Performance 71.89 vs. 77.72 with GF6800U It's slower - why?!
Hello everyone.

I have my ED-Glasses since 2001 an have made them work again now with my new GF6800 Ultra. Before, I had an ATI 9800 XT (didn't work with 3d) and before that a GF3 (worked very well).

What's the problem with the performance of the 71.98, compared with the actual 77.72, the 3D-driver-combo is so much slower! /thumbsdown.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':thumbsdown:' /> I testet it by simply comparing fps in games (in 2D of course) and in 3DMark 2005. With the 71.98 I have nearly 1000 points less (4400) compared with the 77.71 (5500).

Is the 71.x not that optimized for the GF6800 or does anyone have a clue?

Greetings from Germany!
starmarky
Hello everyone.



I have my ED-Glasses since 2001 an have made them work again now with my new GF6800 Ultra. Before, I had an ATI 9800 XT (didn't work with 3d) and before that a GF3 (worked very well).



What's the problem with the performance of the 71.98, compared with the actual 77.72, the 3D-driver-combo is so much slower! /thumbsdown.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':thumbsdown:' /> I testet it by simply comparing fps in games (in 2D of course) and in 3DMark 2005. With the 71.98 I have nearly 1000 points less (4400) compared with the 77.71 (5500).



Is the 71.x not that optimized for the GF6800 or does anyone have a clue?



Greetings from Germany!

starmarky

#1
Posted 06/28/2005 10:03 AM   
Didnt try the new drivers, but strangely i noticed that 71.89 was slower in 3D Mark than my previous driver (66.x?). Wonder if this has something to do with various "optimisations" that Futuremark objected to ? :ph34r:

Steve
Didnt try the new drivers, but strangely i noticed that 71.89 was slower in 3D Mark than my previous driver (66.x?). Wonder if this has something to do with various "optimisations" that Futuremark objected to ? :ph34r:



Steve

#2
Posted 06/28/2005 10:23 AM   
[quote name='rousseau' date='Jun 28 2005, 11:23 AM']Didnt try the new drivers, but strangely i noticed that 71.89 was slower in 3D Mark than my previous driver (66.x?). Wonder if this has something to do with various "optimisations" that Futuremark objected to ?  :ph34r:

Steve
[right][post="39964"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote]

I noticed the reduced speed both in 3DMark03 and 05. And definitely a loss of FPS in games, so I don't think that it relates to optimisations in 3DMark. Was the 71.89 released with GF6800 support or dit it came out earlier?

starmarky
[quote name='rousseau' date='Jun 28 2005, 11:23 AM']Didnt try the new drivers, but strangely i noticed that 71.89 was slower in 3D Mark than my previous driver (66.x?). Wonder if this has something to do with various "optimisations" that Futuremark objected to ?  :ph34r:



Steve

[post="39964"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post]




I noticed the reduced speed both in 3DMark03 and 05. And definitely a loss of FPS in games, so I don't think that it relates to optimisations in 3DMark. Was the 71.89 released with GF6800 support or dit it came out earlier?



starmarky

#3
Posted 06/28/2005 11:21 AM   
I think, most news in 77.72 driver are:
- Support OpenGL 2.0; //Riddik with OGL 1.3 not start!!
- Support GeForce7800GTX;
- Quality fixes.
So, it's big work - to perfomance fixes they haven't time ;)

Interesting, nVidia say perfomance improvement in x64 driver (by using x86-64 CPU) - but I haven't find it /no.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':no:' />
I think, most news in 77.72 driver are:

- Support OpenGL 2.0; //Riddik with OGL 1.3 not start!!

- Support GeForce7800GTX;

- Quality fixes.

So, it's big work - to perfomance fixes they haven't time ;)



Interesting, nVidia say perfomance improvement in x64 driver (by using x86-64 CPU) - but I haven't find it /no.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':no:' />

#4
Posted 06/28/2005 02:31 PM   
Scroll To Top