.70 WHQL, Battlefield 3 runs great, but I'll try these anyways.

Thanks!


----------



## Arksz

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *RobotDevil666*
> 
> Awww man Far Cry 3 still stuttering , it seems bit better and scaling is much better but still stuttering , gonna test BF3 now.


Go into the farcry 3 fold under "my documents". Open up the GamerProfile.xml and add the lines

MaxFps="60" Gfx_Maxfps="60"

make sure they are after Showfps

It fixed all my stuttering in the game, I also have post processing set to FALSE in the file. It caused some lag and the effects make the game look crappy.
You might also need to set the file to read only, it reset for me every time i played the game.


----------



## zefs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *B!0HaZard*
> 
> If you read the release notes properly, this has been in all R310 drivers. So it's been there since 310.33 from Oct 23. Don't spew nonsense.
> http://www.geforce.com/drivers/results/50294


Yes but it wasn't working, for me atleast.


----------



## twitchyzero

no concerns with 310.70 for me...will wait for R311 before I update


----------



## Webrider99

Horrible, Just assuming it was for the 400,500 and 600 series GTX cards. I tried installing on my sig rig, with a GTX 470 and the installer completely fails at "express" setup and then I went to try custom and do a clean install, This also fails and leaves me with no drivers what-so-ever. No control panel, or anything. It even says it self that there are NO drivers installed.







Oh well guess I'm back with 306.97 ... and 310.70 sucked too, couldn't start up any game xD


----------



## grunion

Quote:


> Improves performance for GeForce GTX 690:
> 
> Up to 19% faster performance in Autodesk 3ds Max when interacting with large models compared to GeForce GTX 480.
> Up to 60% faster performance in ray tracing applications such as NVIDIA iray and Chaos V-Ray (subject to the scene fitting into graphics memory) compared to GeForce GTX 480.
> Up to 76% faster performance in the 3D extruded ray tracing capability in Adobe After Effects compared to GeForce GTX 480.


Why are the comparisons being done against the 480?

Anyway dling now...


----------



## El_Capitan

Never had issues with 310.70, but so far no issues with 310.90 as well after a clean install.


----------



## RobotDevil666

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arksz*
> 
> Go into the farcry 3 fold under "my documents". Open up the GamerProfile.xml and add the lines
> MaxFps="60" Gfx_Maxfps="60"
> make sure they are after Showfps
> It fixed all my stuttering in the game, I also have post processing set to FALSE in the file. It caused some lag and the effects make the game look crappy.
> You might also need to set the file to read only, it reset for me every time i played the game.


Nope , doesn't change anything , FC3 is still largely unplayable for me , tried every fix i could fin on the net but nothing helps , such a disappointment cause the game is great.


----------



## 8800GT

Driver did nothing. One of the things I hate about drivers is their "umbrella" fixes. They should focus on each card at a time and make drivers for each card. Like seriously, i hate it when there's "+23% performance increase in far cry 3 for GTX 680" and my GTX 460 suddenly drops 10 fps...it's a piss off. I'd like to see separate drivers for separate cards or a big note saying "To all people who don't own the 6 series, you will suffer a performance hit because we don't really care about you"


----------



## amputate

No more far cry 3 bluescreen maybe? MAYBE!?








I'MA TEST IT !


----------



## grunion

Previously stable oc no longer stable.
Power usage at the same clocks has gone up ~8%.


----------



## Steffek

Windows reports it as an "unsafe download"


----------



## Vonnis

Overclock stability has gone down. What's more interesting is that a couple of times I booted into windows and was greeted with a fantastic 800*600 resolution, no nVCP in shell menu, and unknown monitor and GPU type. Benchmark scores seem lower than before (this seems to be a trend with the latest half a dozen driver releases), if I even manage to complete a run on settings that were not a problem before.
I'm really, _really_ not impressed with any of nVidia's driver offerings these past couple of months. It's like they're desperately trying to react to AMD's 12.11 drivers but end up breaking more than they're fixing.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vonnis*
> 
> Overclock stability has gone down. What's more interesting is that a couple of times I booted into windows and was greeted with a fantastic 800*600 resolution, no nVCP in shell menu, and unknown monitor and GPU type. Benchmark scores seem lower than before (this seems to be a trend with the latest half a dozen driver releases), if I even manage to complete a run on settings that were not a problem before.
> I'm really, _really_ not impressed with any of nVidia's driver offerings these past couple of months. *It's like they're desperately trying to react to AMD's 12.11 drivers but end up breaking more than they're fixing.*


That actually makes a lot of sense. They are really throwing everything they've got at getting their performance up, but the fact of the matter is that they are screwing themselves with botched driver releases.


----------



## grunion

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Vonnis*
> 
> Overclock stability has gone down. What's more interesting is that a couple of times I booted into windows and was greeted with a fantastic 800*600 resolution, no nVCP in shell menu, and unknown monitor and GPU type. Benchmark scores seem lower than before (this seems to be a trend with the latest half a dozen driver releases), if I even manage to complete a run on settings that were not a problem before.
> I'm really, _really_ not impressed with any of nVidia's driver offerings these past couple of months. It's like they're desperately trying to react to AMD's 12.11 drivers but end up breaking more than they're fixing.


This is weird...

I load up a game and it looks 800x600, screen cap it and it is the normal res.


----------



## Blooddrunk

I guess I will stick with .70 till things blow over.


----------



## GanjaGeek

So *sick* of Nvidia's *crap* driver releases as of late... Why is it what with each new driver revision, numerous users - including myself - have reported having to lower our overclocks rather significantly? I've lost about 50% of my GPU OC at this point and about 20% of my memory OC as of the 310.70 WHQL driver. Again, I'm not talking just 13 MHz here either, it seems like it's 26+ MHz on the GPU and about 100+ MHz on the memory.

It makes me sick to lower my OC's with each new driver release, I would have bought an AMD card if I hadn't been duped into believing all of the Kepler hype. What good do the "performance improvements" of 10% here and there on the driver front really mean anymore when that same driver negates your 10% + overclock completely for some unknown reason. Seems off to me. Kepler has been nothing but a headache for overclockers and I hope AMD eats them for breakfast. */rant*


----------



## Vlasov_581

so far far cry 3 is better......i had this retarted shadow flashing before.....not anymore......also cards are running a "little" hotter than bofore


----------



## General123

Had no issues with .70's, am going to try some BF3 and farcry(both which had no issues for me on .70).
EDIT: BF3 is still nice and smooth and max overclocks are still stable..


----------



## Arizonian

*310.70* WHQL fixed the 3D clocks not down clocking to 2D clocks for me with no gaming issues.

*310.90* WHQL down clocking issue still fixed and no gaming issues, at least for BF3 multiplayer for me. So I'm not seeing any change other than perhaps I was getting better FPS as driver improved in BF3 but didn't verify that.

As usual always 'clean install'.


----------



## xPrestonn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Arizonian*
> 
> *310.70* WHQL fixed the 3D clocks not down clocking to 2D clocks for me with no gaming issues.
> *310.90* WHQL down clocking issue still fixed and no gaming issues, at least for BF3 multiplayer for me. So I'm not seeing any change other than perhaps I was getting better FPS as driver improved in BF3 but didn't verify that.
> As usual always 'clean install'.


hopefully these fix the downclocking that has happened on all of the 560tis i've owned for the past year


----------



## Junkboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GanjaGeek*
> 
> So *sick* of Nvidia's *crap* driver releases as of late... Why is it what with each new driver revision, numerous users - including myself - have reported having to lower our overclocks rather significantly? I've lost about 50% of my GPU OC at this point and about 20% of my memory OC as of the 310.70 WHQL driver. Again, I'm not talking just 13 MHz here either, it seems like it's 26+ MHz on the GPU and about 100+ MHz on the memory.
> It makes me sick to lower my OC's with each new driver release, I would have bought an AMD card if I hadn't been duped into believing all of the Kepler hype. What good do the "performance improvements" of 10% here and there on the driver front really mean anymore when that same driver negates your 10% + overclock completely for some unknown reason. Seems off to me. Kepler has been nothing but a headache for overclockers and I hope AMD eats them for breakfast. */rant*


In the previous .70 drivers while people were reporting lower clocks some were also reporting better performance and better scores even if they lost a bit of OC. From that I just assumed that they're tightening things up to make it more efficient and as such it's making some OC's unstable, which I'd be fine with to be honest. Now that drivers are more efficient the cards are being stressed more at all clocks so it would make perfect sense, and while I know having big numbers is nice if you're getting better, more stable, performance then I think in the end that's really what's best for us.

Pretty much most drivers screw up my old 460's SLI but since I got my main card from RMA I can't really test this one out but I would assume it would be the same. Good luck to everyone who tries them though.


----------



## Steffek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GanjaGeek*
> 
> So *sick* of Nvidia's *crap* driver releases as of late... Why is it what with each new driver revision, numerous users - including myself - have reported having to lower our overclocks rather significantly? I've lost about 50% of my GPU OC at this point and about 20% of my memory OC as of the 310.70 WHQL driver. Again, I'm not talking just 13 MHz here either, it seems like it's 26+ MHz on the GPU and about 100+ MHz on the memory.
> It makes me sick to lower my OC's with each new driver release, I would have bought an AMD card if I hadn't been duped into believing all of the Kepler hype. What good do the "performance improvements" of 10% here and there on the driver front really mean anymore when that same driver negates your 10% + overclock completely for some unknown reason. Seems off to me. Kepler has been nothing but a headache for overclockers and I hope AMD eats them for breakfast. */rant*


Who cares if the card goes down a bit if the software is running better at a lower clock. Have to see the trees through the forest man.


----------



## iARDAs

I don't get it.

It says improvements in 690 680 and 660

No love for 670?


----------



## noxon

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GanjaGeek*
> 
> So *sick* of Nvidia's *crap* driver releases as of late... Why is it what with each new driver revision, numerous users - including myself - have reported having to lower our overclocks rather significantly? I've lost about 50% of my GPU OC at this point and about 20% of my memory OC as of the 310.70 WHQL driver. Again, I'm not talking just 13 MHz here either, it seems like it's 26+ MHz on the GPU and about 100+ MHz on the memory.
> It makes me sick to lower my OC's with each new driver release, I would have bought an AMD card if I hadn't been duped into believing all of the Kepler hype. What good do the "performance improvements" of 10% here and there on the driver front really mean anymore when that same driver negates your 10% + overclock completely for some unknown reason. Seems off to me. Kepler has been nothing but a headache for overclockers and I hope AMD eats them for breakfast. */rant*


Could be that the actual improvements are better "use" of the GPU, so the improved performance also equal more stress to the GPU = more powerdraw -> powerlimit wall -> you have to lower clock so the card don't lower vGPU and crash it..

If you also have to lower clocks in ex 3dmark05 which don't care much about GPU clock (never gets close to powerlimit), then its weird..


----------



## MME1122

Lol









I guess Precision X needed a restart.

Anyway I agree 310.70 wasn't fantastic, it was better than 310.61 though. At least for me.
I get a lot of stuttering in Metro 2033, I'm wondering if this will fix any of that.
I also fixed my installation issues so I got this driver to install properly. Apparently I messed up drive letters and had to fix them in the registry...


----------



## Junkboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iARDAs*
> 
> I don't get it.
> 
> It says improvements in 690 680 and 660
> 
> No love for 670?


All three of those work a bit differently but anything that is made to work with a 680 should also apply to the 670. It's been like that for awhile now, where they don't mention the 670, but don't worry they're getting improvements as well .


----------



## CoD511

NVIDIA drivers have gone right down the drain recently, mainly in the form of stability and SLI scaling in newer titles for me... not what I paid over $1000 in GPUs for.


----------



## BulletSponge

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Webrider99*
> 
> Horrible, Just assuming it was for the 400,500 and 600 series GTX cards. I tried installing on my sig rig, with a GTX 470 and the installer completely fails at "express" setup and then I went to try custom and do a clean install, This also fails and leaves me with no drivers what-so-ever. No control panel, or anything. It even says it self that there are NO drivers installed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh well guess I'm back with 306.97 ... and 310.70 sucked too, couldn't start up any game xD


Had this problem also. Took 3 tries but I finally got it updated. Gotta say that I am liking these so far.



Which is a fair improvement over my old Heaven runs...........



Keep in mind that my 670 FTW is just an average overclocker, nothing special. I expect others may be beating this by a fair margin.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Junkboy*
> 
> In the previous .70 drivers while people were reporting lower clocks some were also reporting better performance and better scores even if they lost a bit of OC. From that I just assumed that they're tightening things up to make it more efficient and as such it's making some OC's unstable, which I'd be fine with to be honest. Now that drivers are more efficient the cards are being stressed more at all clocks so it would make perfect sense, and while I know having big numbers is nice if you're getting better, more stable, performance then I think in the end that's really what's best for us.
> Pretty much most drivers screw up my old 460's SLI but since I got my main card from RMA I can't really test this one out but I would assume it would be the same. Good luck to everyone who tries them though.


The problem that I have is that not only did I get a higher overclock with the 306.97 drivers, but I'm also getting higher scores overall with that overclock. It would be something if my scores tightened up by 10% at the expense of a 7% overclock. That means there would be a net-gain in performance, but I'm not seeing that on my 660 Ti. That really has me irked.

When I get home, I'll do a clean install of the 660 Ti to see if that works. So far the 310's are one of nvidia's driver low-points in recent history. The 306 seems to be golden to me. No stability issues, excellent overclocking, and great performance.


----------



## sherlock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iARDAs*
> 
> I don't get it.
> 
> It says improvements in 690 680 and 660
> 
> No love for 670?


670 and 660 Ti uses the same GK104 Chip as 680, only with 1 SMX disabled and some other small changes(like 192 bit Memory bus for 660Ti) so the % performance increase from driver for all three should be about the same, 660 uses the GK106 Chip and 690 is made up from 2 GK104 chip in SLI thus their performance increase from drivers can be different from 680.


----------



## ljason8eg

Can't seem to find a newer Nvidia driver that works well with all my games. I was on the 285 WHQL drivers forever since they worked fine for all the games I was playing. Now, got a couple new games from the Steam sale which didn't work with the 285's so I upgraded. Those games work well now, but other games have issues (bad FPS, flickering) which weren't there when using the older drivers. I'm sure two cards and three screens isn't helping matters, but drivers should be fixing issues, not creating new ones.


----------



## xPrestonn

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Can't seem to find a newer Nvidia driver that works well with all my games. I was on the 285 WHQL drivers forever since they worked fine for all the games I was playing. Now, got a couple new games from the Steam sale which didn't work with the 285's so I upgraded. Those games work well now, but other games have issues (bad FPS, flickering) which weren't there when using the older drivers. I'm sure two cards and three screens isn't helping matters, but drivers should be fixing issues, not creating new ones.


i had been using 300 series drivers for like 8 months because they were the only ones that didnt downclock my GPU lol

so far so good on these, hope it stays that way


----------



## iARDAs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Junkboy*
> 
> All three of those work a bit differently but anything that is made to work with a 680 should also apply to the 670. It's been like that for awhile now, where they don't mention the 670, but don't worry they're getting improvements as well .


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sherlock*
> 
> 670 and 660 Ti uses the same GK104 Chip as 680, only with 1 SMX disabled and some other small changes(like 192 bit Memory bus for 660Ti) so the % performance increase from driver for all three should be about the same, 660 uses the GK106 Chip and 690 is made up from 2 GK104 chip in SLI thus their performance increase from drivers can be different from 680.


Thanks guys for the response. +rep

Good to know 670 is also getting improvement.

However my benchmark in Noshar Canals gave no difference

http://www.overclock.net/t/1343727/iardas-benchmarking-log-gtx-670#post_18934421.

310.70 and 310.90 at 64 player gives the exact same average FPS in Noshar Canals TDM.


----------



## General123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iARDAs*
> 
> I don't get it.
> 
> It says improvements in 690 680 and 660
> 
> No love for 670?


As others have said, improvements for the 680 effect the 670 also. I do not know about the 660ti and below however.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iARDAs*
> 
> Thanks guys for the response. +rep
> 
> Good to know 670 is also getting improvement.
> 
> However my benchmark in Noshar Canals gave no difference
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1343727/iardas-benchmarking-log-gtx-670#post_18934421.
> 
> 310.70 and 310.90 at 64 player gives the exact same average FPS in Noshar Canals TDM.


The performance difference between the .70 and .90 will be nill. The difference they are comparing is between the 306 and 310 driver releases, not the 310.70 and 310.90.

Also, I believe the 660 Ti also gets performance increases as well (690, 680, 670, and 660 Ti all use GK104), but since it's on a 192-bit memory bus and not 256-bit like the 670 or 680, the performance difference is probably about 1/4 lower than that of the 670 or 680. That would be my initial assumption.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xPrestonn*
> 
> i had been using 300 series drivers for like 8 months because they were the only ones that didnt downclock my GPU lol
> so far so good on these, hope it stays that way


301 did that to me lol. Had a nice 3-4 FPS in all my games.

