163.44 drivers caused a 20% performance decrease in Counter-Strike: Source(benchmark)

S

Spoudazo

Gawd
Joined
Apr 23, 2006
Messages
516
AVOID these drivers! ;)
158_45vs.jpg
 
i knew it.

when i updated i noticed alot less frames so i had to turn down the setting. i went back to 94.21 or something and its all better now.
 
mayonaise 812 said:
i knew it.

when i updated i noticed alot less frames so i had to turn down the setting. i went back to 94.21 or something and its all better now.
Click to expand...

that would explain my POS performance...or partly.

What should I revert back to?
 
That's kinda stange. I actually gained about 50 points on 3dmark06 when I switched to these drivers. (From 14,122 to 14,168 after install) I don't really monitor FPS when I play but I haven't noticed any noticeable drop in performance. I actually really like them because I can finally enable AA on Bioshock. Didn't seem to work before. Just my 2 cents.
 
I was using 162.18 before I changed to these beta drivers. I'm not the type to usually change drivers the second a new set comes out, but in this case I specifically did so for the aforementioned Bioshock issue. Who knows, maybe these drivers suck for other games.
 
No, they don't change a thing.

Running a 8800gts, vista 64, tested with the 163.44 I got 282, and when I used driver cleaner, and went back to the 158.45 I got 283.


Maybe on your system it messed something up......
 
I used driver cleaning both time, and used the same settings.

With 16x super-sampling anti-aliasing and all the other settings max via the driver settings, the FPS wouldn't stay at a constant 60fps (Vsync on), but would bounce around the 40s-50s.

With the older drivers (158.45), the SAME settings, I get a constant 60fps.

Now, I always used to play at 100hz on an older monitor, but now I switched to LCDs, and it's hard enough being "stuck" at 60hz. Can't wait for an affordable 120hz LCD. :cool:
 
Yeah i use to get 380 fps in starcraft and now i only get 345 fps! It runs like shit! :p I guess I will never understand you CS boys and your hundreds of fps's.
 
stoney_titan said:
Yeah i use to get 380 fps in starcraft and now i only get 345 fps! It runs like shit! :p I guess I will never understand you CS boys and your hundreds of fps's.
Click to expand...
its a performance test that indicates how your system is running. :rolleyes:
 
stoney_titan said:
Yeah i use to get 380 fps in starcraft and now i only get 345 fps! It runs like shit! :p I guess I will never understand you CS boys and your hundreds of fps's.
Click to expand...


the difference between 100fps and 150fps in counterstrike source is one that i can notice. ;)

of course you can tell me that there's no way i see a difference and then i can tell you that i definitely 'feel' the difference and you can say 'nuh-uh' and i can say 'ya-ha' and so on and so forth. :D
 
How about some details?

What video card?
What OS?
32bit 64bit?

Maybe it only has negative impact on certain configurations.
 
people still play CS:S? I thought that was only played for 12 year old kids with torrets and aggression issues.
 
Thats strange I just ran the benchmark and scored 186.6 average fps on the 163.44 drivers. on XP 32 bit and 8800gts 640 meg.FX55 Processor 2.9ghz
 
Krenum said:
Thats strange I just ran the benchmark and scored 186.6 average fps on the 163.44 drivers. on XP 32 bit and 8800gts 640 meg.FX55 Processor 2.9ghz
Click to expand...

I tweak everything in the drivers for the best IQ.

I can hit 300 if I want, but I'd rather hover around 80ish or so if that means more better picture quality. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top