Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Re : Phoronix: NVIDIA GeForce 8 + 100.14.19 Redux

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,584

    Default Re : Phoronix: NVIDIA GeForce 8 + 100.14.19 Redux

    "Our problems have mainly come down to the driver improperly reading the monitor's EDID information and other connection issues with GeForce 8 hardware. "

    Actually the issue is not with the binary blobs as the nv driver suffers the same issue and it effects cards geforce 6 class and up.

  2. #2

    Default

    Purs like a kitten for me. Maybe it's because I already had an xorg.conf ready and didn't ask for the installer to mess it up for me?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    83

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Source Of Radiance View Post
    Purs like a kitten for me. Maybe it's because I already had an xorg.conf ready and didn't ask for the installer to mess it up for me?
    Same here even had nvidia-settings make a xorg.conf when I wanted to configure 2 monitors. No problems other than my DVI cable being to long, crappy picture on 42" TV.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,584

    Default

    Yes it does not appear on all systems but with certain combinations of hardware and xorg 7.3. The nvidia-xconfig generates a working xorg because it does not generate a xorg.conf with a modes list. Some xorg utilities that do generate a modes list don't work.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Millville, MA
    Posts
    17

    Default

    Just curious, but what is the specific problem with the EDID info? Does it produce modelines that are not correct for the display? I had this problem when installing Gutsy Gibbon fresh (though I believe it was using the open-source driver)...the installer utility reported the display resolution as 1680x1050 when in fact the mode was 1400x1050 (as reported by the display's built-in OSD).

    Cheers,
    Jesse

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by avsa242 View Post
    Just curious, but what is the specific problem with the EDID info? Does it produce modelines that are not correct for the display? I had this problem when installing Gutsy Gibbon fresh (though I believe it was using the open-source driver)...the installer utility reported the display resolution as 1680x1050 when in fact the mode was 1400x1050 (as reported by the display's built-in OSD).

    Cheers,
    Jesse
    Incorrectly reporting the resolution, ignoring it when manually specifying the proper mode, and stuff like the picture @ http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=11124 which shows the Input isn't supported even when a picture is displaying and the picture is off the screen and does not auto adjust.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5

    Default Quake4 FPS drop 100.14.11 -> 100.14.19

    I ran the NVIDIA installer to drop 100.14.19 on top of my working 100.14.11 installation. I didn't change any other configuration (well, I didn't let the installer mess with my xorg.conf), and after running Quake4, my FPS was only running around 30, where before I would have no trouble hitting the 60 FPS cap. I ran the 100.14.11 install to roll back (sort of) and the same Quake4 setup ran at the capped 60 FPS once again (the game is capped, I have vsync disabled). I have a Dell laptop with an integrated 8600M GT. I thought that the new driver was supposed to improve performance with the 8 seriers. Has anyone else experienced this with Quake4 or any other games?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,631

    Default

    Quake 4 is limited to 60 FPS in standard game mode. Only timedemos would run faster.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kano View Post
    Quake 4 is limited to 60 FPS in standard game mode. Only timedemos would run faster.
    I understand, but I am getting less than 60 with 100.14.19. I used to hit the 60 cap with 100.14.11 with no trouble at all.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    5

    Default

    Resolved - but I don't know why. I am running a custom 2.6.23 kernel, and I rebuilt 2.6.23-rc9, reinstalled the nvidia 100.14.19 package and performance is back up where it ought to be.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •