New GeForce 344.11 WHQL Drivers

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
All you GeForce owners out there should head on over to the NVIDIA website and grab the new GeForce 344.11 WHQL drivers.

The new GeForce Game Ready driver, release 344.11 WHQL, allows GeForce owners to continue to have the ultimate gaming experience. This driver is aligned with today’s launch of the world’s most advanced GPUs—the GeForce GTX 980 and GTX 970. With support for NVIDIA G-SYNC Surround displays, gaming has never been more realistic and immersive. In addition, this Game Ready WHQL driver ensures you'll have the best possible gaming experience for the latest new blockbuster titles including Borderlands: The Pre-Sequel, The Evil Within, F1 2014, and Alien: Isolation.
Click to expand...
 
And first-day Linux support for the 970 and 980.

Thanks, nvidia, for caring about us. :)
 
I tried these out last night on my GTX 670 and it made Media Player Classic Home Cinema x64 to not decode correctly.
 
I have the MPC-HC issue on my 770 GTX but not on my GT 430 in my server.
 
Figured it was bound to happen years ago but support has finally been dropped for:

GeForce 8 & 9 Series Desktop Products
•
GeForce 100/200/300 Series Desktop Products

XP support has of course been dropped as well.

I generally do not update these drivers often as most fixes do not pertain to me.

New games with fixes or profiles then certainly updating is a good idea.
 
Does anyone know if their new downsampling mode is compatible with older Nvidia cards (600/700) or just the new 900 ones?
 
tetris42 said:
Does anyone know if their new downsampling mode is compatible with older Nvidia cards (600/700) or just the new 900 ones?
Click to expand...

MFAA is a Maxwell only feature. Hell I'm not even sure if it will work on 750/Ti cards, anyone wanna give it a shot with latest drivers?

FYI I'm not experiencing any problems with MP-C on my current setup. Using it now without issue.
 
MFAA currently does not work but will patched in at a later date, right now its just marketing fluff - though I expect it to actually be useful and I look forward to seeing image quality/performance reviews from [H] on it.
 
If it looks as terrible as TXAA then they can keep it left out.

TXAA was the last 'new' AA Nvidia started pimping and it turned every game that had the feature into a blurry pile of garbage.

Even FXAA looked better than TXAA in all the games I tried it on... but of course I always settled on MSAA over TXAA.

I don't see the point of developing new forms of AA that look worse than what we've had for ages.
 
Xizer said:
If it looks as terrible as TXAA then they can keep it left out.

TXAA was the last 'new' AA Nvidia started pimping and it turned every game that had the feature into a blurry pile of garbage.

Even FXAA looked better than TXAA in all the games I tried it on... but of course I always settled on MSAA over TXAA.

I don't see the point of developing new forms of AA that look worse than what we've had for ages.
Click to expand...

The idea is that these new techniques do a lot of AA for little to no cost. TXAA isn't good, and I think FXAA isn't bad. Unlike TXAA, MFAA won't be its own choice of AA in games that support it - it supposedly will simply override/enhance whatever AA settings you currently have applied, so it should work globally.
 
runudownquick said:
MFAA is a Maxwell only feature. Hell I'm not even sure if it will work on 750/Ti cards, anyone wanna give it a shot with latest drivers?.
Click to expand...
MFAA is something different, not the new downsampling option. Honestly, MFAA sounds exactly like temporal AA, something ATI had back in 2008.

I don't see the point of developing new forms of AA that look worse than what we've had for ages.
Click to expand...
There wouldn't be a point except AA compatibility in modern games is absolute shit. Seriously, pick a random modern game and it's a total dice toss as to whether AA will work at ALL (except for shader-based ones, like FXAA, SMAA, etc.). Even then, it may not be complete. I haven't tried it myself, but look at the image quality comparison Hardocp posted on Watch Dogs:



Wow, they really cleaned up that fence huh?

14083370007cx2pU3ZI8_14_7_l.png


Until we get solutions better than this, the more AA options we have, the better.
 
tetris42 said:
Until we get solutions better than this, the more AA options we have, the better.
Click to expand...

The only two AA options we need are SSAA and MSAA. That's it.

SSAA for perfect anti-aliasing and MSAA for a compromise solution that's overall pretty solid AA but not perfect.

If you are running a potato that can't even handle MSAA then you shouldn't be PC gaming.

There doesn't need to be 50 billion AA methods for potatoes because potatoes will never run games well.

With 50 billion crap AA methods they overshadow MSAA and SSAA. I've noticed SSAA has become so disturbingly rarely included in PC games nowdays that people are having to work on hacks to get it into PC games and Nvidia is now promoting an official driver hack as a "new feature" when it should be a standard form of AA included in all games as an option by developers in the first place. It's probably the easiest form of AA to implement too.

Hell, they're not even putting in MSAA in a lot of games anymore. I've noticed a lot of recent releases only have FXAA or even lower. Dead Rising 3 for example is a new release that only offers FXAA and MLAA as options.
 
The thing with SS/MSAA is that they rape the shit outta your resources and end up being a huge performance hit for that extra image quality - image quality which as seen above is half the time no better than not using any AA or FXAA. The idea behind MFAA is that no game has to have it coded in (which is the issue with SS/MSAA being left completely out of games as AA options) and it's supposed to be able to provide an excellent ratio of performance per resource. If you could get twice the gas mileage out of your car for nothing wouldn't you press that magic button?
 
Shader based AA's like FXAA look great at 4k because it has more pixel to do it's smoothing algorithm on, without messing up texture quality. Also, it's the only viable AA method at that resolution until we get better horse power.
 
Last edited:
Xizer said:
The only two AA options we need are SSAA and MSAA. That's it.

SSAA for perfect anti-aliasing and MSAA for a compromise solution that's overall pretty solid AA but not perfect.

If you are running a potato that can't even handle MSAA then you shouldn't be PC gaming.

There doesn't need to be 50 billion AA methods for potatoes because potatoes will never run games well.

With 50 billion crap AA methods they overshadow MSAA and SSAA. I've noticed SSAA has become so disturbingly rarely included in PC games nowdays that people are having to work on hacks to get it into PC games and Nvidia is now promoting an official driver hack as a "new feature" when it should be a standard form of AA included in all games as an option by developers in the first place. It's probably the easiest form of AA to implement too.

Hell, they're not even putting in MSAA in a lot of games anymore. I've noticed a lot of recent releases only have FXAA or even lower. Dead Rising 3 for example is a new release that only offers FXAA and MLAA as options.
Click to expand...
Back in 2006 ATI had the best of both worlds; MSAA for polygons, SSAA for alpha textures. Nvidia soon followed afterwards with TrSSAA. These both looked great. The problem is you're lucky if these methods will work even half the time in modern games. MLAA, FXAA, SMAA are all just attempts to get SOMETHING working. I'm in agreement MSAA and SSAA would be great methods the vast majority of the time, problem is they only work half the time, if that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top