These newest ones seem ok, though I still get some flickering and pretty bad FPS in Civ V. The flickering is only on the right screen though, kind of weird.


----------



## iARDAs

Well I did get an 8fps increase in Damavand Peak 64 player rush. I also have a 0.2 CPU OC increase but perhaps the drivers gave a little bit of a boast too.


----------



## Junkboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> The problem that I have is that not only did I get a higher overclock with the 306.97 drivers, but I'm also getting higher scores overall with that overclock. It would be something if my scores tightened up by 10% at the expense of a 7% overclock. That means there would be a net-gain in performance, but I'm not seeing that on my 660 Ti. That really has me irked.
> When I get home, I'll do a clean install of the 660 Ti to see if that works. So far the 310's are one of nvidia's driver low-points in recent history. The 306 seems to be golden to me. No stability issues, excellent overclocking, and great performance.


I know it will vary from GPU but GPU, maybe yours might just like "looser" "timings" ? I don't know what to call the driver differences.









I'm sorta equating these last few drivers changes to RAM changes in timings so while some need looser ones for high OC others are fine with tight timings, ect.

Let us know how it goes with a fresh install, Good luck!








Quote:


> Originally Posted by *iARDAs*
> 
> Well I did get an 8fps increase in Damavand Peak 64 player rush. I also have a 0.2 CPU OC increase but perhaps the drivers gave a little bit of a boast too.


For a 64 player map 8 is pretty big congrats, nah with only one GPU BF3 is still mostly still GPU limited. I found zero boost going from 4.0 to 4.7 on my BF3 but I did test this way back when, maybe things have changed. In either case a boost is a boost.


----------



## iARDAs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Junkboy*
> 
> For a 64 player map 8 is pretty big congrats, nah with only one GPU BF3 is still mostly still GPU limited. I found zero boost going from 4.0 to 4.7 on my BF3 but I did test this way back when, maybe things have changed. In either case a boost is a boost.


Yeah thanks. Well my benchs are amateur but still 8 fps especially at 1440p resolution is pretty good.

I will now bench Armored Shield Conquest 64 player and lets see how it will be.


----------



## Mayor Winters

YAY!!! Got my 1286 / 7400 back finally, with the .70 I had to downgrade clocks to 1251 / 7300.

Also I lost the stuttering in BF3 the .70 was giving to me, and in some other games, only tried a few in the last 2 hours.


----------



## Anth0789

Will give these a try, hopefully will have no issues.


----------



## FTWRoguE

Just went from the .70 Betas to these, my overclock numbers are still stable in Heaven. Will have to try out FC3


----------



## Sharchaster

testing it about 30 minutes, and this driver is *much smoother* than .70...kudos to nvidia to make a 'smooth' drivers again...


----------



## feniks

yay, updating


----------



## Osea23

Got my system updated from .70 and I just played a few games of Black Ops 2. Things are a lot smoother now! Micro stuttering has now been decreased significantly in BO2. Good job NVIDIA!


----------



## Darylrese

i really hope this fixes crashing to desktop caused by 310.70!


----------



## dph314

The 310.90's crash FC3 2 minutes after I start. It's smooth before it crashes, using SLI. Usage is low though, lower than 310.70 anyway, but quite smooth. Then bam, black screen with sound, can't close or minimize it so I have to restart the computer because even though I can see the task bar, nothing will come up in front of the black FC3 screen.

310.70 worked, but SLI skipped every 30 seconds so I had to use a single card for FC3 everytime. I guess I'm going to go back to that, since it's better than nothing, which is what I have now. I'll try one more clean install of these and a prayer, then I'll have to revert and use one card.


----------



## feniks

not so great benchmark results here on 3770K @ daily 4.9GHz and 670 2GB in SLI (1267MHz core and 7012MHz mem):

a) 310.70 WHQL


b) 310.90 WHQL


AvP:
a) 310.70 WHQL
Number of frames: 19539
Average Frame Time: 5.4ms
Average FPS: 186.4

b) 310.90 WHQL
Number of frames: 19363
Average Frame Time: 5.4ms
Average FPS: 184.8

haven't checked actual playability nor other benchmarks yet.


----------



## General123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *feniks*
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> not so great benchmark results here on 3770K @ daily 4.9GHz and 670 2GB in SLI (1267MHz core and 7012MHz mem):
> a) 310.70 WHQL
> 
> b) 310.90 WHQL
> 
> 
> 
> haven't checked actual playability nor other benchmarks yet.


\
Did you check to see if the clocks changed from upgrading the drivers?


----------



## Junkboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *feniks*
> 
> not so great benchmark results here on 3770K @ daily 4.9GHz and 670 2GB in SLI (1267MHz core and 7012MHz mem):
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> a) 310.70 WHQL
> 
> b) 310.90 WHQL
> 
> 
> 
> haven't checked actual playability nor other benchmarks yet.


Could you do me a favor? Could you lower your OC's by about 10 on the core and 20 on the mem then redo tests? I'm wondering what that would do for your score in case it's slightly throttling.


----------



## feniks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *General123*
> 
> \
> Did you check to see if the clocks changed from upgrading the drivers?


yes I did, nv is using the same clock tables as before with 310.70 WHQL (or betas), no change in actual clocks with same offsets.


----------



## HeadlessKnight

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Junkboy*
> 
> Could you do me a favor? Could you lower your OC's by about 10 on the core and 20 on the mem then redo tests? I'm wondering what that would for your score in case it's slightly throttling.


Actually that is called margin of error







.


----------



## feniks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Junkboy*
> 
> Could you do me a favor? Could you lower your OC's by about 10 on the core and 20 on the mem then redo tests? I'm wondering what that would for your score in case it's slightly throttling.


no probs, I will. I was actually watching actual core throughout the benches on EVGA Precision OSD and they did not throttle on either of cards ever. one thing I might have missed on my part is that I can't remember if I had EVGA Precision OSD turned on during base becnhmarks or not, so I will repeat the test without Precision and see if numbers stay at least same. then I will lower clocks a bit -10/-20 and redo again.

will update this post with results.

EDIT:
here is re-run if Heaven 3.0 at same exact settings as before, just disabled Precision X OSD and disabled some bakcground apps (e.g. Kaspersky AV, Skype, Peerblock, Logitech webcam soft, ROG connect, etc.) to rule out any interference:


here is AvP benchmark re-run
Number of frames: 19271
Average Frame Time: 5.4ms
Average FPS: 183.9

now off to re-testing exact same stuff just with slightly lowered clocks (-10/-20 vs last ones used). be right back.

EDIT2:
re-run2 at lower clocks, actual 1254MHz (-13 offset change vs before) and 6966MHz mem (-20 offset vs before), all other settings same:
a) Heaven 3.0


b) AvP
Number of frames: 19130
Average Frame Time: 5.5ms
Average FPS: 182.5


----------



## Junkboy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *feniks*
> 
> no probs, I will. I was actually watching actual core throughout the benches on EVGA Precision OSD and they did not throttle on either of cards ever. one thing I might have missed on my part is that I can't remember if I had EVGA Precision OSD turned on during base becnhmarks or not, so I will repeat the test without Precision and see if numbers stay at least same. then I will lower clocks a bit -10/-20 and redo again.
> will update this post with results.
> EDIT:
> here is re-run if Heaven 3.0 at same exact settings as before, just disabled Precision X OSD and disabled some bakcground apps (e.g. Kaspersky AV, Skype, Peerblock, Logitech webcam soft, ROG connect, etc.) to rule out any interference:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> here is AvP benchmark re-run
> Number of frames: 19271
> Average Frame Time: 5.4ms
> Average FPS: 183.9
> now off to re-testing exact same stuff just with slightly lowered clocks (-10/-20 vs last ones used). be right back.
> EDIT2:
> re-run2 at lower clocks, actual 1254MHz (-13 offset change vs before) and 6966MHz mem (-20 offset vs before), all other settings same:
> a) Heaven 3.0
> 
> b) AvP
> Number of frames: 19130
> Average Frame Time: 5.5ms
> Average FPS: 182.5


Thanks, seems like theirs just perfectly efficient with new drivers, great cards btw.


----------



## grunion

Still FC3 CTD with sli enabled.


----------



## furyn9

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *feniks*
> 
> not so great benchmark results here on 3770K @ daily 4.9GHz and 670 2GB in SLI (1267MHz core and 7012MHz mem):
> a) 310.70 WHQL
> 
> b) 310.90 WHQL
> 
> AvP:
> a) 310.70 WHQL
> Number of frames: 19539
> Average Frame Time: 5.4ms
> Average FPS: 186.4
> b) 310.90 WHQL
> Number of frames: 19363
> Average Frame Time: 5.4ms
> Average FPS: 184.8
> haven't checked actual playability nor other benchmarks yet.


I did experienced the same , In my case 2fps less in heaven and 3fps less in AvP and 125point less in 3Dmark 11
so I roll back to 310.70


----------



## dklic6

I'm getting better FPS with this driver, but worse fluidity overall in BF3. Kinda frustrating.


----------



## spice003

drivers are crap, now my tv is not being detected


----------



## feniks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Junkboy*
> 
> Thanks, seems like theirs just perfectly efficient with new drivers, great cards btw.


thanks









I will have to re-do some 5.0GHz benchmarks with maxed out clocks and see if I get any improvement over there, last driver was throttling cores somewhat, perhaps it's less now? will see about that later, will post back only if I find some improvements finally he he









I don't mind loosing that 0.5 FPS in heaven 3.0 at my daily clocks if people say the image feels smoother in gaming. haven't had a chance to test it yet, but I will see, so far so good, driver at least as stable as former WHQL, that's something he he!


----------



## baalbelphegor

it says that it supports the gtx 660m but when I start the install it says no compatible hardware detected


----------



## General123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *baalbelphegor*
> 
> it says that it supports the gtx 660m but when I start the install it says no compatible hardware detected


Laptop installs are always hard. You need to extract it at first then use device manager and install it.


----------



## Osea23

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *baalbelphegor*
> 
> it says that it supports the gtx 660m but when I start the install it says no compatible hardware detected


My Lenovo y580 installed the .90 drivers just fine.


----------



## grunion

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *baalbelphegor*
> 
> it says that it supports the gtx 660m but when I start the install it says no compatible hardware detected


Also keep an eye on LTV2G, it'll be there soon.


----------



## dph314

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *grunion*
> 
> Still FC3 CTD with sli enabled.


Here too. Well, sort of. Actually I'd consider CTDs a step up from what I have to go through. Get a black screen that I can't close no matter what, have to do a restart. Even single-card crashes for me now- "Far Cry 3 has stopped responding..."


----------



## StreekG

When i first installed Far Cry 3 i also did a new install of 310.70, but to my mistake i forgot to check clean install, this is when i was getting the black screen and had to restart.
Re-installing the drivers as a clean install fixed this problem for me and never crashed in far cry 3 again


----------



## dph314

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *StreekG*
> 
> When i first installed Far Cry 3 i also did a new install of 310.70, but to my mistake i forgot to check clean install, this is when i was getting the black screen and had to restart.
> Re-installing the drivers as a clean install fixed this problem for me and never crashed in far cry 3 again


Checking the 'Clean install' box when installing the drivers isn't what people who say "Do a clean install" are referring to. All checking that box does is what it says in the description- revert your settings back to default instead of saving them. For what people refer to as a 'clean install', you have to use the guide on here- http://www.overclock.net/t/1150443/how-to-remove-your-nvidia-gpu-drivers or use a program such as Driver Fusion in safe mode after uninstalling the drivers through the Control Panel because many files still remain left behind afterwards









Glad your problems were fixed though. I installed 310.90 twice and 310.70 twice, no fix for me


----------



## StreekG

Yeah i have done a clean install the proper way before, just saying that's what fixed my issue, i am hesitant to install 310.90 now...


----------



## dph314

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *StreekG*
> 
> Yeah i have done a clean install the proper way before, just saying that's what fixed my issue, i am hesitant to install 310.90 now...


Well, if you're not having any problems at the moment I wouldn't. I even reverted after trying it and now I'm having problems that weren't there before with 310.70. Not sure what's going on here, but it seems to be only with FC3. So I'm taking a break from it. Haven't started AC3 yet, so I guess it's the perfect time to


----------



## wendigo4700

So...theres no performance increase, for us GTX5xx owners?

It seems they only focus on the GTX6xx cards now. And so I guess my GTX580 is being left in the dust, and will get no more attention from nvidia


----------



## StreekG

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dph314*
> 
> Well, if you're not having any problems at the moment I wouldn't. I even reverted after trying it and now I'm having problems that weren't there before with 310.70. Not sure what's going on here, but it seems to be only with FC3. So I'm taking a break from it. Haven't started AC3 yet, so I guess it's the perfect time to


Still trying to finish Borderlands 2 before i really play FC3. Sidequests


----------



## Derp

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wendigo4700*
> 
> So...theres no performance increase, for us GTX5xx owners?
> It seems they only focus on the GTX6xx cards now. And so I guess my GTX580 is being left in the dust, and will get no more attention from nvidia


Perfectly normal, AMD is actually worse about that than Nvidia. For an example the 8800GT is older than the HD4870 but the 8800GT actually has windows 8 drivers for it..... The HD4870 was forgotten.

Also, after so many performance updates the arch is basically maxed out. There's no way to get any more performance out of them so future driver releases are mainly for compatibility with new games.


----------



## General123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wendigo4700*
> 
> So...theres no performance increase, for us GTX5xx owners?
> It seems they only focus on the GTX6xx cards now. And so I guess my GTX580 is being left in the dust, and will get no more attention from nvidia


All the performance for those cards have been milked.


----------



## huzzug

i don't think this news item got notice and since i don't have permissions to start a new thread i'll post it here
http://www.esecurityplanet.com/network-security/researcher-warns-of-nvidia-display-driver-vulnerability.html

a vulnerability in driver is something new for me


----------



## wendigo4700

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Derp*
> 
> Perfectly normal, AMD is actually worse about that than Nvidia. For an example the 8800GT is older than the HD4870 but the 8800GT actually has windows 8 drivers for it..... The HD4870 was forgotten.
> Also, after so many performance updates the arch is basically maxed out. There's no way to get any more performance out of them so future driver releases are mainly for compatibility with new games.


hmmm..I guess I'll just still grap it, just to get that vulnerability fix then


----------



## sherlock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *huzzug*
> 
> i don't think this news item got notice and since i don't have permissions to start a new thread i'll post it here
> http://www.esecurityplanet.com/network-security/researcher-warns-of-nvidia-display-driver-vulnerability.html
> a vulnerability in driver is something new for me


Since this driver came out immediately after that news, one could assume that this driver might contain fix to that vulnerability.


----------



## Tippy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> Someone test this and please report back if it fixes the framerate stutter in BF3 for Kepler GPUs. That's the main thing that irked me about the 310.70's.


OHHHHH so that's what it is!

Christ I have been playing BF3 at 100-120 fps on a 120hz monitor this whole time, and suddenly in the last week or two I've noticed that it doesn't feel anywhere near as ultra-smooth as it used to. The framerate indicator stays steady but it still feels like I'm playing at goddamn 40 fps, ARGH.


----------



## grunion

SLI BF3 is silky smooth for me, was the same with .70.


----------



## Sharchaster

to all Far Cry 3 gamer, I want to ask how many fps did you get at the first mission (searching the blue leaf, green, red, kill boar, etc)??? Because I can get 63 - 86 FPS at stock clocks using 310.90....with ultra and 4xmsaa, this is normal? or quite low?


----------



## NitrousX

For me, these run a bit worse than 310.70 WHQL. I'm getting constant frame rate drops in BF3, BL2, and FC3 that I never saw in 310.70. Everything goes back to normal once I roll back to 310.70.


----------



## grunion

.70 vs .90
Still no proper sli support.


----------



## ahnafakeef

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tippy*
> 
> OHHHHH so that's what it is!
> Christ I have been playing BF3 at 100-120 fps on a 120hz monitor this whole time, and suddenly in the last week or two I've noticed that it doesn't feel anywhere near as ultra-smooth as it used to. The framerate indicator stays steady but it still feels like I'm playing at goddamn 40 fps, ARGH.


100-120 FPS with a 660Ti? at what settings?


----------



## PoisonousRakija

Any improvements for Blackops II and Far Cry 3 with GTX 560 Ti from previous drivers?


----------



## Ghoxt

Great...since updating, now in GW2 I get Normals that look flipped on certain mountain areas where I can see right thru them >< pia moving the camera around now.


----------



## Tippy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ahnafakeef*
> 
> 100-120 FPS with a 660Ti? at what settings?


