ifl92/jfl92 what 8600 drivers are you using??

and how well do they work. this is for the 8600m gt specifically. love more input thanks!!

 

windows update upgraded my vista64 from 156.10 to 167.59. wirelessman told me he has 167.79 i think. but he has vista business x86. they're fine i guess. 3 of my wei scores went up .1 with the new drivers. not that i care but letting you know. haven't had any problems other than vista not performing as well as xp with either driver.

 

what about the newer 174 or 175 series ones??

 

i don't remember which i tried, but i did try a 174.xx. no go. got random blue screens and wouldn't go into standby.

 

hmm really?? everyone has been telling me those are what i want to use?? the 175's i mean??

 

yea, but 99 percent of those people are looking for performance and/or overclocking. you want stability and nothing but. i wanted exactly that too, my standby to work and powermizer options. i found that in a 169.xx driver. why is it so important to have a 17x.xx driver? the latest and greatest doesn't mean it's the best if it can't meet your standards. some people will put up with a random crash just to get an extra 5 fps, or some fancier textures or bragging rights on high oc's. i've only tried about 10 drivers, and about 5 of them right away would not work because of bsod's/black screens. i saw your other thread about the woman wanting the latest drivers but stability. just use 156.10's or the windows update driver. there's a few 169.xx drivers that are fine too.

 

what about the dell release?? has anyone think those are stable?? just curious??

ill look at the 169's also..

 

i think i read a couple posts about those not working/working well. i don't remember. i just wish vista had better support already. i know it's improved, but graphics performance and drivers are still optimal on xp.

 

see i have not installed any drivers yet so windows update will not install the control panel.. correct??

 

every driver i've tried has installed the panel. i don't see why it wouldn't unless a driver was manufacturer specific and they disabled it.

 

ok .. i thought it would only be the driver. i never let wu install main drivers.

just starting with a clean slate i hate to install a billion drivers looking for a good one

 

yeah i know what you mean. that's why i gave up. it's time consuming and i'm not heavy into pc gaming so the time spent wasn't even really worth the benefits. man, everybody must have went to bed early tonight. i'm definitely not a graphics person. maybe you'll get some better answers tomorrow.

 

174.70 for now. Occasionally I get a standby issue but not always and I haven't figure it out when is that happening and when not. I'm not playing games now so I didn't test any other drivers. And no BSOD, that would make me change the driver.

 

174.xx from somewhere and all 175.xx do have some strange stability problem, the driver brakes after some time in 3D mode and reloads again after 20 seconds or less, sometimes dropping clocks to 2D. This happens on my machine in both XP x86 and Vista amd64.

 

167.59 are the best for me, no driver crash, performance is great with 2D and 3D.
Games are running smooth and my Stanby/Hibernate issue is solved with this.

 

so do the 175 drivers have a hibernate issue??

 

Nope: they work perfectly.

 

174.74 - no problem yet, everything works fine.

 

174.93 The best so far. nice frames with this one.

 

arghh to many of these to play with. if a person really does not care at all about frame rates what drivers should they be using?? for total stability?? she will prob never play many games and if she does she wil lnot care about framerates... thanks

 

167.79 try that one.

 

Just use the ones which come with Windows Update (right now, that would be 167.59).

 

It's always better to use the one coming from the mobo vendor.