Jump to content
LaptopVideo2Go Forums
LSudlow

Windows 7 with nVidia FX Cards

Recommended Posts

LSudlow

Thanks, Steen - you're exactly right on all counts.

The reason some newer Vista drivers work on the FX series is because some beta builds include legacy code forks. Thank Nvidia for throwing us a bone. It might be useful to track/confirm good candidates down.

The very reason for this thread. Thanks for the confirmation on 173.90 :)

Remata91, if 98.13 is working for you, I'd stick with it. It's a very good driver.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Levyke

Hi!

I have an fx 5700 video card and i cant install corectly to w7 , i tried a lost of drivers (latest from nvidia too) but isnt helped , aero and this thing is working great ,but when i try to play some games the display crashing . If i tri to run the performance tool in the controll panel than crashing again , i tried an fx 5200 (128 mg) w7 recognised well no crash , but i cant handle that fx 5700 (and info from this model no1 has it?? ).

If some1 know some info pls tell me .

Sry for my english!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LSudlow

Levyke, please try 98.13, with our modded inf, and see if that works. That will give us a place to start.

If 98.13 crashes with games, I would suspect a problem with that card, since the FX 5200 works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sam G

Umm, your GPU is a G72M & not an NV3x GPU as per this thread title, hence 190.73 works fine for you. Edit the inf of the latest driver set to see if it works on your notebook. Needless to say 179.47 is a bum stear.

After looking up my card info on Wikipedia, yes it does have a G72GLM core. However, I misunderstand your first sentence in the reply. This thread said nothing on the original post about "nv3x" that I could find. I posted because the title states "Windows 7 with nVidia FX Cards". I have both, so I replied.

As for the INF file, what exactly would I be editing in the file? I've never done so before, so this is new territory for me. I've primarily been using installers to test different drivers.


I'm on version 179.68 now. I tested my MMO and the stutter is definitely less visible, but it is still apparent and would cause a headache with prolonged playing.

What did get fixed is when swapping from 179.47 to 179.68, my Ubuntu VM in VirtualBox no longer locks up. This is a well documented bug with nVidia drivers on the Ubuntu forums. It was driving me nuts, lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest aaaaaa

Hi again,

I have try to follow the aaaaaa suggestions, if I have understood correctly ...

1- "first you MUST install driver over win update"

I updated the driver from device manager -> update driver -> find automatically the update driver

It install the 175.19, works fine but without aero.

2- "upgrade over device manager with modet driver"

After reboot I go to device manager -> update driver -> find driver manually -> select the dir for the

173.90 with the mod inf , but I get: "Windows find the software driver for you device was already

updates" and of course, does not modify the drivers

I have to follow the LSudlow suggestion :

So I changed first to the standard VGA driver and after setup the 163.11 driver version but I get again the blue screen.

So I return to the 98.13

uninstal all drivers (make vga), then run windows update and instal drivers from it, then go to device manager and update drivers to 173.90.(device manager->display adapters->update driver software->browse my computer for driver software-> let me pick a list... -> have disk -> browse.. and use 173.90.

it work. try it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Christian

Thanks, Christian - your findings confirm what others are seeing. (I use 98.16 myself.) While most of the newer drivers behave the way you describe, I'd be interested to hear what happens if you try 163.11 or 173.90. We're hoping they may be exceptions. Thanks.

173.90 are installed okay but still problems:

- UAC switching does not work porperly.

Sometimes it switches, sometimes it hangs. Desktop seems to be very slow

- Welcome-screen shows only a blue screen (not bsod)

- nv-control panel 100% CPU, very slow but works.

But it was surprised that the desktop generally works.

Christian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LSudlow

aaaaaa and Christian, thanks for your updates. It looks like 173.90 is a winner (sort of). I'd be interested to see what happens if you try 163.11, since the 16x.xx drivers seems to perform better with FX cards for some reason. But only if you feel like it.

Regardless, I appreciate hearing your results. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest aaaaaa

173.90 are installed okay but still problems:

- UAC switching does not work porperly.

Sometimes it switches, sometimes it hangs. Desktop seems to be very slow

- Welcome-screen shows only a blue screen (not bsod)

- nv-control panel 100% CPU, very slow but works.

But it was surprised that the desktop generally works.

Christian

if you want performance in nv control panel make this changes:

http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/2237/clipboard01wyg.jpg

and if you want more performance go to system properties and make this changes (aero enablet):

http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/1126/clipboard014.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Winnies

Nothing working fine here. before I format my pc I was using 179.. I forgot last two numbers. it was working bit fine except that the hd movies could not play properly. now I tried 17390 the screen went blue and stuck there. I had to press sleep on my keyboard and when I pressed again it proceded. now I can't even properly play .avi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Winnies

Nothing working fine here. before I format my pc I was using 179.. I forgot last two numbers. it was working bit fine except that the hd movies could not play properly. now I tried 17390 the screen went blue and stuck there. I had to press sleep on my keyboard and when I pressed again it proceded. now I can't even properly play .avi

I forot to tell that I am using fx5200

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LSudlow

Winnies, you've got the situation I mentioned above, where your system is trying to load files from two different drivers. The solution is to boot into safe mode and go into the Windows Control Panel. Under Programs, uninstall "Nvidia Drivers" and you should be able to boot normally.

Start with 98.13 to be sure everything is working properly. Then you can try upgrading to 173.90. I'm not yet convinced 173.90 will work for everyone, but you can use this same process to go back to 98.13 if you need to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest steen

After looking up my card info on Wikipedia, yes it does have a G72GLM core. However, I misunderstand your first sentence in the reply. This thread said nothing on the original post about "nv3x" that I could find. I posted because the title states "Windows 7 with nVidia FX Cards". I have both, so I replied.

Yes, that much was obvious. Nvidia FX series = NV3x GPUs, and is the implicit point of the OP. You no more have an FX series card than I have an XT series... Your GPU is still supported in the codebase. Mobile GPUs have historical patchy support due to various OEM/ODM proprietary designs and compounded by Quadro driver certification. The AXIOM/MXM standards allow IHVs to now better support mobile products.

As for the INF file, what exactly would I be editing in the file? I've never done so before, so this is new territory for me. I've primarily been using installers to test different drivers.

All required info is in my posts, else just use the inf customizing from this site.

173.90 are installed okay but still problems:

- UAC switching does not work porperly.

Sometimes it switches, sometimes it hangs. Desktop seems to be very slow

- Welcome-screen shows only a blue screen (not bsod)

- nv-control panel 100% CPU, very slow but works.

None of these issues occur for me. I also don't need to disable AERO features for good GUI response.

But it was surprised that the desktop generally works.

And so too were many of us... :)

I'm not yet convinced 173.90 will work for everyone

You could be right. I only have FX5900XT/FX5900NU & i875/i865 to test with, which are probably the most stable. I suspect the following:

1. Chipset issues with the old FX codebase, esp SBA & FW.

2. GART drivers & WDDM. (Vista update for SiS GART isn't rolled up in Win7 release. Requires update before installing drivers.)

3. NV30/5/8 (One quad/cycle) vs NV31/4/6 which have less ALUs/pipe & 1/2 the texels/clock.

4. 32-bit vs 64-bit code base.

5. Non-qualified driver code (obviously).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest vkapartzianis

Here's my experience from running Windows 7 on an FX 5700 for almost a year now.

1. The very latest Vista drivers to support FX cards are 177.18 and 177.56. These came out a year ago, from slightly different (and many months old) driver branches, are very stable, and I don't recommend using anything else.

2. For Aero:

  • Set AGP aperture size to 256MB.
  • Overclock to the max using a utility like RivaTuner. My card came from Albatron, both fans were broken at the time I upgraded, but it did 500Mhz core (from 425) and 640Mhz memory (from 425) without problems running constantly for a year.
  • Adjust 3D settings for maximum speed, by turning off all quality enhancements and enabling all optimizations in the Nvidia control panel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest steen

1. The very latest Vista drivers to support FX cards are 177.18 and 177.56.

They both fail to init on my 5900. Perhaps someone with a 5200/5600/5700 can confirm. I tried a few more while I was at it, also without success: 175.90, 175.97, 178.05, 182.60.

2. For Aero:

  • Set AGP aperture size to 256MB.
  • Overclock to the max using a utility like RivaTuner. My card came from Albatron, both fans were broken at the time I upgraded, but it did 500Mhz core (from 425) and 640Mhz memory (from 425) without problems running constantly for a year.
  • Adjust 3D settings for maximum speed, by turning off all quality enhancements and enabling all optimizations in the Nvidia control panel.

The marginal gain from overclocking your core for Aero may be 0.1-0.2 on the graphics experience index. Bandwidth may have greater effect from a low base. Aero is a 2D GUI rendered on the 3D engine, so Control Panel filter/mip/AA/V-Sync tweaks won't have much effect. It's largely blend/fill dependent. Also note that boards with 2d/3d clocks will run mostly at 2d clocks depending on SKU/BIOS/drivers.

If PS2.0 shaders are executed, NV31/6 are effectively 2x2 instead of 4x1. That's where NV31/4/6 suffer. NV35/8 are always 4x2 in this scenario (& 8x1 with Z-only passes).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest steen

I found a Geforce FX 5600 128MB AGP with dual DVI so tried it in the same test rig as the 5900XT. Drivers 177.18 & 177.56 don't init. Confirmed blue login screen with faint vertical green lines with both 173.90 & 163.11. However, typing a passwd + enter boots with full Aero enabled. UI performance is glitchy with occasional freezing, resolved by alt-tab & alt-f4 to kill the frozen process. 158.18 has no problem at the login screen & seems to work OK, but there are still occasional UI glitches. If you want extra res/refresh rate control replace the entire MODEMOD section with NV_Modes from the 163.11 inf. Running WEI results in screen corruption that recovers on completion. This 5600 scores 3.5 for graphics & 3.0 for gaming graphics cf 5900XT 4.3/3.7 & Radeon 9600XT 4.2/4.0 (but these have no corruption). Video performance is fine. No problems with VMR9 & EVR on all sets. 3DM03 runs fine but drops Aero on launch with the 5600. Score is >1000 points lower than in WinXP. 5900 similarly lower Win7 3DM03 score. I can see why gaming is an issue.

Something I didn't notice earlier is that multi-texturing doesn't work properly with any of these driver sets on the FX series. They're optimized for NV40-> pipe. Explains a lot & why performance of 5200/5500/5600/5700 is extra bad. Basically, your GPU must be capable of 1 quad/cycle or 4 color pixels/cycle with PS2.0.

Gratuitous pic. Ntune can't id the GPU & doesn't work.

173905600.th.png

Over & out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LSudlow

Great research, Steen. Thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest steen

No probs, LSudlow. Thanks for the useful thread & laptopvideo2go for the driver archive & forum.

I'd just like to clarify that 3DM03 multi-texturing test is more an alpha-blending test, so the poor results are likely reflected in Aero. If the 5600 is indicative, I'm surprised anyone is bothering with Win7 & Aero with NV31/4/6. All drivers are poor including 96.85, & 98.13/6. These drivers cause cpl related instability & exhibit a blank screen for ~30secs from Win7 animated splash to login screen for the service to load. Performance/video/filtering also seems worse than the newer sets. 169.61/2 don't init. If I had to, I'd use 158.18 & live with the occasional UI/UAC quirk. I can't be bothered with mix/match or debug. NV30/35 owners should be fine using any driver set, so I'd go for 173.90 or 163.11. Performance is night->day better on the 5900.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Guest

Both 177.18 and 177.56 work flawlessly. Don't use a generic modified INF, use each driver's NV_WHQL.INF and add your card in [NVIDIA.Mfg.NTx86.6.0] and [strings] sections. You should add it as an "nv_NV3x" type of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest steen

Both 177.18 and 177.56 work flawlessly.