Combination of Low/Medium with no AA...hardly looks different compared to Ultra because most of the time spent in multiplayer involves having blurred vision and any combination of lensflare/bloom/dust/smoke/snow/debris/jam/etc all over your eyes


----------



## ahnafakeef

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Tippy*
> 
> Combination of Low/Medium with no AA...hardly looks different compared to Ultra because most of the time spent in multiplayer involves having blurred vision and any combination of lensflare/bloom/dust/smoke/snow/debris/jam/etc all over your eyes


I knew 100 fps at ultra was too good to be true! Thanks for the input!


----------



## 47 Knucklehead

I installed it on my SLI'd 580's and have been playing Rift and Folding (sorry, no FPS play yet) and have had no issues. It seems a hair faster, but nothing to write home about. I'll have to fire up MWO and some other games to check out the drivers even better.


----------



## laurelgtxyz

Installed and played BF3 for 2 hours. No issues or what so ever. But the performance gain is nothing to write about.


----------



## sherlock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ahnafakeef*
> 
> 100-120 FPS with a 660Ti? at what settings?


0X MSAA on a TDM game maybe, I got that on 301.42 and my old GTX670 when I used to have a 120hz monitor.


----------



## Antykain

No issues with these drivers, yet.. BF3, PS2 running smoothly. PS2 seems like it gained a few FPS. So, a small *+* there..


----------



## mtbiker033

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *grunion*
> 
> SLI BF3 is silky smooth for me, was the same with .70.


yep me too


----------



## RobotDevil666

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *grunion*
> 
> SLI BF3 is silky smooth for me, was the same with .70.


Strange 310.90 gave me horrible stutter in BF3 did roll back to 310.70 and it's smooth again , since FC3 is still not fixed and BF3 has stutter I'll stick to 310.70


----------



## LightMassKiller

How does one completely remove 310.70?~


----------



## OTHG_ChefTreb

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *LightMassKiller*
> 
> How does one completely remove 310.70?~


http://www.overclock.net/t/1150443/how-to-remove-your-nvidia-gpu-drivers/0_50


----------



## LightMassKiller

Done. Drivers instaled I'll test them out in a bit.


----------



## Motive

My BF3 just dies sometimes during gaming, no overclock. And usually at the end before I get bonus points. With these drivers.


----------



## powahlam

My driver stops working while playimg bf3 sometimes sli 670 stock clocks
Win 7 ult 64 bit
2500k @4.4
Z68 ud3h b3
2x8gb DDR 1600
Sammy 840 pro
Cat leap 2560x1440

In nvidia control panel I have these settings just for bf3

Clamp. On
Supersample 8
Powermangement mode to prefer max performance
Max pre rendered frames 1
Texture quality high quality

Using evga precision x 3.0.4 sync is off

I have these settings


----------



## General123

I do not know if I am wrong in this regard but I can not help but feel that users that are having issues are simply due to their own errors, whether it be with the drivers or just the pc in general. I find that it makes no sense for the driver simply to not work for some but work fine for most, even when these people have the same or similar setups. I don't know, just my


----------



## furyn9

For some reason the 310.90 corrupt my OS , I can't install any NVIDIA driver . I'd remove all the file ( regedit ) I'll follow the thread how to remove complete the NVIDIA drivers, and nothing happen. By the way I always do a clean install by that I mean I do everything as the thread ( remove NVIDIA driver ) so







right now


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *General123*
> 
> I do not know if I am wrong in this regard but I can not help but feel that users that are having issues are simply due to their own errors, whether it be with the drivers or just the pc in general. I find that it makes no sense for the driver simply to not work for some but work fine for most, even when these people have the same or similar setups. I don't know, just my


Wrong.

310.70 - BF3 stutters, it's noticeable and a FRAPS benchmark confirms it.
306.97 - less stuttering, FRAPS confims.

310.90 does nothing to fix this issue for me.

No changes to settings at all. How can that be user error?


----------



## General123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> *Wrong.*
> 310.70 - BF3 stutters, it's noticeable and a FRAPS benchmark confirms it.
> 306.97 - less stuttering, FRAPS confims.
> 310.90 does nothing to fix this issue for me.
> No changes to settings at all. How can that be user error?


Thank you for your opinion as I also stated my own








I did not experience any of the issues you stated, at all. We both have 600's so how could it possibly be the drivers if someone else is able to run them completely fine?


----------



## chmodlabs

Cant wait to get my 670 back from EVGA RMA as well. But I'm more than likely going to sell the RMA'd card as BNIB in the overclock marketplace and pick up a 7970 Ghz. I just refuse to put up with micro stutter on a $400 graphics card.

- chmodlabs


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *General123*
> 
> Thank you for your opinion as I also stated my own
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did not experience any of the issues you stated, at all. We both have 670's so how could it possibly be the drivers if someone else is able to run them completely fine?


And yet there are others with 680's and 670's that are also experiencing the same issue that I'm experiencing. The difference is that on the 670 or 680, the performance is high enough that unless you're maxing the game completely, you won't notice. @ 90 FPS, the game runs great, but at 60, it constantly stutters at least once every couple seconds. The issue really is that people simply do not notice due to high framerates, but when you do notice, it becomes a real issue.

The general feeling is that nvidia is artificially increasing framerates at the expense of smoothness, and that irks me pretty bad, especially after I spent $300 on a video card.

Supposedly there is no issue in Windows 8, but the issue is present among virtually all GK104 users on Windows 7. This isn't an isolated incident.


----------



## chmodlabs

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> And yet there are others with 680's and 670's that are also experiencing the same issue that I'm experiencing. The difference is that on the 670 or 680, the performance is high enough that unless you're maxing the game completely, you won't notice. @ 90 FPS, the game runs great, but at 60, it constantly stutters at least once every couple seconds. The issue really is that people simply do not notice due to high framerates, but when you do notice, it becomes a real issue.
> The general feeling is that nvidia is artificially increasing framerates at the expense of smoothness, and that irks me pretty bad, especially after I spent $300 on a video card.
> Supposedly there is no issue in Windows 8, but the issue is present among virtually all GK104 users on Windows 7. This isn't an isolated incident.


Time to upgrade to a 120hz monitor......

- chmodlabs


----------



## dph314

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *General123*
> 
> Thank you for your opinion as I also stated my own
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did not experience any of the issues you stated, at all. We both have 670's so how could it possibly be the drivers if someone else is able to run them completely fine?
> 
> 
> 
> And yet there are others with 680's and 670's that are also experiencing the same issue that I'm experiencing. The difference is that on the 670 or 680, the performance is high enough that unless you're maxing the game completely, you won't notice. @ 90 FPS, the game runs great, but at 60, it constantly stutters at least once every couple seconds. The issue really is that people simply do not notice due to high framerates, but when you do notice, it becomes a real issue.
> 
> The general feeling is that nvidia is artificially increasing framerates at the expense of smoothness, and that irks me pretty bad, especially after I spent $300 on a video card.
> 
> Supposedly there is no issue in Windows 8, but the issue is present among virtually all GK104 users on Windows 7. This isn't an isolated incident.
Click to expand...

No user error here either. Brand new Windows 8 install, removed 310.70 drivers using the thread posted a few posts back like I always have. 310.70 was the first driver I installed on Win8, and I got this skip in FC3 every 30 seconds when using SLI. Now with this driver I get a straight-up black screen 1 minute in everytime. Reverted (cleanly of course) and now it's giving me the "Far Cry 3 has stopped responding..." 1 minute in.

Before installing 310.90, I originally installed 310.70, like I said, and had the problem with SLI but with one card...it was amazing. Win8 is definitely an improvement. But literally never had a problem with drivers or any game like this before R310. I hate this family


----------



## xoleras

r310 - especially 310.70 onwards have made my 3dmark11 scores noticeably worse. I don't know what the deal is, apparently these drivers don't like overclocking quite as much, but my games have been OK.


----------



## amoverclock29

This driver worked out very well for me.
Some minor improvements in average FPS of BF 3 and it even solved the stuttering issue.
Impressive improvement in Far Cry 3 (6-8 FPS gain) and again solved the stuttering issue.
As far as I am concerned I have had no issues with these drivers at all. Good to see Nvidia stepping up their game


----------



## naved777

Finally they fixed the artifacts nd stuttering issue of FC3.....silky smooth 55avg fps with everything maxxed out
BF3 used to crash with 310.70...dat is gone now averaging @65fps in Ultra
Overall good but it may do worse than good for few....


----------



## DarwinMoss

No freak outs from windows or any other programs and no Aero crashes either in the .90 driver so far which I got on the .70 so it's good. Also see some small gains in BF3 so it's nice that it seems to be smoothed out.


----------



## Sharchaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *amoverclock29*
> 
> This driver worked out very well for me.
> Some minor improvements in average FPS of BF 3 and it even solved the stuttering issue.
> *Impressive improvement in Far Cry 3 (6-8 FPS gain) and again solved the stuttering issue.*
> As far as I am concerned I have had no issues with these drivers at all. Good to see Nvidia stepping up their game


Me too, with this driver, I am able to play the games with max settings with 8 x MSAA and HDAO, and get 60 - 79 FPS at the second mission (save Liza), Good Job NVIDIA and Ubisoft, the game is look SO AMAZING...wow


----------



## Tippy

For me this fixed my BF3 stuttering issues (660 Ti) compared to 310.70.


----------



## raven117

still on 306.97's, I play alot of guild wars 2. Anyone notice any improvements. I've seen Nvidia limited voltage or something in the later driver sets, what exactly is going on with that?


----------



## dph314

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *raven117*
> 
> still on 306.97's, I play alot of guild wars 2. Anyone notice any improvements. *I've seen Nvidia limited voltage or something in the later driver sets*, what exactly is going on with that?


Do you mean for non-reference cards? Do you have any source/details on that?


----------



## Celeras

These work well for me, sticking with them.


----------



## jetpuck73

I still get the yellow roads in BF3.


----------



## Infinite Jest

I've had some artifacting at the top of the screen and a bit more stutter than usually while loading textures with the new driver in GTA IV. Coming from 306.97


----------



## xentrox

Been using these all day yesterday playing Hawken and BF3.

They are by far the best WHQL's to ever come out for my 680. I am experiencing smoother rendering and ~15% increase in FPS with both games.

I highly recommend this set.


----------



## dph314

Can someone tell me if they've tried these with Assassin's Creed III and SLI? I'm seriously ready to throw a baby out the window... First Far Cry 3 crashes in SLI, then even with single-card. And now after giving up on it, I move to AC3 and in SLI I get about 40% usage on both cards. Not sure if it's the game or drivers. I might give these drivers another shot for AC3, but they hated FC3 on my PC. Brand new Windows 8 install too


----------



## xoleras

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dph314*
> 
> Can someone tell me if they've tried these with Assassin's Creed III and SLI? I'm seriously ready to throw a baby out the window... First Far Cry 3 crashes in SLI, then even with single-card. And now after giving up on it, I move to AC3 and in SLI I get about 40% usage on both cards. Not sure if it's the game or drivers. I might give these drivers another shot for AC3, but they hated FC3 on my PC. Brand new Windows 8 install too


Not sure if this will help, but using MSI afterburner overlay OSD (if you're using it) in some games have caused crashes for me especially when alt-tabbing. I usually leave the OSD overlay turned off these days.


----------



## Darylrese

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xoleras*
> 
> Not sure if this will help, but using MSI afterburner overlay OSD (if you're using it) in some games have caused crashes for me especially when alt-tabbing. I usually leave the OSD overlay turned off these days.


Yeah especially in windows 8 i found!


----------



## ez12a

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jetpuck73*
> 
> I still get the yellow roads in BF3.


Sure you're not playing BF3: Wizard of Oz edition?









i'm going to try these out on my 670 when i get back from work. They sound promising so far.

I'm running the previous version and there are some weird shadows in Far Cry 3 that reflect some kind of blue..it's strange and only occurs in certain situations (only one that i found so far).


----------



## king8654

Quote:


> Can any of you guys let me know how BF3 does ?


Ya, going to try some in a few. BF3 with new update and 310.70 driver been BSOD'ing on me all day, and its def not my setup, since it crushes prime/folding 24/7/memtest/etc., as ive even scaled down to 1080p just to make sure. Stutters for a sec, then loses audio, and then BSOD, restart. Turned off HT, upgraded driver, hopefully fixes this


----------



## Darylrese

I get crash to desktop too in Far Cry 3 with this driver







So fed up not being able to use my computer properly after spending so much on it in the last 12 months!


----------



## xoleras

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darylrese*
> 
> I get crash to desktop too in Far Cry 3 with this driver
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So fed up not being able to use my computer properly after spending so much on it in the last 12 months!


Are you on windows 7 or 8?

I think i'm going to wait for a service pack before jumping to 8. I'm not too keen on metro either.


----------



## Darylrese

Windows 8 Pro with Start8 installed. Only use Metro for xbox music, otherwise it looks just like Windows 7 but has shorter boot times.


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Something wierd would happen after every few restarts or turning the computer on from shut off. The driver would not load and my screen was at a low resolution. Then I'd restart the computer again, and it was good. I rolled back to 310.70 to see if it happens again. Been good so far.


----------



## Vonnis

Getting display driver crashes in BL2 with this driver. I'm thinking I'd be better off rolling back, but every driver in the past couple of months has been a step backwards from the previous. Getting pretty tired of this crap.


----------



## Mayor Winters

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *OTHG_ChefTreb*
> 
> http://www.overclock.net/t/1150443/how-to-remove-your-nvidia-gpu-drivers/0_50


No need to do that anymore, you just go to the custom mark installation of the setup, mark de box and it rolls over it alone.

No issues doing this since months, and these .90 drivers are the best ones since I installed my 670 on june. Awesome, BF3 is smooth and I got my OC back


----------



## shiloh

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *MrTOOSHORT*
> 
> Something wierd would happen after every few restarts or turning the computer on from shut off. The driver would not load and my screen was at a low resolution. Then I'd restart the computer again, and it was good. I rolled back to 310.70 to see if it happens again. Been good so far.


I have the exact same issue. I went back to 310.70 and I'm ok now.

EDIT: Just noticed that we both have a 690. might be an issue related to 690 only


----------



## jprovido

fixed everything for me. 310.70 was horrible! this worked flawlessly for me


----------



## dph314

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xoleras*
> 
> Not sure if this will help, but using MSI afterburner overlay OSD (if you're using it) in some games have caused crashes for me especially when alt-tabbing. I usually leave the OSD overlay turned off these days.


Nope. Don't use the OSD often.

Windows 8 has been great when the game is actually working though. Playing AC3 with one card now and it's incredible. SLI support is sub-par at best, from the little bit I Google'd. But with one card at 1390/6800 it's awesome. Maxed with TXAA and I never drop below 70fps. And 70 is hardly noticeably different from 120fps. I suggest you get Win8









I think it's just Ubisoft games I have trouble with. Well, I _hope_...


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shiloh*
> 
> I have the exact same issue. I went back to 310.70 and I'm ok now.
> EDIT: Just noticed that we both have a 690. might be an issue *related to 690 only*


Or Canadians, probably the gtx690 though!


----------



## ahnafakeef

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mayor Winters*
> 
> No need to do that anymore, you just go to the custom mark installation of the setup, mark de box and it rolls over it alone.
> No issues doing this since months, and these .90 drivers are the best ones since I installed my 670 on june. Awesome, BF3 is smooth and I got my OC back


I second this. I did this going from 304.xx to 310.70 to 310.90 and no issues yet.


----------



## feniks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mayor Winters*
> 
> No need to do that anymore, you just go to the custom mark installation of the setup, mark de box and it rolls over it alone.
> No issues doing this since months, and these .90 drivers are the best ones since I installed my 670 on june. Awesome, BF3 is smooth and I got my OC back


yeah, I've been using CLean Install option in Custom mode since they introduced it, never a problem.


----------



## atomicmew

Crashing issues with these drivers. Going back to 306.97. Very disappointed with the 310 series


----------



## feniks

nvidia will be doing a minor change to driver and posting it again soon without a need for MS re-certification (source here), that should fix 690 users at least, not sure about other stuff people are having trouble with.


----------



## ANDMYGUN

Hey guys, I've installed probably 4 drivers in a row, yet to install these drivers, will I run into compatibility issues in the near future if I keep installing over each driver?


----------



## Vonnis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *shiloh*
> 
> I have the exact same issue. I went back to 310.70 and I'm ok now.
> EDIT: Just noticed that we both have a 690. might be an issue related to 690 only


It's not a GTX690 specific issue. It may be a multi-GPU problem though; I've had the same thing happen with my GTX680 SLI.


----------



## TA4K

I was having a problem where BF3 ran in windowed mode, whatever I do. I'm sticking with .70 for this one.


----------



## SteveYzerman19

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TA4K*
> 
> I was having a problem where BF3 ran in windowed mode, whatever I do. I'm sticking with .70 for this one.


Same here


----------



## d-block

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> Wrong.
> 310.70 - BF3 stutters, it's noticeable and a FRAPS benchmark confirms it.
> 306.97 - less stuttering, FRAPS confims.
> 310.90 does nothing to fix this issue for me.
> No changes to settings at all. How can that be user error?


Those aren't the only variables though. There could be a significant factor you are leaving out, such as you didn't mention you moved your computer into the bathroom. Your case may or may not be user error, but the majority of all computer problems are caused by user error in some form or another. That said, I found 310.70 to be one of the worst driver experiences for me in recent memory. I'm on 306.97 now too. Seems more stable.


----------



## GanjaGeek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *mcg75*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *GanjaGeek*
> 
> Me too.
> WTH Nvidia?
> Sick of my $400 GPU being a POS.
> AMD needs to hurry up with the 8xxx cards, I'm gladly purchasing one.
> 
> 
> 
> The same AMD that I left Nvidia for a month ago to find out that in 14 months, they still can't get Skyrim running right?
Click to expand...

Funny, Skyrim runs great on my 7950, only AMD's drivers are actually stable!









Don't troll me for being mad that I spent $400 on a GPU and the company that made it can't get the drivers to work properly for a large percentage of users.

Funny how you're sticking up for the same company that can't make BF3 run full screen in their latest WHQL for many users when it's been out as long as Skyrim


----------



## TA4K

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GanjaGeek*
> 
> Me too.
> WTH Nvidia?
> Sick of my $400 GPU being a POS.
> AMD needs to hurry up with the 8xxx cards, I'm gladly purchasing one.


Well mine only cost me $150, two months ago so I'm happy anyway.


----------



## randomizer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *TA4K*
> 
> I was having a problem where BF3 ran in windowed mode, whatever I do. I'm sticking with .70 for this one.


Tried the alt-enter key combination (with the window in focus)? It's a workaround but I found that it usually works to switch an application to fullscreen.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> Someone test this and please report back if it fixes the framerate stutter in BF3 for Kepler GPUs. That's the main thing that irked me about the 310.70's.


I'm only quoting this because this is the problem I'm having, again, with these drivers just as I did the 310.70. I rolled back to 306.97.


----------



## adridu59

I never had a single problem with Nvidia drivers, never "felt" any problem at least and I've been using almost all of them since GeForce 295.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dph314*
> 
> I don't see anymore problems here than usual. So...?


Exactly
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *adridu59*
> 
> I never had a single problem with Nvidia drivers, never "felt" any problem at least and I've been using almost all of them since GeForce 295.


Same deal for me pretty much...got into the game with a 295, have owned two 560 Ti's, 6 different 570's, two 670's, and now this 680 since then....and never had a single issue with drivers with any of my cards, *until* this latest 310.xx series came out.


----------



## lacrossewacker

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *BulletSponge*
> 
> Had this problem also. Took 3 tries but I finally got it updated. Gotta say that I am liking these so far.
> 
> Which is a fair improvement over my old Heaven runs...........
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Keep in mind that my 670 FTW is just an average overclocker, nothing special. I expect others may be beating this by a fair margin.


I don't think my Evga 670 FTW is an average overclocker. I got 53fps on mine. I can benchmark at 1300mhz/7000mhz, but when I play a game, I can only do +88 on my core, so around 1270-1280mhz core

Represent that FTW cards!


----------



## Darylrese

I NEVER had an issue with nvidias drivers until 310.xx too. I am getting annoyed i cant use my PC for gaming though at the moment as it crashes to desktop all the time.

My last AMD card the 6950, had driver issues too and i found AMD fixed issues on really old games that no-one ever plays rather than the latestest ones. They used to bring out a new cataylist driver every few weeks but none of them changed anything all the time i owed it. Not sure what they are like these days but if they are stable they are ahead of the game for now.


----------



## mcg75

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GanjaGeek*
> 
> Funny, Skyrim runs great on my 7950, only AMD's drivers are actually stable!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't troll me for being mad that I spent $400 on a GPU and the company that made it can't get the drivers to work properly for a large percentage of users.
> Funny how you're sticking up for the same company that can't make BF3 run full screen in their latest WHQL for many users when it's been out as long as Skyrim


Huh? There's no defending, sticking up or trolling in my comment for you.

I relayed my experience switching from NV to AMD recently. If you don't agree that's fine but don't make stuff up about me ok, thanks.


----------



## dph314

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *PCModderMike*
> 
> Same deal for me pretty much...got into the game with a 295, have owned two 560 Ti's, 6 different 570's, two 670's, and now this 680 since then....and never had a single issue with drivers with any of my cards, *until* this latest 310.xx series came out.


Same. Always done clean installs and never had an issue, with game nor driver, until R310. When it works, it's amazing. AC3 with one card at 1400mhz/7000mhz is unbelievable. But I might just be having trouble with the games themselves, as I've only tried Ubisoft games, and we know they don't have the best track-record. About to try Hitman for the first time now, so, we'll see how that game pans out with these drivers.


----------



## Kaldari

I've been stuck with 310.54 for what feels like forever now. I've tried upgrading after every driver release, but there is always some issue that makes me revert. With so many people already voicing problems with these, I guess I won't even bother this time around.


----------



## dph314

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Kaldari*
> 
> I've been stuck with 310.54 for what feels like forever now. I've tried upgrading after every driver release, but there is always some issue that makes me revert. With so many people already voicing problems with these, I guess I won't even bother this time around.


Have you tried FC3 or AC3 with .54? Just wondering if it's the game or driver. Because on both .90 and .70 I get a horrible experience one way or another in these two games with SLI.

Ran the Hitman benchmark and it's not recognizing SLI!


----------



## Seid Dark

It seems that Nvidia will never fix bad PhysX performance with Kepler cards in Borderlands 2







Friend with GTX 570 has better fps than me in that game and that's just plain wrong. I play with PhysX on low and still get drops to 40fps in battles which feels awful when you are used to higher framerates. I'm not alone with this problem, some even get fps drops with GTX 680 SLI. My card gets normal results in benchmarks and other games. Metro 2033 was another disappointment, I know AMD is far better than Nvidia in it but low performance still surprised me. I may switch to AMD when their next gen cards are released.


----------



## Kaldari

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dph314*
> 
> Have you tried FC3 or AC3 with .54? Just wondering if it's the game or driver. Because on both .90 and .70 I get a horrible experience one way or another in these two games with SLI.
> Ran the Hitman benchmark and it's not recognizing SLI!


I haven't, but it's worth a go. FC3 and AC3 are relatively new games though, so drivers predating those games may have issues. They have been rock solid for me in everything I've played though.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dph314*
> 
> Same. Always done clean installs and never had an issue, with game nor driver, until R310. When it works, it's amazing. AC3 with one card at 1400mhz/7000mhz is unbelievable. But I might just be having trouble with the games themselves, as I've only tried Ubisoft games, and we know they don't have the best track-record. About to try Hitman for the first time now, so, we'll see how that game pans out with these drivers.


Yes that's the most disappointing part of it for me. When it is running good, the performance gain I see in BF3 and Far Cry 3 is awesome, but they both have that weird clock drop and then subsequently FPS drop....annoying.


----------



## Mad Pistol

I'm going to post my findings from another thread in here. This may help explain some of the issues in BF3.

Originally from here: http://www.overclock.net/t/1344795/bf3-stuttering/0_30#post_19001746



Spoiler: BF3 benchmark details



System specs:

i5 3570k (stock)
ASrock Z77 Extreme 4
eVGA GTX 660 Ti FTW Sig 2 (stock) - *310.90 forceware drivers*
8GB DDR3 1600mhz RAM (9-9-9-24-2T)
128GB Crucial M4 SSD
500GB WD Caviar Blue HDD
3TB Segate Baracuda 7200.14
Corsair TX-650 PSU (first gen)
Windows 8 Pro
Dell U2412M monitor (1920x1200)

Game: BF3
Map: Caspian Border
Players: 64
benchmark times: 2 minutes each
Benchmark program: FRAPS

Settings: 1920x1200
Ultra settings
AA - variable (see below)

Ultra, 4xAA - no vsync


Ultra, No AA - adaptive vsync


Ultra, No AA - no vsync


High preset, no AA, no vsync.


I find it interesting that at max settings, the game performance is phenomenal. However, as soon as you start trying to limit the card in any way, be it taking away AA, putting adaptive vsync on, or even set settings to high, it bites your head off in the form of framerate stuttering. This is REALLY disappointing. My 7870 plays the game well at Ultra settings, but when you scale back the settings or put a limiter on it, it takes it in stride without issue.

Now that I've noticed this, I believe it when people tell me that they have no issues running BF3 @ ultra with a Kepler GPU on the 310.90 drivers. There is no issue at all there. However, anyone that introduces a limiter into the equation is met with harsh results. That's the REAL issue here.

Conclusion: This is NOT user error. I know it looks like user error, but this should not be happening for any reason. When you increase framerates (or attempt to limit them) the system should respond accordingly with performance that fits the new situation. I'm a little baffled that this is happening, especially on Nvidia's GK104 lineup of GPUs. If you attempt to inflate the framerates by lowering the settings, the game starts stuttering. The reason some people don't notice is because the framerates are higher than most refresh rates on monitors, and thus, you just think it's your monitor that's having issues, not the GPU.

This needs to be fixed, and it needs to be fixed very soon.


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> I'm going to post my findings from another thread in here. This may help explain some of the issues in BF3.
> Originally from here: http://www.overclock.net/t/1344795/bf3-stuttering/0_30#post_19001746
> 
> 
> Spoiler: BF3 benchmark details
> 
> 
> 
> System specs:
> i5 3570k (stock)
> ASrock Z77 Extreme 4
> eVGA GTX 660 Ti FTW Sig 2 (stock) - *310.90 forceware drivers*
> 8GB DDR3 1600mhz RAM (9-9-9-24-2T)
> 128GB Crucial M4 SSD
> 500GB WD Caviar Blue HDD
> 3TB Segate Baracuda 7200.14
> Corsair TX-650 PSU (first gen)
> Windows 8 Pro
> Dell U2412M monitor (1920x1200)
> Game: BF3
> Map: Caspian Border
> Players: 64
> benchmark times: 2 minutes each
> Benchmark program: FRAPS
> Settings: 1920x1200
> Ultra settings
> AA - variable (see below)
> Ultra, 4xAA - no vsync
> 
> Ultra, No AA - adaptive vsync
> 
> Ultra, No AA - no vsync
> 
> High preset, no AA, no vsync.
> 
> 
> 
> *I find it interesting that at max settings, the game performance is phenomenal. However, as soon as you start trying to limit the card in any way, be it taking away AA, putting adaptive vsync on, or even set settings to high, it bites your head off in the form of framerate stuttering.*
> 
> 
> Spoiler: BF3 benchmark details
> 
> 
> 
> This is REALLY disappointing. My 7870 plays the game well at Ultra settings, but when you scale back the settings or put a limiter on it, it takes it in stride without issue.
> Now that I've noticed this, I believe it when people tell me that they have no issues running BF3 @ ultra with a Kepler GPU on the 310.90 drivers. There is no issue at all there. However, anyone that introduces a limiter into the equation is met with harsh results. That's the REAL issue here.
> Conclusion: This is NOT user error. I know it looks like user error, but this should not be happening for any reason. When you increase framerates (or attempt to limit them) the system should respond accordingly with performance that fits the new situation. I'm a little baffled that this is happening, especially on Nvidia's GK104 lineup of GPUs. If you attempt to inflate the framerates by lowering the settings, the game starts stuttering. The reason some people don't notice is because the framerates are higher than most refresh rates on monitors, and thus, you just think it's your monitor that's having issues, not the GPU.
> 
> 
> *This needs to be fixed, and it needs to be fixed very soon.*


This, all day. Just wanted to highlight those main points. I play all maxed out in BF3, except for the AA set to 2x, _that's_ when the stutter/clock drop/FPS drop rears it's ugly face. But push all the settings back up, and it's smooth.
I just want my card to run to it's full potential. I just want the problem *fixed.*


----------



## junkerde

fix your crap nvidia.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> No he is just saying both camps have problem. AMD is laughing because people claim Nvidia driver are perfect.


Yea. I will reiterate, I have had less problems with AMD drivers over the last several years than I've ever had with nvidia. I know that people don't like AMD drivers of old, but the current ones are pretty dang good, and I dare say better than nvidia's current crop.


----------



## GanjaGeek

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> No he is just saying both camps have problem. AMD is laughing because people claim Nvidia driver are perfect.
> 
> 
> 
> Yea. I will reiterate, I have had less problems with AMD drivers over the last several years than I've ever had with nvidia. I know that people don't like AMD drivers of old, but the current ones are pretty dang good, and I dare say better than nvidia's current crop.
Click to expand...

I'll second this... My 6850 and 7850 are working just fine in every game I own, and they have been ever since I've owned them... Never had an issue with AMD's drivers back when I still owned my 4550 either.

My 670 is a total POS due to the last few WHQL drivers from Nvidia.

*Get your crap together Nvidia.*


----------



## Sharchaster

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dph314*
> 
> *Have you tried FC3 or AC3 with .54?* Just wondering if it's the game or driver. Because on both .90 and .70 I get a horrible experience one way or another in these two games with SLI.
> Ran the Hitman benchmark and it's not recognizing SLI!


maybe sounds strange, but did you trying to lower your OC processor and trying to run the games with stock settings? it worked for my system when I got the problem with .70 beta.


----------



## rebelextrm02

I installed this driver on a fresh install of Windows 8. No problems so far on my 660TI. I have my 660TI oc'd to 1250 core and 7008 memory. My 3570k is at 4.7. I played about 3 hours straight of Battlefield 3 maxed out at 1920x1080 last night without a single hickup.


----------



## Mad Pistol

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rebelextrm02*
> 
> I installed this driver on a fresh install of Windows 8. No problems so far on my 660TI. I have my 660TI oc'd to 1250 core and 7008 memory. My 3570k is at 4.7. I played about 3 hours straight of Battlefield 3 maxed out at 1920x1080 last night without a single hickup.


Maxed out is not the issue. It's everything UNDER maxed out where the drama happens.

Read my post here for more information.


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

i heard about a cold bug today > http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=de&ie=UTF-8&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pcgameshardware.de%2FNvidia-Geforce-Hardware-255598%2FNews%2FGeforce-Treiber-31090-Probleme-1043133%2F&act=url


----------



## Search

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ZealotKi11er*
> 
> No he is just saying both camps have problem. AMD is laughing because people claim Nvidia driver are perfect.


If so I apologize









Just getting annoyed with the constant AMD vs Nvidia crap lately.

Nvidia is far from perfect for me. No clue what is going on in the AMD camp.


----------



## vish92

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Mad Pistol*
> 
> I'm going to post my findings from another thread in here. This may help explain some of the issues in BF3.
> Originally from here: http://www.overclock.net/t/1344795/bf3-stuttering/0_30#post_19001746
> 
> 
> Spoiler: BF3 benchmark details
> 
> 
> 
> System specs:
> i5 3570k (stock)
> ASrock Z77 Extreme 4
> eVGA GTX 660 Ti FTW Sig 2 (stock) - *310.90 forceware drivers*
> 8GB DDR3 1600mhz RAM (9-9-9-24-2T)
> 128GB Crucial M4 SSD
> 500GB WD Caviar Blue HDD
> 3TB Segate Baracuda 7200.14
> Corsair TX-650 PSU (first gen)
> Windows 8 Pro
> Dell U2412M monitor (1920x1200)
> Game: BF3
> Map: Caspian Border
> Players: 64
> benchmark times: 2 minutes each
> Benchmark program: FRAPS
> Settings: 1920x1200
> Ultra settings
> AA - variable (see below)
> Ultra, 4xAA - no vsync
> 
> Ultra, No AA - adaptive vsync
> 
> Ultra, No AA - no vsync
> 
> High preset, no AA, no vsync.
> 
> I find it interesting that at max settings, the game performance is phenomenal. However, as soon as you start trying to limit the card in any way, be it taking away AA, putting adaptive vsync on, or even set settings to high, it bites your head off in the form of framerate stuttering. This is REALLY disappointing. My 7870 plays the game well at Ultra settings, but when you scale back the settings or put a limiter on it, it takes it in stride without issue.
> Now that I've noticed this, I believe it when people tell me that they have no issues running BF3 @ ultra with a Kepler GPU on the 310.90 drivers. There is no issue at all there. However, anyone that introduces a limiter into the equation is met with harsh results. That's the REAL issue here.
> Conclusion: This is NOT user error. I know it looks like user error, but this should not be happening for any reason. When you increase framerates (or attempt to limit them) the system should respond accordingly with performance that fits the new situation. I'm a little baffled that this is happening, especially on Nvidia's GK104 lineup of GPUs. If you attempt to inflate the framerates by lowering the settings, the game starts stuttering. The reason some people don't notice is because the framerates are higher than most refresh rates on monitors, and thus, you just think it's your monitor that's having issues, not the GPU.
> This needs to be fixed, and it needs to be fixed very soon.


Guys , all of these threads are forcing me to believe that there is something fundamentally wrong with kepler since I have went through all driver updates on my 560 and I am yet to face any issues.
Also,back in the 500 days MSAA was Nvidia's forte and look what has happened http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-660-ti-memory-bandwidth-anti-aliasing,3283-13.html even the 670 fumbles after a certain point while radeons scale linearly
hope they correct their mistakes(if any) with the 700 series.


----------



## That Guy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vish92*
> 
> Guys , all of these threads are forcing me to believe that there is something fundamentally wrong with kepler since I have went through all driver updates on my 560 and I am yet to face any issues.
> Also,back in the 500 days MSAA was Nvidia's forte and look what has happened http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-660-ti-memory-bandwidth-anti-aliasing,3283-13.html even the 670 fumbles after a certain point while radeons scale linearly
> hope they correct their mistakes(if any) with the 700 series.


Generally, any time you see something regarding some new drivers, you'll see more ache and woe threads than praise threads. I haven't had any issues with my drivers ever. Does that mean I'm going to make a praise thread, no. It just means I'm not going to make a rant thread.


----------



## ZealotKi11er

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *vish92*
> 
> Guys , all of these threads are forcing me to believe that there is something fundamentally wrong with kepler since I have went through all driver updates on my 560 and I am yet to face any issues.
> Also,back in the 500 days MSAA was Nvidia's forte and look what has happened http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-660-ti-memory-bandwidth-anti-aliasing,3283-13.html even the 670 fumbles after a certain point while radeons scale linearly
> hope they correct their mistakes(if any) with the 700 series.


A lot less changed are needed to be made to your card then Kepler. The more changes the more likely something goes wrong.


----------



## Darylrese

I hope everyone is giving nvidia feedback on how none of us seem to be able to use our expensive graphics cards at present without some kind of an issue!

There is a driver feedback button on their website, make sure you fill the form in to let them know!...not that i'm sure anyone takes any notice of this kind of thing!


----------



## LuminatX

I don't know what they did in these, but I got a huge performance increase in GW2.
Glad I upgraded


----------



## PCModderMike

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darylrese*
> 
> I hope everyone is giving nvidia feedback on how none of us seem to be able to use our expensive graphics cards at present without some kind of an issue!
> There is a driver feedback button on their website, make sure you fill the form in to let them know!...not that i'm sure anyone takes any notice of this kind of thing!


Absolutely, make use of that feedback button! Doubt Nvidia will be creeping around here gathering information from our rants.


----------



## M1sT3rM4n

How sad... I have good hardware but perform worse than people who don't even SLI:


----------



## dph314

I don't know if it's because I'm on Windows 8 now that I'm having the problems or not (maybe their Win8 drivers aren't as good as some think), but I've literally never had problems before R310. Never had to revert, never had to reinstall, troubleshoot, nothing. Every problem prior to R310 was a known issue of that specific game's doing, occurring on all cards. 310.90 would lock up when switching in and out of SLI, Hitman doesn't recognize SLI on them, the .70's, or the .64's. And yeah, while I'm on it, Hitman is extremely CPU dependent I'm assuming? I ran the benchmark with one card completely maxed, because I have no damn choice as far as SLI, and got 39fps @ stock 1176mhz/6000mhz. Re-ran the benchmark at 1400mhz/7000mhz and got 44fps. This is with my CPU at the stock turbo 3.8Ghz. Going to try 4.6Ghz and see what happens.

Edit: Hmm. Must not be. Just really demanding GPU-wise I guess. Up'd the CPU to 4.6Ghz and still got 44fps. This blows. I miss SLI.


----------



## M1sT3rM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *M1sT3rM4n*
> 
> How sad... I have good hardware but perform worse than people who don't even SLI:


After a clean install using the built-in clean install option:



And again


----------



## atomicmew

What do you mean that you're scoring less than single GPU users? That score seems pretty reasonable for a 680 SLI, most single 670/680 users only score 1100-1200.


----------



## skyn3t

the 310.90 is way way better than 310.70 BF3 run a lot smooth in a single 670







Im stick with 310.90 till they make another one like.


----------



## skyn3t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *M1sT3rM4n*
> 
> After a clean install using the built-in clean install option:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And again


do something fill your rig out. this way we all know what hardware you have


----------



## M1sT3rM4n

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *skyn3t*
> 
> [/SPOILER]
> do something fill your rig out. this way we all know what hardware you have


Thought the hardware specs in the SS was good enough, but here it is:

1. 500GB SSD with 2TB backup HDD.
2. i7 3039k OC'ed to 4.3GHz
3. 2x EVGA Nvidia 680s in SLI, stock clock @ 1050mV.
4. 32GB RAM.
5. ASRock x79 Extreme6 Mobo.

If anything's missing (or more info is needed), let me know.


----------



## xStark

what he meant was putting it on your sig..awesome rig btw

this is what i got earlier on a 310.70


i'll try to get the latest drivers and test what happens

UPDATE

here's the score after trying 310.90


----------



## M1sT3rM4n

Done


----------



## xStark

it's doing fine on dota2

i had trouble earlier about it suddenly jumping and freezing, but then i realize utorrent was running, fail for me xD


----------



## windowszp

Why do i have to install this driver in safe mode








? if i don't i get a black screen at login.

pain the @$$.

Same thing with last driver....
more work that shouldn't need to be done thank you nvidia


----------



## Awieos

nvidia driver getting worser lately


----------



## dph314

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Awieos*
> 
> nvidia driver getting worser lately


Sadly enough









These drivers work amazingly well for some though, so, I don't know.

So, still wondering, because the Hitman thread seems to not be that active, has anyone tried these or any recent drivers with that game? 3 driver versions and I can't get the game to recognize SLI. I'm thinking it's a game issue, but Google returns very little regarding SLI problems with that game.


----------



## rcfc89

My 690 refuses to run under .90 https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/527036/geforce-drivers/310-90-will-not-load-with-gtx-690/6/
I just wen't back to .70 with no issues at all. Everything maxed out in BF3 Ultra 1080p 120hz never drops below 100fps. Averaging 120 in larger maps and over 175fps in smaller maps Metro etc.


----------



## dph314

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rcfc89*
> 
> My 690 refuses to run under .90 https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/527036/geforce-drivers/310-90-will-not-load-with-gtx-690/6/
> I just wen't back to .70 with no issues at all. Everything maxed out in BF3 Ultra 1080p 120hz never drops below 100fps. Averaging 120 in larger maps and over 175fps in smaller maps Metro etc.


Weird indeed. I also noticed that with this driver my offsets are messed up in Afterburner. I can only OC in 13mhz-increments? I can only set the core clock at 1398mhz with a ~200mhz offset. Then I keep increasing the offset by 1 but the clock doesn't go anywhere until I hit +209, where it jumps to 1411mhz







And what makes no sense at all is that my stock speed on this BIOS is 1202mhz, so the offsets are now inaccurate as well as not letting me set the clock to anything between 1398 and 1411mhz. Not sure if it's been like this for the whole R310 or not.


----------



## Vonnis

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dph314*
> 
> Weird indeed. I also noticed that with this driver my offsets are messed up in Afterburner. I can only OC in 13mhz-increments? I can only set the core clock at 1398mhz with a ~200mhz offset. Then I keep increasing the offset by 1 but the clock doesn't go anywhere until I hit +209, where it jumps to 1411mhz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And what makes no sense at all is that my stock speed on this BIOS is 1202mhz, so the offsets are now inaccurate as well as not letting me set the clock to anything between 1398 and 1411mhz. Not sure if it's been like this for the whole R310 or not.


It's been like that for a while, since 306.XX I believe.


----------



## General123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dph314*
> 
> Weird indeed. I also noticed that with this driver my offsets are messed up in Afterburner. I can only OC in 13mhz-increments? I can only set the core clock at 1398mhz with a ~200mhz offset. Then I keep increasing the offset by 1 but the clock doesn't go anywhere until I hit +209, where it jumps to 1411mhz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And what makes no sense at all is that my stock speed on this BIOS is 1202mhz, so the offsets are now inaccurate as well as not letting me set the clock to anything between 1398 and 1411mhz. Not sure if it's been like this for the whole R310 or not.


Roll back to 306.97, it is the last driver that allowed for better control.


----------



## GenoOCAU

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dph314*
> 
> Weird indeed. I also noticed that with this driver my offsets are messed up in Afterburner. I can only OC in 13mhz-increments? I can only set the core clock at 1398mhz with a ~200mhz offset. Then I keep increasing the offset by 1 but the clock doesn't go anywhere until I hit +209, where it jumps to 1411mhz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And what makes no sense at all is that my stock speed on this BIOS is 1202mhz, so the offsets are now inaccurate as well as not letting me set the clock to anything between 1398 and 1411mhz. Not sure if it's been like this for the whole R310 or not.


My memory has been doing this the whole of R310. @ +528 mem I get clocks of 3524, at +529 it jumps straight to 3542 where I can sometimes get ECC errors. (didnt get memory errors unless clocked to +580 on previous drivers..

Tempted to go 304.79's for testing tbh.


----------



## feniks

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dph314*
> 
> Weird indeed. I also noticed that with this driver my offsets are messed up in Afterburner. I can only OC in 13mhz-increments? I can only set the core clock at 1398mhz with a ~200mhz offset. Then I keep increasing the offset by 1 but the clock doesn't go anywhere until I hit +209, where it jumps to 1411mhz
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And what makes no sense at all is that my stock speed on this BIOS is 1202mhz, so the offsets are now inaccurate as well as not letting me set the clock to anything between 1398 and 1411mhz. Not sure if it's been like this for the whole R310 or not.


I guess you never used 310 betas, nor the 310.70 WHQL then? that's when NV changed the driver core clock table (and memory clock table too AFAIK). there is nothing wrong with 13MHz increments tho ... they provide better stability and performance actually, at least for me on 310.70.
310.90 runs well here however, I lost minor some points in benchmarks ... on the other hand everything looks very smooth in games (there was quite a few serious bugs fixed by this driver, at least one related to security exploit and other related to actual FPS).

for 690 users (and hopefully 680 SLI as well), I believe NV stated they will be releasing a minor update soon to fix the cold boot issues and other screw ups, it's been posted by Manuel (NVIDIA employee) in similar thread like this, just in EVGA forums.


----------



## dph314

Yeah I don't mind the weird offsets. I can deal with 13mhz increments. I suppose I usually like having the clock set at an 'even' number, like 1400, just as a pet peeve of mine. But I'll be fine with 1411









Gameplay is excellent on this driver though, I have to admit it. All the problems come with very smooth gameplay. Dropped Shadows to Medium and MSAA to 2X and I'm getting 90fps min's in Hitman at 1411mhz/7000mhz with max temp of 65C, so at least I know temps didn't go up with these drivers like I saw some report.

Edit: Yeah I used them all, just never noticed it because of the game I was playing. Pretty much only played FC3 since the day it was released and used the beta's that came out for it, as well as every driver since, but I used SLI at stock clocks, so, never even OC'd from .54 all the way till now (because FC3 crapped out on me as of late so I moved on to other games, and OC'd for them, for the first time in a while). Not minding the increments at all though.


----------



## Emissary of Pain

Hey all ...

I really need some help ...

I just tried installing the latest drivers (310.90) and the install fails immediately with the driver setup screen showing nothing is installed and now regardless of what driver version I use it wont install ...

Is there a fix for this or do I need to format ?


----------



## General123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Emissary of Pain*
> 
> Hey all ...
> 
> I really need some help ...
> 
> I just tried installing the latest drivers (310.90) and the install fails immediately with the driver setup screen showing nothing is installed and now regardless of what driver version I use it wont install ...
> 
> Is there a fix for this or do I need to format ?


After dumping/ extracting it, go to device manger and install it through there.


----------



## jprovido

I've used 310.90 for a quite a while now and I've experienced zero issues and every issue I had with 310.70 WHQL is fixed now. I don't care with the other releases from now on. nvidia isn't messing up my computer again. quote me on this one ima stick with 310.90 from now on dun care about updates after this. I've learned my lesson. shame on you nvidia


----------



## KaRLiToS

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I've used 310.90 for a quite a while now and I've experienced zero issues and every issue I had with 310.70 WHQL is fixed now. I don't care with the other releases from now on. nvidia isn't messing up my computer again. quote me on this one ima stick with 310.90 from now on dun care about updates after this. I've learned my lesson. *shame on you nvidia*


Why shame on them? You just said they fixed your issues you had with previous driver.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *KaRLiToS*
> 
> Why shame on them? You just said they fixed your issues you had with previous driver.


I wouldn't even bother telling the whole story. making the long story short all worked fine with 310.70 BETA. installed WHQL and literally killed my OS. twas not a pleasant experience trust me


----------



## Topgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I wouldn't even bother telling the whole story. making the long story short all worked fine with 310.70 BETA. installed WHQL and literally killed my OS. twas not a pleasant experience trust me


As a long time lurker of these boards I have finally decided to join the forums so I can give my own two cents. First of all for the longest time you have been *****ing and griping about Nvidias drivers, I probably see more of your post regarding this subject than anyone elses. Second of all 99.9 percent of the issues you mention no one else ever seems to complain about "myself included". Third of all I myself had the 310.70 beta and all of the ones preceeding it and have not had so much as a single issue with my games or my GTX 680. Also my OS didnt break when I updated from the 310.70 beta to the WHQL version.









Nvidia didnt break your OS, you broke it!.......... and its about time you start owning up to your own user error which you seem to have plenty of. PC gaming isnt for everyone, it requires you to maintain and keep your OS nice and clean. You are a prime example of a person who has no business gaming on a PC so do yourself and everyone else a favor and either learn how to maintain your PC or sell it, then go pick up a console.....problem solved.


----------



## Cakewalk_S

Spoiler: Warning: Spoiler!



Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Topgunner*
> 
> As a long time lurker of these boards I have finally decided to join the forums so I can give my own two cents. First of all for the longest time you have been *****ing and griping about Nvidias drivers, I probably see more of your post regarding this subject than anyone elses. Second of all 99.9 percent of the issues you mention no one else ever seems to complain about "myself included". Third of all I myself had the 310.70 beta and all of the ones preceeding it and have not had so much as a single issue with my games or my GTX 680. Also my OS didnt break when I updated from the 310.70 beta to the WHQL version.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nvidia didnt break your OS, you broke it!.......... and its about time you start owning up to your own user error which you seem to have plenty of. PC gaming isnt for everyone, it requires you to maintain and keep your OS nice and clean. You are the number 1 reason that many of you should stick to console gaming.






Dude, chill out with the personal attacks...

I've been running 310.90 previously on 310.70. No issue. Did a custom clean install from 310.70 and never had an issue. Drivers work great... Make sure you guys are turning off afterburner or precision and restoring your default clocks...that could be an issue people have finding... WoT works great, FC3, Bf3, Metro2033, JC2...no issues. I haven't benchmarked it, but it seems I got my 1293Mhz overclock back from previous 1280Mhz on 310.70 drivers... I haven't benched it in heaven for stability, but it seems stable in FC3....


----------



## dph314

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Topgunner*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I wouldn't even bother telling the whole story. making the long story short all worked fine with 310.70 BETA. installed WHQL and literally killed my OS. twas not a pleasant experience trust me
> 
> 
> 
> As a long time lurker of these boards I have finally decided to join the forums so I can give my own two cents. First of all for the longest time you have been *****ing and griping about Nvidias drivers, I probably see more of your post regarding this subject than anyone elses. Second of all 99.9 percent of the issues you mention no one else ever seems to complain about "myself included". Third of all I myself had the 310.70 beta and all of the ones preceeding it and have not had so much as a single issue with my games or my GTX 680. Also my OS didnt break when I updated from the 310.70 beta to the WHQL version.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nvidia didnt break your OS, you broke it!.......... and its about time you start owning up to your own user error which you seem to have plenty of. PC gaming isnt for everyone, it requires you to maintain and keep your OS nice and clean. You are the number 1 reason that many of you should stick to console gaming.
Click to expand...

Well, I can see you're going to fit right in here









In his defense, it really could have been the driver. I keep a 'clean' OS and with everything running fine for the past year or more, and no other software or hardware changes going on right beforehand, I installed the driver he also had problems with and it messed my internet up pretty bad. So, I definitely believe him. I did some troubleshooting while waiting for my new HDD to come in that I was going to install Win8 on, and even with the help of many people here there was no fix, driver did something wierd.


----------



## Topgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Cakewalk_S*
> 
> 
> Dude, chill out with the personal attacks...


Its not a personal attack, its honesty and if you took the time to read his dozens upon dozens of complaints of issues that everyone else isnt having "everytime a new driver comes out" you wouldnt disagree.


----------



## Skrillex

These drivers are fine for me.


----------



## Emissary of Pain

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *General123*
> 
> After dumping/ extracting it, go to device manger and install it through there.


If I force the install ... can I "harm" my system ?


