rec.autos.simulators

New Detonators 28.32 and n2002

jon

New Detonators 28.32 and n2002

by jon » Wed, 10 Apr 2002 02:57:09

Hesitantly tried the new Det's after hearing some good mostly bad remarks
about them. Has anyone else noticed if they handle the smoke from a wreck
lot better? On my gf2 ti, smoke would cause an instantaneous noticeable
(10-15 fps)  framerate drop, seems like the new ones only lose 1-3 fps. I am
very pleased indeed.
MadDAW

New Detonators 28.32 and n2002

by MadDAW » Wed, 10 Apr 2002 03:24:20

Like the 23.11 drivers I think the 28.32 drivers performance is more O/S
dependant. Only this time its reversed. With the 23.11s 2000\XP performance
was god, but Win9x/ME performance suffered. The 28.32 appear to be the
direct opposite. I have been running the 28.32s since they came out and they
have ran great for me. I have not had any of the problems like slow loading
and drops in 3d mark scores. From what I have seen the majority of people
with 28.32 problems seem to be XP users. Now before the hundreds of posts
show up to prove me wrong show up keep in mind that every system reacts
differently, but if you are running Win9x/ME I'd say go for it.

As far as the smoke goes I really can't answer that because I have not had
any problems with it in the past, but I'm running a XP1800 and a GF3.

MadDAWG

jon

New Detonators 28.32 and n2002

by jon » Wed, 10 Apr 2002 03:40:59

I am running win2000. I haven't really tested mine with 3dmark, quit that
and just started looking at my fps in games i play. I just got irritated
with comparing my 3dmark scores, wondering why i couldn't get my score up to
the ones people with similar systems had. Naturally that will change when I
get my gf4 4400 at the end of the month. :)

I was running the 27.51 drivers. That may have been part of the reason for
the smoke fps drop too.


jason moy

New Detonators 28.32 and n2002

by jason moy » Wed, 10 Apr 2002 06:56:24


> Like the 23.11 drivers I think the 28.32 drivers performance is more O/S
> dependant. Only this time its reversed. With the 23.11s 2000\XP performance
> was god, but Win9x/ME performance suffered. The 28.32 appear to be the
> direct opposite. I have been running the 28.32s since they came out and they
> have ran great for me. I have not had any of the problems like slow loading
> and drops in 3d mark scores. From what I have seen the majority of people
> with 28.32 problems seem to be XP users. Now before the hundreds of posts
> show up to prove me wrong show up keep in mind that every system reacts
> differently, but if you are running Win9x/ME I'd say go for it.

That is really odd.  I did a fresh install of windows 98 when I bought
my GeForce 4 and installed the 28.32 drivers from the getgo.  No games
would run for more than 20 seconds without crashing.  Same with
3dmark2001, and I don't think I've ever seen that crash before.  It
seems like the D3D rendering isn't even working at all since the
framerates will hover around 10fps or lower in anything and then I get
a quick CTD.

Installed the 27.42 drivers which come with the card and haven't had a
problem.  Actually I ran the detonator install on the CD that came
with the card, the autorun installer tried to install XP drivers for
some unknown reason.

Jason

MadDAW

New Detonators 28.32 and n2002

by MadDAW » Wed, 10 Apr 2002 08:05:03

Well I'm running a GF3 not a 4 so that may be the differeance. Until the
28.32 the 27.42 were the best for me as well.

MadDAWG

///M5Bria

New Detonators 28.32 and n2002

by ///M5Bria » Wed, 10 Apr 2002 11:01:09

Nothing but infinte loops when i run the 28.32 w/ XP.  Had to resort back to
23.11.



1. Nvidia releases 28.32

2. OT: GF2 GTS - 28.32 or 23.11 drivers

3. New Info on TNT Detonator Drivers - NOT GOOD

4. New Nvidia Detonator drivers: version 3.65

5. New 9/10/01 Detonator XP v21.81

6. new Detonators...

7. New Detonators Don't work for me

8. N2002: Temporarily Disable Joystick b4 running N2002

9. F1RS: Patches ands Pedals

rec.autos.simulators is a usenet newsgroup formed in December, 1993. As this group was always unmoderated there may be some spam or off topic articles included. Some links do point back to racesimcentral.net as we could not validate the original address. Please report any pages that you believe warrant deletion from this archive (include the link in your email). RaceSimCentral.net is in no way responsible and does not endorse any of the content herein.