+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 15 of 15
Thread: GTS250 driver upgrade
November 27th, 2011, 11:35 PM #1
GTS250 driver upgrade
Just downloaded 285.62 for my GTS250 GeForce. Any known issues? I am starting to get error messages after screen goes black that driver mdmll** has recovered from an error. This rig is a gigabyte mobo, 4GB mem, running Vista Home Premium on Intel E2160 @ 1.80 GHZ / 1.80dual proc
November 28th, 2011, 12:40 AM #2
Wow, I'm still using 266.58 drivers, didn't realize how far out of date they were till you posted this.
November 28th, 2011, 01:29 AM #3
I didn't update yet, it was good sized (105MB) but I let the NVidia installer have a shot and it failed. I knew it was going to a half hour before it gave up, you get that first inch of "installing" progress bar then it just sits there, not moving. I just checked and I am running 188.8.131.5262 from 10/15/2011. Auto update is working to some extent I guess. That weird looking number came out of device driver/Properties on the GTS250,,,,
November 28th, 2011, 01:41 AM #4
Go to Nvidia Control Panel, Click Help Drop Down Menu, Go to System Information and in that box it will display the Current Driver Version.
Yeah, 100-135 or so MB is about what the Drivers weigh in at.
November 28th, 2011, 02:50 AM #5
Yeah, the installer did not act at like the updata I did last. But, the old driver has not failed since I was on the nVidia web aite. I know it could not have any effect.........
November 28th, 2011, 02:53 AM #6
November 29th, 2011, 08:54 PM #7
I think thats the driver im running on my GT240 with no issues.
290.36 is the newest Nivida driver.
Last edited by truckpuller; November 29th, 2011 at 08:57 PM.
November 29th, 2011, 09:08 PM #8
November 29th, 2011, 09:50 PM #9
One of these days i get me a better video card maybe 2 since this mobo has 2 pciX16 slots, but money dont grow on trees..lol
November 29th, 2011, 10:39 PM #10
285.62 is the latest official driver.
The 290's are the latest Beta Drivers.
November 29th, 2011, 11:35 PM #11
November 30th, 2011, 12:55 AM #12
November 30th, 2011, 02:55 AM #13
Basically a neutered GTX 570, they consume about 200W of Power, run a bit warmer and all that, but performance at least for gaming, is only a hair better than standard GTX 560 Ti's.
Main reason is the stock core clock is 90MHz slower, but they do have a greater 320-bit Memory bus (256 on standard 560 Ti's), and the more shaders (448 vs 384)
from one review I read on it (and I suspect most other reviews like it), on average the newer Ti runs anywhere from 5 to 10 fps faster in games... and yet they get rave reviews.
to those reviewers, sorry, but your WRONG. Its NOT a great buy at all. The only redeeming aspect to these cards is the Triple SLI support, NOTHING else. I expected more performance from them and its not worth it.
A fairly high Factory Overclocked standard 560 Ti could easily Match or even Beat a stock 448 Model. Would still pull less watts and run cooler... And to make it a no brainer... Price would STILL be vastly cheaper.
Take for example the EVGA GTX 560 Ti SuperClock card, runs at 900Mhz core speed, $240 on newegg...
Price of these new 448 models... supposed to be a MSRP of $290.
for that much, I might as well stretch the extra bucks and get a full blown fully enabled GTX 570.
Review I was reading: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 Roundup (EVGA, Gigabyte, MSI)
Anyways, I'd keep an eye out in the weeks to come to see how these things Fold.
They may not be worth their new Price tag for Gaming, the Stock clocked and even Factory Overclocked, standard 560 Ti's still have the price advantage, and bang for buck, but with these cards having reduced Shader counts down from a full GTX 570's, and being 64 shaders more... if you can snag one for a decent price, it might be worth it if your buying them for Folding.
This is like GTX 465 vs GTX 460 all over again, but in reverse. At least with those, the 465 came out first (Reduced spec GTX 470), and then the better more efficient 460 came soon after, and had about same maybe slightly less performance at the cost of price, Heat and Power consumption.
Now, with the GTX 560 Ti 448 core vs standard 384 core, you have the same thing, but a larger price gap, and even less incentive to go for it.
reason is, its already close to the GTX 570 price, so why not get the full card?
and performance wise, its barely a photo finish between the standard 560 Ti and this version.
They would of been better off, just releasing this card at the standard 560 Ti's price range, and move the whole range down in pricing, forcing the standard 560 into the 550 Ti's range, giving the Radeon 6870 competition again. Driving the superior GTX 550 Ti, into the Radeon 6770's range, where the GTS 450 used to play.
One last Price wars before the next gen cards come out.
November 30th, 2011, 03:26 AM #14
another perfect example... Toms Hardware review...
1920x1080 res, High settings, Battlefield 3... A whopping 5 fps or so difference between the two 560 Ti Variants.
Benchmark Results: Battlefield 3 : Nvidia GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 Core Review: GF110 On A Diet
Factor in the $50 price increase, and you have quite possibly one of the most stupidest Moves from Nvidia all year long.
Granted its to get rid of reduced spec defective GTX 570 chips and boost sales during holidays (claims to be limited edition, but thats what the deal was with the GTX 260's before they shifted production from the regular 192 core models to the 216 core "Special" editions, then shrunk the die process 10nm and made the 216 core the "regular" model).
Still think Nvidia should of introduced it at a lower price range and moved the entire line down in pricing, if anything THAT would be more likely to boost sales for the entire line rather than just one more useless card in this performance range.
November 30th, 2011, 08:18 AM #15
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
By flashy123 in forum PC HardwareReplies: 1Last Post: July 22nd, 2010, 06:36 AM
By pbrad08 in forum PC HardwareReplies: 0Last Post: November 27th, 2009, 10:39 PM
By buckaro in forum Technical SupportReplies: 4Last Post: October 26th, 2009, 08:40 PM
By KraidSaves in forum PC HardwareReplies: 3Last Post: April 25th, 2005, 02:56 PM
By justinw in forum Applications and Operating SystemsReplies: 4Last Post: January 23rd, 2005, 09:33 PM