----------



## Motive

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Topgunner*
> 
> As a long time lurker of these boards I have finally decided to join the forums so I can give my own two cents. First of all for the longest time you have been *****ing and griping about Nvidias drivers, I probably see more of your post regarding this subject than anyone elses. Second of all 99.9 percent of the issues you mention no one else ever seems to complain about "myself included". Third of all I myself had the 310.70 beta and all of the ones preceeding it and have not had so much as a single issue with my games or my GTX 680. Also my OS didnt break when I updated from the 310.70 beta to the WHQL version.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nvidia didnt break your OS, you broke it!.......... and its about time you start owning up to your own user error which you seem to have plenty of. PC gaming isnt for everyone, it requires you to maintain and keep your OS nice and clean. You are a prime example of a person who has no business gaming on a PC so do yourself and everyone else a favor and either learn how to maintain your PC or sell it, then go pick up a console.....problem solved.


Actually, .70 and .90 were terrible drivers for me as well. I had to go back to 306.97. So it isn't just him. It's many, many people. Just not all of them run to the forums and throw up all over threads about their issues.


----------



## feniks

I honestly still think that 310 nv drivers revealed mostly flaws in firmware of some card models, especially the new 600 series ... and especially the factory overclocked ones ... or revised peoples GPu OC stability cruelly (core & mem clocks tables introduced, some that upgrade straight from older drivers miss this fact) ... on the other hand it's true that some configs (e.g. 680 SLI or 690 cards) do experience problems with the latest WHQL and it's been confirmed by NV rep, but generally other models do not seem to be affected for most ... and that hints that if they show trouble it's either teh card itself causing it (firmware issue, or a lemon card that sneaked through quality control) ... or the issue in within OS (corrupted files, some bad settings, conflicting apps interfering) ... or at some points the CPU OC is unstable and that gets revealed when card is trying to run more efficiently with newer drivers ... in some cases I've seen people running incompatible hardware (e.g. memory sticks designed for x58 tri-channel used on dual channel boards in xmp mode) and yet complaining on everything not related to it...

I personally don't have trouble with neither 306 nor 310 drivers, nor any betas in between (used most) ... I do see changes in performance, sometimes up, other times down, based on synthetic benchmarks, but either way all seems good to me, be it with a single 670 or 670 in SLI.


----------



## dph314

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *feniks*
> 
> I honestly still think that 310 nv drivers revealed mostly flaws in firmware of some card models, especially the new 600 series ... and especially the factory overclocked ones ... or revised peoples GPu OC stability cruelly (core & mem clocks tables introduced, some that upgrade straight from older drivers miss this fact) ... on the other hand it's true that some configs (e.g. 680 SLI or 690 cards) do experience problems with the latest WHQL and it's been confirmed by NV rep, but generally other models do not seem to be affected for most ... and that hints that if they show trouble it's either teh card itself causing it (firmware issue, or a lemon card that sneaked through quality control) ... or the issue in within OS (corrupted files, some bad settings, conflicting apps interfering) ... or at some points the CPU OC is unstable and that gets revealed when card is trying to run more efficiently with newer drivers ... in some cases I've seen people running incompatible hardware (e.g. memory sticks designed for x58 tri-channel used on dual channel boards in xmp mode) and yet complaining on everything not related to it...
> 
> I personally don't have trouble with neither 306 nor 310 drivers, nor any betas in between (used most) ... *I do see changes in performance, sometimes up, other times down, based on synthetic benchmarks*, but either way all seems good to me, be it with a single 670 or 670 in SLI.


It's probably not accurate to judge drivers based on the results of synthetics like 3dMark11 or Heaven. I'm sure both camps make adjustments specifically for these 2 major benchmarks just to make their cards look better. In synthetics, you probably don't need the same type of optimizations a game would need, and you definitely don't need a smooth framerate / low latencies and the like. So improving raw fps in a synthetic is probably quite different from what they do for optimizing a game engine.

I know performance in benchmarks is relevant to many here, but I'm just saying, a driver probably can't be judged on how well it performs primarily on the performance in 3dMark11
















Other than SLI locking up in FC3, and still being broken in AC3 and completely non-existent in Hitman Absolution despite it being specifically stated in the notes that a SLI profile is added for it, these drivers have been great with one card in those games.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Topgunner*
> 
> As a long time lurker of these boards I have finally decided to join the forums so I can give my own two cents. First of all for the longest time you have been *****ing and griping about Nvidias drivers, I probably see more of your post regarding this subject than anyone elses. Second of all 99.9 percent of the issues you mention no one else ever seems to complain about "myself included". Third of all I myself had the 310.70 beta and all of the ones preceeding it and have not had so much as a single issue with my games or my GTX 680. Also my OS didnt break when I updated from the 310.70 beta to the WHQL version.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nvidia didnt break your OS, you broke it!.......... and its about time you start owning up to your own user error which you seem to have plenty of. PC gaming isnt for everyone, it requires you to maintain and keep your OS nice and clean. You are a prime example of a person who has no business gaming on a PC so do yourself and everyone else a favor and either learn how to maintain your PC or sell it, then go pick up a console.....problem solved.


yea im so dumb It's all my fault. PEBKAC. nvidia deserves ZERO blame for my issues even though I uninstall drivers properly via guides here in ocn. im just an nvidia hater I don't really own a gtx 680 I just make things up so nvidia will have a bad rep.

happy now? I don't have even have plans on wasting a single minute with this post. I have more important things to do lol


----------



## Vonnis

I just found out this driver screws with my overclock more than I thought. I normally use +105/+350 for everything, and slightly higher (+118/+375) when benching 3DMark11. I thought it was just my higher overclocks that were affected but now even +92/+300 isn't stable. Glorious. Now I need to retest to find new settings that are actually stable, but I'm guessing that by the time I've lowered frequencies enough to be stable the result will be so unnoticeable it's probably not even worth my time.


----------



## grunion

I went on and rolled back to .70, the random res changes got annoying.


----------



## twitchyzero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> yea im so dumb It's all my fault. PEBKAC. nvidia deserves ZERO blame for my issues even though I uninstall drivers properly via guides here in ocn. im just an nvidia hater I don't really own a gtx 680 I just make things up so nvidia will have a bad rep.
> 
> happy now? I don't have even have plans on wasting a single minute with this post. I have more important things to do lol


In his defense...you did non-stop complaining for what seemed like pages after pages.

Generally if you installed your drivers on OS drive...restoring to a backup to a timeframe before the update should have no problem remedying your problems.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *twitchyzero*
> 
> In his defense...you did non-stop complaining for what seemed like pages after pages.
> 
> Generally if you installed your drivers on OS drive...restoring to a backup to a timeframe before the update should have no problem remedying your problems.


I complained because I was pissed and that was like ONE DAY (if it happened to you trust me you won't like it). I wouldn't call that non stop complaining. I even had issue with downclocking on the 310.70 I just forced the clocks to be at max just to get it to work. nvidia drivers are horrible period. I have no idea why these nvidia fan boys are getting butt hurt. do they own nvidia or something. I'm experiencing issues that's it. I'm not turning it to a crusade to not buy nvidia cards come on. I just bought an SSD and experienced the same problem I had with 310.70 is it conflicting with any of my hardware? possibly but now 310.90 works so I'm fine with it now. I'm not gonna change my drivers unless I get a game that is totally unplayable. dun care about performance increases anymore


----------



## Carlitos714

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Webrider99*
> 
> Horrible, Just assuming it was for the 400,500 and 600 series GTX cards. I tried installing on my sig rig, with a GTX 470 and the installer completely fails at "express" setup and then I went to try custom and do a clean install, This also fails and leaves me with no drivers what-so-ever. No control panel, or anything. It even says it self that there are NO drivers installed.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh well guess I'm back with 306.97 ... and 310.70 sucked too, couldn't start up any game xD


Yup same thing happened on my sli gtx480s no control panel and no option to sli. 310.70 crashed bfbc3 and crysis 2. I also installed 306.97 and my card are happy


----------



## DoktorCreepy

Weird these drivers are working fine for me so far. I haven't played Swotr in a while though, that was the last game I still had issues with on 310.70.

I never do a express install I do a custom install and install the graphics driver and PhysX thats it.


----------



## wendigo4700

My screen goes into standby mode with this driver, after around 20min. If I dont touch the mouse within that time.

And yes, I have set the inbuilt windows 7 power saving, to never turn off my monitor. And inside the nvidia control panel, I have set the power saving feature, for maximum performance.

I never had this problem with 310.70

hmmm.....


----------



## wutang61

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *atomicmew*
> 
> What do you mean that you're scoring less than single GPU users? That score seems pretty reasonable for a 680 SLI, most single 670/680 users only score 1100-1200.


He's down a decent amount. With my overclock I pull 109ish.









Sent from my toaster with the 4g's and the wifis


----------



## atomicmew

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wutang61*
> 
> He's down a decent amount. With my overclock I pull 109ish.
> 
> Sent from my toaster with the 4g's and the wifis


I can score ~1300 with my single 670, but not every 670 can. I'm just saying that his score was within reason, especially if its not overclocked.


----------



## Topgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> nvidia deserves ZERO blame for my issues even though I uninstall drivers properly via guides here in ocn.


If you ventured beyond simply removing your old drivers via control panel and then reinstalling with the new driver then yes,,,, you are to blame because as I said before you are the one who completely borked your OS to the point that you had to reinstall it by using some uncessary guide which had you manually deleting registry files or using some sort of driver cleaner.


----------



## jprovido

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Topgunner*
> 
> If you ventured beyond simply removing your old drivers via control panel and then reinstalling with the new driver then yes,,,, you are to blame because as I said before you are the one who completely borked your OS to the point that you had to reinstall it by using some uncessary guide which had you manually deleting registry files or using some sort of driver cleaner.


i hate guys like these. coming in like they're some sort of tech guru. don't assume everyone else are idiots esp here in OCN..


----------



## Topgunner

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> i hate guys like these. coming in like they're some sort of tech guru. don't assume everyone else are idiots esp here in OCN..


It doesnt take a tech guru to uninstall and reinstall a video driver without borking your whole OS. Also I never assumed that everyone else is an idiot nor do I think that everyone else on ocn is an idiot.


----------



## skyn3t

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> i hate guys like these. coming in like they're some sort of tech guru. don't assume everyone else are idiots esp here in OCN..


Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Topgunner*
> 
> It doesnt take a tech guru to uninstall and reinstall a video driver without borking your whole OS. Also I never assumed that everyone else is an idiot nor do I think that everyone else on ocn is an idiot.


can both of you chill out? this is not going to take none of you no where.


----------



## evoll88

They just need to go eat dinner somewhere and work it out hehe. I have yet to have a problem with the new driver and have played medal of honor warfighter mp alot and not a hiccup at all. I will be playing bf3 tonight to see if it works good on it but i follow the driver install guide on here and evga site and no problems yet.


----------



## twitchyzero

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *jprovido*
> 
> I complained because I was pissed and that was like ONE DAY (if it happened to you trust me you won't like it). I wouldn't call that non stop complaining. I even had issue with downclocking on the 310.70 I just forced the clocks to be at max just to get it to work. nvidia drivers are horrible period. I have no idea why these nvidia fan boys are getting butt hurt. do they own nvidia or something. I'm experiencing issues that's it. I'm not turning it to a crusade to not buy nvidia cards come on. I just bought an SSD and experienced the same problem I had with 310.70 is it conflicting with any of my hardware? possibly but now 310.90 works so I'm fine with it now. I'm not gonna change my drivers unless I get a game that is totally unplayable. dun care about performance increases anymore


Yes it if happened to me, I'd be pissed as wel...but I may bring it up once...maybe twice..no more than that.

Serious question, did you try system restore at all?


----------



## rcfc89

Apparently they fixed the problem. New driver is up. https://forums.geforce.com/default/topic/527036/geforce-drivers/310-90-will-not-load-with-gtx-690/8/


----------



## Darylrese

where? I can't find it!


----------



## Darylrese

where? I can't find it!


----------



## Darylrese

woah sorry it seems OCN has gone mad and posted my question loads of times! I only clicked it once!

Just realized it says its called the same thing, still 310.90 but with a fixed .inf file


----------



## Vonnis

Maybe it's just the same link, since it's just one tweaked file. I re-downloaded and reinstalled and so far I'm not having the driver boot problem.

Scratch that, as usual I had forgotten to enable SLI after installing the drivers and as soon as I had done that, the problem was back.


----------



## Darylrese

Doh! I installed these but i have yet to test them. What is the fixed supposed to do exactly?


----------



## Vonnis

From that thread at GeForce I guess this is just to fix the cold boot issue where the drivers don't load in multi-gpu configurations.


----------



## grunion

Where is this fixed driver?
I'd like to install the .90 again.


----------



## SlackerITGuy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *grunion*
> 
> Where is this fixed driver?
> I'd like to install the .90 again.


While the date still reads Jan 5, that's the new one.

EDIT: The 310.90 over at GeForce.com, that's the new one, don't mind the upload date.


----------



## rcfc89

Played for a few hours last night with the updated driver with the 690 correction. A few different titles BF3, L4D2, FC3. Everything ran smooth as butter. I can't get over the difference from 60hz to 120hz. Its staggering.


----------



## SlackerITGuy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rcfc89*
> 
> Played for a few hours last night with the updated driver with the 690 correction. A few different titles BF3, L4D2, FC3. Everything ran smooth as butter. I can't get over the difference from 60hz to 120hz. Its staggering.


The real question is, what's smoother? a V-Sync'ed 60Hz image or a non V-Sync'ed 120Hz one...


----------



## rcfc89

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SlackerITGuy*
> 
> The real question is, what's smoother? a V-Sync'ed 60Hz image or a non V-Sync'ed 120Hz one...


I never have v-sync on. I had a dell u3011 before and tried surround/eyefinity as well with 3x asus 24" monitors. If you have a capable rig to keep things over 100fps in ultra the 120hz experience is something to behold. I really hope these monitor companies have something in the works for 2560 in 120hz. I'd drop 1500 easy if they produced one.


----------



## SlackerITGuy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rcfc89*
> 
> I never have v-sync on. I had a dell u3011 before and tried surround/eyefinity as well with 3x asus 24" monitors. If you have a capable rig to keep things over 100fps in ultra the 120hz experience is something to behold. I really hope these monitor companies have something in the works for 2560 in 120hz. I'd drop 1500 easy if they produced one.


The thing is, according to every single person/review site on the internet a 120Hz monitor is significantly smoother than a 60Hz one, but there's still image tearing am I right?

I would really like to see someone perform this test, what's smoother/more fluid? a V-Sync'ed 60Hz image vs a non V-Sync'ed 120Hz.

I'd put my money on the V-Sync'ed 60Hz one.

One thing's for sure, trying to set up a 120Hz V-Sync'ed gaming rig would be extremely more expensive, you'll need at least multiple GPUs (for modern games and future proofing), not to mention the actual 120Hz monitor itself.


----------



## rcfc89

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SlackerITGuy*
> 
> The thing is, according to every single person/review site on the internet a 120Hz monitor is significantly smoother than a 60Hz one, but there's still image tearing am I right?
> 
> I would really like to see someone perform this test, what's smoother/more fluid? a V-Sync'ed 60Hz image vs a non V-Sync'ed 120Hz.
> 
> I'd put my money on the V-Sync'ed 60Hz one.
> 
> One thing's for sure, trying to set up a 120Hz V-Sync'ed gaming rig would be extremely more expensive, you'll need at least multiple GPUs (for modern games and future proofing), not to mention the actual 120Hz monitor itself.


I'm no expert just telling you what I've experienced. Not many people have tried all 3 popular monitor displays like I have. (2560/eyefinity/120hz) I don't see any tearing or distortion of any kind. In bf3 for example I never drop below 100fps with everything maxed out in ultra. It mainly stays steady around 120-125. For any doubters I guess you just need to experience it for yourself. Most that have will never go back to 60hz. I'm one of them.


----------



## SlackerITGuy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rcfc89*
> 
> I'm no expert just telling you what I've experienced. Not many people have tried all 3 popular monitor displays like I have. (2560/eyefinity/120hz) I don't see any tearing or distortion of any kind. In bf3 for example I never drop below 100fps with everything maxed out in ultra. It mainly stays steady around 120-125. For any doubters I guess you just need to experience it for yourself. Most that have will never go back to 60hz. I'm one of them.


But did you used to play with V-Sync on when you had your previous monitor? the 60Hz one.


----------



## Final8ty

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rcfc89*
> 
> I never have v-sync on. I had a dell u3011 before and tried surround/eyefinity as well with 3x asus 24" monitors. If you have a capable rig to keep things over 100fps in ultra the 120hz experience is something to behold. I *really hope these monitor companies have something in the works for 2560 in 120hz. I'd drop 1500 easy if they produced one.*


I'm waiting for 30" 2560 or higher @120 as well.


----------



## rcfc89

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SlackerITGuy*
> 
> But did you used to play with V-Sync on when you had your previous monitor? the 60Hz one.