177.xx work flawlessly? Sounds interesting. Could you detail your hardware? Perhaps it will help nail things down. A scrn of nvcpl system info would be useful. Both fail to init on my NV31/NV35 boards. Nothing to do with the inf... Perhaps NV36 does indeed work?

Don't use a generic modified INF, use each driver's NV_WHQL.INF and add your card in [NVIDIA.Mfg.NTx86.6.0] and [strings] sections. You should add it as an "nv_NV3x" type of course.

Yes, well, um...

Some of the driver sets seemed sluggish, & remembering some issues with a GTX280, I thought I'd check out latency:

173.90

dpc17390.th.png

163.11

dpc16311.th.png

Dramatic difference. Under WinXP, latency is <10us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LSudlow

Steen, you're right as usual. 177.18 does install on NV34 boards and I found a file that suggests Lenovo arranged it specifically for Thinkpad laptops with FX Go5200 (NV34) chips.

Performance, however, is slow, which leads to your other point.

Even if we get later drivers to install, the 16x drivers are the last ones that perform well with FX series cards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest scott

Thanks, Christian - your findings confirm what others are seeing. (I use 98.16 myself.) While most of the newer drivers behave the way you describe, I'd be interested to hear what happens if you try 163.11 or 173.90. We're hoping they may be exceptions. Thanks.

i have a dell inspiron 8600 with a fx go5650

i came across this forum because i am upgrading to windows 7 and could not find drivers for this card.

the first driver i tryed was 173.90 and it works perfectly so far except that when i close the lid the screen stays white instead of turning off.

thanks so much for all the great info.

if i have better luck with any other ones i will post my results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest steen

Interesting info, LSudlow. I thought 177.18 was an Acer mobility set & that 177.56 was Lenovo? If there really is a separate mobility code path, it should be exploitable for desktop cards, too...

Some bad news with 163.11. The 16x series has two show-stopper bugs. Intermittent screen blanking & non-functional flat panel scaling. If you touch the scaling tab, you lose all monitor scaling & can only adjust via the panel itself. The screen blanking issue is just annoying. I forgot how bad these driver sets were... Down to 158.18 & no probs. 5900 tested with a 24" panel.

i have a dell inspiron 8600 with a fx go5650

the first driver i tryed was 173.90 and it works perfectly so far except that when i close the lid the screen stays white instead of turning off.

Useful info. Do you have any screen weirdness at the Win7 login? Checked DPC latency? I should be able to mod my NV31 to NV31M to test.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest steen

Back to the future redux...

The issue with intermittent screen blanking with DVI-D seems due to exceeding nominal pixel clock. 5800/5900/5700/5600 have a 165Mhz TMDS. 5500/5200 make do with 135Mhz. Edit reg NVTweak/NvCplEnableAdvancedTimingPage=1 to enable Manage Custom Resolutions under the Display section of the NVCpl. Deselect Treat as HDTV & create a CVT Reduced Blank custom resolution. Notice the final pixel clocks. This is useful for all single link connections (both card & panel). Only 173.90 works properly.

Problem:

17390cvt6.th.png

Solution:

17390cvt7.th.png

It should be possible to use a 5500/5200 @ 1920x1200@50Hz or 1920x1080@58Hz if your panel can accept lower than 60Hz vertical:

17390cvt3.th.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SCF

Did anyone find working versions for the 64-bit Version of Windows 7? The "best" version for 32-bit 173.90 is not available as 64-bit version. I tried the closest versions of the 64-bit driver, but to no avail. 173.68 refuses to load and 174.31 works neither. I might test additional versions and will update this post accordingly.

Just for the record, the system I want to install these drivers contains a Geforce PCX 5900 card. The Beta WHQL 96.85 drivers NVIDIA provides work fine, though I'd like to run more current drivers if possible. On Windows 7 32-bit 173.90 worked without a problem.

Update:

174.16 doesn't work

171.12 works apparently

171.37 works as well

Edited by SCF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...