I didn't use it then either only because my pair of 580's struggled to stay above 50fps in 2560+ resolutions on my previous rig. If I went back to 2560 with my current machine I'd probably enable it to keep things tidy around 60fps. But at that resolution even my current rig would struggle to keep framerates that high. 2560 in ultra is punishing on gpu's.


----------



## SlackerITGuy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rcfc89*
> 
> I didn't use it then either only because my pair of 580's struggled to stay above 50fps in 2560+ resolutions on my previous rig. If I went back to 2560 with my current machine I'd probably enable it to keep things tidy around 60fps. But at that resolution even my current rig would struggle to keep framerates that high. 2560 in ultra is punishing on gpu's.


I see.

What you could do is set your current 120Hz monitor to run at 60Hz and then V-Sync it, then you could see whether 120Hz non V-Sync'ed is really smoother than a 60Hz V-Sync'ed image.


----------



## ljason8eg

Sure Vsync is smooth but the input lag it adds far outweighs any benefits.


----------



## SlackerITGuy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Sure Vsync is smooth but the input lag it adds far outweighs any benefits.


There are ways to defeat any input lag created by V-Sync.

Pretty easy ones actually.


----------



## ljason8eg

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *SlackerITGuy*
> 
> There are ways to defeat any input lag created by V-Sync.
> 
> Pretty easy ones actually.


Not in my experience, but do tell, I'm all ears.


----------



## SlackerITGuy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Not in my experience, but do tell, I'm all ears.


What have you tried to reduce any input lag created by V-Sync? Since it appears that you've gone this road before.


----------



## ljason8eg

Triple buffering and capping the frame queue. I've never found anything that works, and countless other people will say the same. I play iRacing quite competitively and vsync absolutely destroys consistency. Yeah, it does eliminate tearing, but I'd rather have a little tearing instead of being terrible because my inputs are constantly behind.


----------



## SlackerITGuy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Triple buffering and capping the frame queue. I've never found anything that works, and countless other people will say the same. I play iRacing quite competitively and vsync absolutely destroys consistency. Yeah, it does eliminate tearing, but I'd rather have a little tearing instead of being terrible because my inputs are constantly behind.


Wow that's a shame, it's weird because capping the frame queue usually works extremely well in shooters, at least for me, but I can see how it would still be an issue in a racing game, where every single command/input is more critical.

Have you tried messing around with Lucid Virtu MVP's Virtual V-Sync?

I see that you have a i7 920 powered rig, so your motherboard won't support it, but maybe a friend of yours has a H61/Z68/Z77 based motherboard that does support it... Would be worth trying IMO.


----------



## thestache

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *ljason8eg*
> 
> Sure Vsync is smooth but the input lag it adds far out weighs any benefits.


Vsync no longer has input lag. With current drivers it works flawlessly.


----------



## General123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thestache*
> 
> Vsync no longer has input lag. With current drivers it works flawlessly.


Lol.. it is still there.


----------



## SlackerITGuy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *thestache*
> 
> Vsync no longer has input lag. With current drivers it works flawlessly.


Yeah no, as much as I love V-Sync (couldn't play a game without it), it still causes a noticeable amount of input lag.


----------



## wutang61

after extenisve testing with my cards stock,overclocked, "prefer max performance" forced in nvidia control panel adaptive vsync on, off. Stuttering never improved. Rolled back to 306 and problem solved. Ashame. It bugs me not being able to run latest. Maybe the next driver family will fix the issue.


----------



## dph314

I get a lot less tearing on my 120hz monitor than I did on my 60hz. Hardly ever played with v-sync because I didn't like the lag.

But most games I don't get any tearing at all, and some games I get a little. It's never noticeable to the point where it makes me consider using v-sync, like it was on my 60hz.

Never going back to 60hz again, not only because of the minimal tearing but also the fluidity. I'd rather play a game on High settings @ +100fps than on Ultra @ ~60fps.
Quote:


> Originally Posted by *wutang61*
> 
> after extenisve testing with my cards stock,overclocked, "prefer max performance" forced in nvidia control panel adaptive vsync on, off. Stuttering never improved. Rolled back to 306 and problem solved. Ashame. It bugs me not being able to run latest. Maybe the next driver family will fix the issue.


In what game? _Every_ game?


----------



## wutang61

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dph314*
> 
> I get a lot less tearing on my 120hz monitor than I did on my 60hz. Hardly ever played with v-sync because I didn't like the lag.
> 
> But most games I don't get any tearing at all, and some games I get a little. It's never noticeable to the point where it makes me consider using v-sync, like it was on my 60hz.
> 
> Never going back to 60hz again, not only because of the minimal tearing but also the fluidity. I'd rather play a game on High settings @ +100fps than on Ultra @ ~60fps.
> In what game? _Every_ game?


Sorry about that. Didn't even realize I didn't mention the game. Bf3.

That's my main online fps


----------



## General123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dph314*
> 
> I get a lot less tearing on my 120hz monitor than I did on my 60hz. Hardly ever played with v-sync because I didn't like the lag.
> 
> But most games I don't get any tearing at all, and some games I get a little. It's never noticeable to the point where it makes me consider using v-sync, like it was on my 60hz.
> 
> Never going back to 60hz again, not only because of the minimal tearing but also the fluidity. I'd rather play a game on High settings @ +100fps than on Ultra @ ~60fps.
> In what game? _Every_ game?


Really? I play alot of games at very high fps with no tearing, just can not stand V sync.


----------



## dph314

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *General123*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dph314*
> 
> I get a lot less tearing on my 120hz monitor than I did on my 60hz. Hardly ever played with v-sync because I didn't like the lag.
> 
> But most games I don't get any tearing at all, and some games I get a little. It's never noticeable to the point where it makes me consider using v-sync, like it was on my 60hz.
> 
> Never going back to 60hz again, not only because of the minimal tearing but also the fluidity. I'd rather play a game on High settings @ +100fps than on Ultra @ ~60fps.
> In what game? _Every_ game?
> 
> 
> 
> Really? I play alot of games at very high fps with no tearing, just can not stand V sync.
Click to expand...

Well, I don't get much tearing at all. I'm pretty sensitive to it though, so my definiteion of "a little" is probably what most people would call non-existant.

I also hate v-sync. I'm glad I get very minimal tearing ever since I got this monitor. Not upgrading to Ultra HD until the 120hz's are out and drop in price


----------



## xSociety

I too can't play any game with v-sync on, I used to be one of those guys that swore by v-sync but ever since I got a really good mouse and 120Hz monitor I can't believe I used to play games at 60Hz with v-sync. Never again. Also, all those tips and tricks to make v-sync have less input lag are, IMO, completely bogus, I can immediately tell that my mouse movement is behind.

Add me to that list of people buying a higher res monitor once they also have 120Hz. I'm almost tempted to buy an Overlord.


----------



## rcfc89

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xSociety*
> 
> I too can't play any game with v-sync on, I used to be one of those guys that swore by v-sync but ever since I got a really good mouse and 120Hz monitor I can't believe I used to play games at 60Hz with v-sync. Never again. Also, all those tips and tricks to make v-sync have less input lag are, IMO, completely bogus, I can immediately tell that my mouse movement is behind.
> 
> Add me to that list of people buying a higher res monitor once they also have 120H *I'm almost tempted to buy an Overlord.*


e]

Question is will your current rig be able to give you constant 100+fps in 2560 resolutions to take advantage of the increased refresh rate. My rig can do it no problem at 1080p with max eye candy on BF3. Switch the resolution to 2560 its sure to drop to a average fps closer to 60-70. Thus not really taking advantage of the better refresh rate. I'm guessing tri-sli would be needed to make it worth your time and money. You could always turn the setting down the "High" not Ultra but screw that.


----------



## marbleduck

Hopefully this fixes my 580 3-way, not even stable at stock everything when using the last three drivers


----------



## Callist0

Looks like the majority of problems are with the 600 series cards, or just most people own those. I updated the drivers using express (didn't remove the old ones prior) and it screwed up my SLI settings. Running twin 460s. Once I got it back I fired up metro 2033 and had loads of flickering and screen issues. A full restart fixed it and I haven't seen any issues there. As for folding, looks like it ruined it since neither GPU is over 36% usage...


----------



## dph314

Anyone else's clocks stay at full base clock speed after the computer wakes up from sleep? Even with nothing open. I have to restart for them to drop back down to 324mhz. And yes, Global Profile is set to 'Adaptive'.


----------



## xoleras

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dph314*
> 
> Anyone else's clocks stay at full base clock speed after the computer wakes up from sleep? Even with nothing open. I have to restart for them to drop back down to 324mhz. And yes, Global Profile is set to 'Adaptive'.


Must be a windows 8 thing, that doesn't happen with 310.90 for me. Have you mentioned it over at the nvidia.com forums? Manuel over there is pretty good about collecting user bug reports posted there.


----------



## Fuel Truck

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dph314*
> 
> Anyone else's clocks stay at full base clock speed after the computer wakes up from sleep? Even with nothing open. I have to restart for them to drop back down to 324mhz. And yes, Global Profile is set to 'Adaptive'.


Is this a problem and how do I check it??


----------



## xoleras

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fuel Truck*
> 
> Is this a problem and how do I check it??


Feed your PC some sleeping aid pills! Or just put it to sleep


----------



## un-nefer

I keep getting gfx driver crashes and my custom resolutions always disappear with any of the 307 drivers...

Even without playing any games, the gfx driver will crash. ie. I'll leave my PC on over night to download something, and when I jump on in the morning I find the gfx driver had crashed sometime during the night.

Anyone else get this? Anyone got a solution?


----------



## xoleras

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *un-nefer*
> 
> I keep getting gfx driver crashes and my custom resolutions always disappear with any of the 307 drivers...
> 
> Even without playing any games, the gfx driver will crash. ie. I'll leave my PC on over night to download something, and when I jump on in the morning I find the gfx driver had crashed sometime during the night.
> 
> Anyone else get this? Anyone got a solution?


Are you overclocking? Did you install any software or hardware while your PC was stable?


----------



## General123

Interesting question I have.. does anyone have a black screen at boot for a few seconds? I can see the windows logo and then bam black screen for like 3-4 seconds when I should be well into windows.


----------



## un-nefer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xoleras*
> 
> Are you overclocking?


My PC is highly overclocked - however even after settings everything to stock and I still get the gfx driver crashes.

Also worth noting is that I can run my PC overclocked with 306.88 drivers without any gfx driver crash, so it's unlikely caused by my PC being overclocked, and more likely some conflict with the 307.xx drivers and the GTX680 gfx cards when used in SLI.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xoleras*
> 
> Did you install any software or hardware while your PC was stable?


Not at all. Before trying the 307.xx drivers, I never had gfx driver crashes, with 307.xx I get them daily. It seems the longer the PC is on, the more chance there is of the gfx driver crashing.

It's spotted by a quick flicker of the monitor followed by the desktop switching to native monitor resolution @ 16bit color.

In games, it's spotted by the game freezing and the monitor going black for a second or two, then it recovers and the game continues to play (most of the time) but the resolution has switch to native @ 60Hz and the FPS drops right down.

It is weird and frustrating tbh.


----------



## sherlock

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *un-nefer*
> 
> My PC is highly overclocked - however even after settings everything to stock and I still get the gfx driver crashes.
> 
> Also worth noting is that I can run my PC overclocked with 306.88 drivers without any gfx driver crash, so it's unlikely caused by my PC being overclocked, and more likely some conflict with the 307.xx drivers and the GTX680 gfx cards when used in SLI.
> Not at all. Before trying the 307.xx drivers, I never had gfx driver crashes, with 307.xx I get them daily. It seems the longer the PC is on, the more chance there is of the gfx driver crashing.
> 
> It's spotted by a quick flicker of the monitor followed by the desktop switching to native monitor resolution @ 16bit color.
> 
> In games, it's spotted by the game freezing and the monitor going black for a second or two, then it recovers and the game continues to play (most of the time) but the resolution has switch to native @ 60Hz and the FPS drops right down.
> 
> It is weird and frustrating tbh.


With all drivers 307 and up, your Core+ value for OC in an Afterburner/Percison X have to be a *multiple of 13* in order to avoid instability.


----------



## nyk20z3

Everything is perfect for me with these drivers in 670 ftw sli or if i just use a single card.


----------



## dph314

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Fuel Truck*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dph314*
> 
> Anyone else's clocks stay at full base clock speed after the computer wakes up from sleep? Even with nothing open. I have to restart for them to drop back down to 324mhz. And yes, Global Profile is set to 'Adaptive'.
> 
> 
> 
> Is this a problem and how do I check it??
Click to expand...

Just open Afterburner after waking up the PC. My core and memory clocks on _both_ cards (even though I have SLI disabled) are at 1202mhz/6000mhz. They idle at 40C even though there's no load because of the clocks, and don't go back down until I reset the computer.


----------



## [email protected]

I have yet to try this driver. Heard it doesn't perform well with BF3? For single cards that is? True?

I know it varies on everyone's system and they get different results, wouldn't hurt to try though.


----------



## un-nefer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *sherlock*
> 
> With all drivers 307 and up, your Core+ value for OC in an Afterburner/Percison X have to be a *multiple of 13* in order to avoid instability.


Cheers for the info, but even with no overclocks I get the driver crash - so it has to be something else causing it.

tbh, I disabled all overclocks the other day because I've been trying to work out why the gfx driver keeps crashing, but I am at my wits end as I can not seem to track down why, or find a solution.


----------



## rcfc89

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *un-nefer*
> 
> Cheers for the info, but even with no overclocks I get the driver crash - so it has to be something else causing it.
> 
> tbh, I disabled all overclocks the other day because I've been trying to work out why the gfx driver keeps crashing, but I am at my wits end as I can not seem to track down why, or find a solution.


Sorry for your troubles and no offense but this is exactly why I won't OC gpu's. All the headache for a few fps in games or increased benchmark scores. I guess its more about the challenge for some to push their cards to the max. I prefer to just keep up to date with the top tier cards and keep things at a factory stable reliable clock. To each his own I guess. I hope you can get things squared away.


----------



## dph314

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rcfc89*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *un-nefer*
> 
> Cheers for the info, but even with no overclocks I get the driver crash - so it has to be something else causing it.
> 
> tbh, I disabled all overclocks the other day because I've been trying to work out why the gfx driver keeps crashing, but I am at my wits end as I can not seem to track down why, or find a solution.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry for your troubles and no offense but this is exactly why I won't OC gpu's. All the headache for a few fps in games or increased benchmark scores. I guess its more about the challenge for some to push their cards to the max. I prefer to just keep up to date with the top tier cards and keep things at a factory stable reliable clock. To each his own I guess. I hope you can get things squared away.
Click to expand...

He said it wasn't the overclock that was causing the crash.

It's easy to do and free performance. Personally, I don't see a reason _not_ to do it. Find a stable clock and you're done with testing. And now all you have to do is open Afterburner for free fps


----------



## evoll88

Yeah i dont o.c. my card/cards either just for a few fps plus i have sli so its easy for me to just install and play games. I havent updated the driver cuz i havent had a problem with cold start up so i will leave it alone for now.


----------



## rcfc89

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dph314*
> 
> He said it wasn't the overclock that was causing the crash.
> 
> It's easy to do and free performance. Personally, I don't see a reason _not_ to do it. Find a stable clock and you're done with testing. And now all you have to do is open Afterburner for free fps


The fact that the disable of the increased clock speeds have been removed doesn't mean the damage hasn't already been done. Most people start with a mild oc then that leads to pushing to higher oc's to watercooling etc. I personally don't find gaining a few fps worth pushing a card to run hot and be under constant heavy loads becuase of it. Its risky and not worth it to me especially since I want to sell that card within a year to pick up the newest generation. I can understand though why peope do it. Trying to keep up with games with slower or older cards require it.


----------



## rcfc89

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *evoll88*
> 
> Yeah i dont o.c. my card/cards either just for a few fps plus i have sli so its easy for me to just install and play games. I havent updated the driver cuz i havent had a problem with cold start up so i will leave it alone for now.


Same here its not really needed. Only playing games here. Don't have a need or desire to do benchmarking. I have my cpu overclocked but that's because I need my MB/Cpu/Ram combo to last me at least 3 years. It allows me to just upgrade gpu's every year to stay with all the new games. Right now my 690 at stock clocks can handle pretty much everything you throw at it.


----------



## dph314

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rcfc89*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dph314*
> 
> He said it wasn't the overclock that was causing the crash.
> 
> It's easy to do and free performance. Personally, I don't see a reason _not_ to do it. Find a stable clock and you're done with testing. And now all you have to do is open Afterburner for free fps
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The fact that the disable of the increased clock speeds have been removed doesn't mean the damage hasn't already been done. Most people start with a mild oc then that leads to pushing to higher oc's to watercooling etc. I personally don't find gaining a few fps worth pushing a card to run hot and be under constant heavy loads becuase of it. Its risky and not worth it to me especially since I want to sell that card within a year to pick up the newest generation. I can understand though why peope do it. Trying to keep up with games with slower or older cards require it.
Click to expand...

Yeah I usually only do it when I got a really demanding game and SLI doesn't work with the particular game. Been having problems with SLI in FC3, AC3, and Hitman. Just my luck I get 3 games in a row that I can't use my second $600 card on







But on normal voltage-locked cards, increasing the clock as high as it'll go, which isn't extremely far, will probably not degrade the card noticeably whatsoever.

I don't know. I completely understand your way of thinking. I could just never buy something and not overclock it when I need to, as I would feel like I'm losing out on something I paid for (I know overclocked speeds are 'extra', but I usually look at it as I'm wasting performance if I don't). Maxing out those 3 games I mentioned on a 120hz monitor is no easy task, so the extra mhz are a welcome addition


----------



## Sprkd1

So, I have GTX 560 Ti 448 Cores. I _will_ see an improvement with these drivers since it says "Performance Boost - Increases performance for GeForce 400/500/600 Series GPUs in several PC games vs. GeForce 306.97 WHQL drivers" right? Currently on 306.23.


----------



## SlackerITGuy

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sprkd1*
> 
> So, I have GTX 560 Ti 448 Cores. I _will_ see an improvement with these drivers since it says "Performance Boost - Increases performance for GeForce 400/500/600 Series GPUs in several PC games vs. GeForce 306.97 WHQL drivers" right? Currently on 306.23.


Yes, you'll see performance increases across the board.

The performance improvements that came with R310 are for both Fermi and Kepler.


----------



## amputate

Oh why hello there 800x600.
How have you been since my our last reboot?


----------



## dph314

Ok, this is weird. The 'full base clock while idling' problem is not related only to waking the computer after Sleep. I did a reboot and have been browsing for a while and checked the Afterburner graph. Usage on both cards (even though SLI is disabled) went up to 99% (even though I have nothing open) for a few seconds, and then the load dropped to 0 but the clocks have stayed at full non-boost speed ever since. The hell?

I'll have to post something on the official forum.


----------



## xoleras

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dph314*
> 
> I don't know. I completely understand your way of thinking. I could just never buy something and not overclock it when I need to, as I would feel like I'm losing out on something I paid for (I know overclocked speeds are 'extra', but I usually look at it as I'm wasting performance if I don't). Maxing out those 3 games I mentioned on a 120hz monitor is no easy task, so the extra mhz are a welcome addition


I'm pretty much the same way. There's no way I would buy a reference 680 after using various lightning products, I enjoy overclocking and getting the most out of my wares.

As a counter point to RFC (who said something along the lines of OCing not being worth it due to risks), the risks of degradation are often overstated and limited to those who are grossly negligent. I've had two CPUs die on me as a result of overclocking, however it was due to mistakes on my part. I've overclocked GPUs for years and have never had any issues - because I know how to overclock responsibly and properly monitor things. I'm sure dph is the same.


----------



## xoleras

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *dph314*
> 
> Ok, this is weird. The 'full base clock while idling' problem is not related only to waking the computer after Sleep. I did a reboot and have been browsing for a while and checked the Afterburner graph. Usage on both cards (even though SLI is disabled) went up to 99% (even though I have nothing open) for a few seconds, and then the load dropped to 0 but the clocks have stayed at full non-boost speed ever since. The hell?
> 
> I'll have to post something on the official forum.


I really feel like this must be an issue with the windows 8 driver, I haven't heard of such issues with win7. Definitely report that over to ManuelG...do you have a spare win7 x64 partition to test 310.90 out on?


----------



## un-nefer

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rcfc89*
> 
> The fact that the disable of the increased clock speeds have been removed doesn't mean the damage hasn't already been done.


My gfx cards factory boost to 1188Mhz - my OC'd core clock for daily use (games) was very mild and was set to 1202Mhz (barely above stock), and for benchmarks it was 1215Mhz - I'd be very surprised if that caused any damage, considering there are many who can go over 1300Mhz









But anyway, you seem to have totally neglected the fact that I can run older drivers and not have the gfx crash occur (even if my gfx card is OC'd). So how is it that earlier gfx driver is fine and doesn't have continual gfx driver crashes, yet the 307.xx do?

Like I said, it has nothing to with OC, it is specific to 307.xx drivers.

I appreciate your replies, you think it is OC related and that is a totally fine reply, however it is not the issue for my particular problem.

Is there anyone else who has any idea what might be causing ONLY the 307.xx gfx drivers to crash for me? Does anyone have a solution to fix the 307.xx driver crash for me? Maybe a work around to run an older driver but still benefit from the latest SLI profiles?

Any suggestion will be tried.

Thx


----------



## xion

Why do these drivers keep crashing in BF3? I had to revert back to 310.70 cause of it.. So annoying, Bf3 has had so many issues with me.


----------



## dph314

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xoleras*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dph314*
> 
> Ok, this is weird. The 'full base clock while idling' problem is not related only to waking the computer after Sleep. I did a reboot and have been browsing for a while and checked the Afterburner graph. Usage on both cards (even though SLI is disabled) went up to 99% (even though I have nothing open) for a few seconds, and then the load dropped to 0 but the clocks have stayed at full non-boost speed ever since. The hell?
> 
> I'll have to post something on the official forum.
> 
> 
> 
> I really feel like this must be an issue with the windows 8 driver, I haven't heard of such issues with win7. Definitely report that over to ManuelG...do you have a spare win7 x64 partition to test 310.90 out on?
Click to expand...

I doubt I'll use that old 500GB WD HDD that I had Win7 on again, but I plan on saving it in case I do a back-up build or something one day, so aside from saving a few things for school first, I just took it out and put the Seagate in for Win8, so yeah I still have the full install of Win7 on that old drive. I think it could be Win8 too, because even with all of the problems I had with R310 on Win7, none of them ever caused anything like the clocks constantly idling at 1110mhz/6005mhz. Not sure. I may just wait it out until the next driver and see what happens, or revert if I have to.

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xoleras*
> 
> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *dph314*
> 
> I don't know. I completely understand your way of thinking. I could just never buy something and not overclock it when I need to, as I would feel like I'm losing out on something I paid for (I know overclocked speeds are 'extra', but I usually look at it as I'm wasting performance if I don't). Maxing out those 3 games I mentioned on a 120hz monitor is no easy task, so the extra mhz are a welcome addition
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm pretty much the same way. There's no way I would buy a reference 680 after using various lightning products, I enjoy overclocking and getting the most out of my wares.
> 
> As a counter point to RFC (who said something along the lines of OCing not being worth it due to risks), the risks of degradation are often overstated and limited to those who are grossly negligent. I've had two CPUs die on me as a result of overclocking, however it was due to mistakes on my part. I've overclocked GPUs for years and have never had any issues - because I know how to overclock responsibly and properly monitor things. I'm sure dph is the same.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Even when going mildy crazy for my couple suicide runs I did for my +P20,000 runs, I was able to keep the core, memory, and VRM temps all at 70C or below. CPU core temps right around there as well. Now, with normal gaming, it's getting to the point where an upgrade is right around the corner so I'm getting a little more adventurous with my overclocks, but even then, running over 1400mhz for a game, temps are easily kept in the 60C's (VRM temps in the low 50C's). So, did I bring the estimated life of the GPU from 12 years down to 8 or 9? Maybe. But for what I paid and for how long I'll actually be using the hardware, it's really a non-issue. Now for people that leave the stock fan profile on the card and throw the voltage all the way up and game on a poorly ventilated case...it might cause problems. But I can all but guarentee I'll be in great shape until I have those 780s sitting in my Newegg Shopping cart









But you're right. Little bit of know-how and you're golden. I can't let that performance just sit there unused. Makes me feel like I'm missing out on something.


----------



## Sprkd1

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Sprkd1*
> 
> So, I have GTX 560 Ti 448 Cores. I _will_ see an improvement with these drivers since it says "Performance Boost - Increases performance for GeForce 400/500/600 Series GPUs in several PC games vs. GeForce 306.97 WHQL drivers" right? Currently on 306.23.


I upgraded to these drivers a few days ago and have no issues to report.


----------



## cam51037

I upgraded to 310.90 and had problems in BF3, where with my 670 OCed to around 1350 core, I'd only get 19 FPS. Re-installed 310.60 and I was getting in the high 90's on the same settings. :/


----------



## nyk20z3

Played like 2 hours of BF3 last night using just 1 of my 670 ftw non oc'ed with no issues.

Maxed out at 1920x1080 so idk if higher resolutions or oc'ing is what causes issues but i have experienced nothing negative at all.


----------



## xSociety

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nyk20z3*
> 
> Played like 2 hours of BF3 last night using just 1 of my 670 ftw non oc'ed with no issues.
> 
> Maxed out at 1920x1080 so idk if higher resolutions or oc'ing is what causes issues but i have experienced nothing negative at all.


Why just use 1?


----------



## nyk20z3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xSociety*
> 
> Why just use 1?


No need for sli at 1920x1080 i have come to realize.

I have everything maxed and i still get over 60 frames at all times in multi player so i am going to just use a single card until i go 2560x1440.

I use my 2cd 670 ftw for phys x when i can as of late.

But of course when Crysis 3 drops i might have to enable it lol


----------



## rcfc89

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *nyk20z3*
> 
> No need for sli at 1920x1080 i have come to realize.
> 
> I have everything maxed and i still get over 60 frames at all times in multi player so i am going to just use a single card until i go 2560x1440.
> 
> I use my 2cd 670 ftw for phys x when i can as of late.
> 
> But of course when Crysis 3 drops i might have to enable it lol


Why would you even install a second 670 with a 1080p 60hz monitor? Pick Up a 120hz and join the butter smooth revolution lol.


----------



## nyk20z3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *rcfc89*
> 
> Why would you even install a second 670 with a 1080p 60hz monitor? Pick Up a 120hz and join the butter smooth revolution lol.


I don't build around a monitor size lol i just like to overkill.

I plan on doing a Samsung or Dell ips at 2560x1440 this year for sure so hopefully then i can take advantage of these cards.


----------



## Darylrese

SLI GTX 670 and disabling the second card....thats madness! If you have it, use it it will altleast boost your minimum FPS in some games. BF3 for example will often dip below 60FPS on a single GTX 670. I have a single GTX 670 with a 120hz monitor and im itching for a second card but cant afford it at the moment!


----------



## xSociety

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darylrese*
> 
> SLI GTX 670 and disabling the second card....thats madness! If you have it, use it it will altleast boost your minimum FPS in some games. BF3 for example will often dip below 60FPS on a single GTX 670. I have a single GTX 670 with a 120hz monitor and im itching for a second card but cant afford it at the moment!


Agreed. I have 2 and disabling one is madness.


----------



## Darylrese

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *xSociety*
> 
> Agreed. I have 2 and disabling one is madness.


How do you find your GTX 670 SLI setup? I really really want a second card!!


----------



## nyk20z3

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darylrese*
> 
> SLI GTX 670 and disabling the second card....thats madness! If you have it, use it it will altleast boost your minimum FPS in some games. BF3 for example will often dip below 60FPS on a single GTX 670. I have a single GTX 670 with a 120hz monitor and im itching for a second card but cant afford it at the moment!


No point when my frames don't drop low enough to justify it lol.

I turn it on when i play Metro or recently Crysis warhead.

When i go 2560x1440 i will run sli all the time or i may grab another 670 for kicks!


----------



## Darylrese

Theres no point in not having it on either when its already sat there powered up? lol I get where your coming from and glad you still use it for some more powerful games! If not you can always donate it to me


----------



## marduke83

I have 670sli and I disable one of the cards for some games, especially considering the heat we are having at the moment here in Australia.. and I run vsync in some games aswell to drop the load the keep temps even lower. overkill? yeah probably, but when it's currently 30c at nearly 7.30pm I like to try to keep my room as cool as I can. haha


----------



## xSociety

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Darylrese*
> 
> How do you find your GTX 670 SLI setup? I really really want a second card!!


I love it! I can take advantage of them because I have a 120Hz monitor so that's a plus. The only time I would disable one would be because the game flat out doesn't support SLI but other than that, I can't think of a good reason not to use both of them.


----------



## [email protected]

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *marduke83*
> 
> I have 670sli and I disable one of the cards for some games, especially considering the heat we are having at the moment here in Australia.. and I run vsync in some games aswell to drop the load the keep temps even lower. overkill? yeah probably, but when it's currently 30c at nearly 7.30pm I like to try to keep my room as cool as I can. haha


V-sync usually is for image tearing but i don't have the same card as you do. So i am certain 600 cards require v-sync to have the smooth framerates?


----------



## marduke83

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *[email protected]*
> 
> V-sync usually is for image tearing but i don't have the same card as you do. So i am certain 600 cards require v-sync to have the smooth framerates?


For games like borderlands 2 using vsync cuts my gpu usage by about 35% because it doesn't need to use much to render 60fps, but this is only during our summer to help lower temps.


----------



## Slightly skewed

These wont even install for me. GO figure. I had to revert back to .70.


----------



## Motive

These drivers, or crashers as I started typing out, make BF3 crash almost instantly on load. No other game but BF3 does it absolutely destroy. So I'll be waiting on some new drivers from them.


----------



## General123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Motive*
> 
> These drivers, or crashers as I started typing out, make BF3 crash almost instantly on load. No other game but BF3 does it absolutely destroy. So I'll be waiting on some new drivers from them.


Maybe your not stable? Turn down your overclock.


----------



## GfhTattoo

all 310.XX drivers dont work for me. i fresh install too.







will give these a go tho, need to rma this card, just need cash to do it


----------



## cam51037

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *GfhTattoo*
> 
> all 310.XX drivers dont work for me. i fresh install too.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> will give these a go tho, need to rma this card, just need cash to do it


What? EVGA is making you pay for shipping? Ask them for a shipping label. They sent me one so my RMA was totally free, they paid for shipping both ways.


----------



## Motive

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *General123*
> 
> Maybe your not stable? Turn down your overclock.


I've tried everything. Stock clocks, swapped ram, tried 1 video card, new power supply. It's not the computer, every other game, including Far Cry 3 which I feel is probably more demanding than BF3, ran just fine. Even a fresh windows install. Crash city with BF3.


----------



## General123

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Motive*
> 
> I've tried everything. Stock clocks, swapped ram, tried 1 video card, new power supply. It's not the computer, every other game, including Far Cry 3 which I feel is probably more demanding than BF3, ran just fine. Even a fresh windows install. Crash city with BF3.


Wow that sucks. Have you thought that it may be BF3 causing the issue? I have had a ton of issues with it in the past.


----------



## Motive

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *General123*
> 
> Wow that sucks. Have you thought that it may be BF3 causing the issue? I have had a ton of issues with it in the past.


Well, before BF3's latest patch, it ran fine. It'd done it before, but they released a small patch, and everything was perfect. Another patch, crashcrashcrash 10 minutes of playing crashcrashcrash.


----------



## 13ack.Stab

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *Motive*
> 
> Well, before BF3's latest patch, it ran fine. It'd done it before, but they released a small patch, and everything was perfect. Another patch, crashcrashcrash 10 minutes of playing crashcrashcrash.


Try out Nvidia's 313.95 Beta drivers, they've been fantastic for me. Smooth flying all around -- and I had huge crashing issues with 310.90, too.


----------



## Motive

It's actually even worse with those drivers. I don't know what the hell the deal is. EVERY game runs just fine, perfectly, even the much more demanding Crysis 3 MP demo. I've gone from using the soundcard in my headphones while disabling the on-board ones, which is a hit due to this being a Sniper 3 motherboard, which has fantastic onboard audio, nothing. Reinstalling windows. Nothing. Using only drivers that came with the disc instead of using the newer ones from the website, nothing. Tried it with a single 680 in my comp, nothing. Repair install, I've tried everything.

Only thing that manages to work is running on 306.97, and mildly downclocking the 680's in SLI. And EVEN then it still does it a few times before it starts working, still kicking me offline abit more than I'd like, too. BF3 is getting to the point where it won't be worth all the hassle, and nor will BF4.


----------



## Weltgeist13

http://rog.asus.com/forum/showthread.php?27498-nVIDIA-Geforce-Driver-310.90-Release-1-5-13/page3

does not have it! I'm looking for the modified .INF File for the Nvidia 310.90 drivers ! ! 
(unless it is already included in the International version):
310.90-notebook-win8-win7-winvista-64bit-international-whql of the driver itself ?

btw, you do not need to 'uninstall' the old driver to install the new ones or get them to work..
you download a modified .INF File for that driver and edit , normally the ' nvam.inf ' is where to edit,
i.e. (Setup Information (.inf)) in the Display.Driver folder.


----------



## GfhTattoo

Quote:


> Originally Posted by *cam51037*
> 
> What? EVGA is making you pay for shipping? Ask them for a shipping label. They sent me one so my RMA was totally free, they paid for shipping both ways.


Dam i need to try that, i been waiting for cash to send it in. newborn takes all the cash i got....


----------

