Tuesday, August 12th 2008

NVIDIA Releases 177.83 Forceware, Offers Powerpacks

Strategically timed, NVIDIA released a new Forceware driver package, version 177.83 Forceware. This package weighing nearly 120 MB packs the PhysX API runtime, and brings about a host of changes. With this release, NVIDIA devised what is known as a "Powerpack" approach to deliver software and promote sales of its products. NVIDIA is giving away several goodies for free that are exclusive to users of the GeForce accelerators, most of them being exclusive demos of games such as Nurein, Metal Knight Zero. Warmonger, the full game is given away as a free download. Other parts of this pack includes the GeForce Folding @ Home client, a 30-day fully functional trial of the Badaboom Video Transcoding software and Unreal Tournament 3 PhysX mod. Two technology demos are also included. Users can customise on what should download, in essence make their own Powerpacks from what's available, following which depending on the web-browser used, the page launches an ActiveX or Java based download manager to deliver the software.

The NVIDIA Powerpack web page can be reached here.
Add your own comment

80 Comments on NVIDIA Releases 177.83 Forceware, Offers Powerpacks

#1
ShadowFold
newtekie1 said:
Yes, that should be supported, though I haven't tested it myself yet.
What about drivers? It doesn't make sense to me yet but I hope you can!
Posted on Reply
#2
Unregistered
ShadowFold said:
What about drivers? It doesn't make sense to me yet but I hope you can!
nope it cant be done , unless physx is supported on ATI .

When that happens physX will be installed regardless of Nvidia drivers. Right now PhysX has to be accessed through Nvidia Control panel which means installing nvidia drivers.
Posted on Edit | Reply
#3
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
Well, if you have a 8400GS, the Forceware will install for it, as also the PhysX driver, it will crunch physx.

Just as you could have a ATI gfx card and use a Ageia PhysX card, you can have a ATI gfx card, with a cheap NVidia card that just the same.
Posted on Reply
#4
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
ShadowFold said:
What about drivers? It doesn't make sense to me yet but I hope you can!
You have to install the nVidia Graphics and PhysX drivers along side the ATi Graphics drivers. Back in the old days, this would cause a problem because the drivers didn't get along, but now it rarely causes an issue.

btarunr said:
I'm trying this:

My mobo lacks two long (x16) slots. So I'm buying a 8400GS, creating a notch after the bars of the first PCI-E lane on the card's PCI-E interface, so as to fit it into a PCI-E x1 slot. 250 MB/s looks enough bandwidth for a GPU that's just crunching PhysX and handling the second display head, since PhysX cards used PCI at one point.
Wouldn't it be better to just cut out the back of the PCI-E slot on the motherboard? I know people used to do that to their PCI-E x4 slots to allow second graphics cards.

Edit: Here is some information on the mod: http://whirlpool.net.au/wiki/?tag=Dell_SC430_42
Posted on Reply
#5
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
newtekie1 said:
You have to install the nVidia Graphics and PhysX drivers along side the ATi Graphics drivers. Back in the old days, this would cause a problem because the drivers didn't get along, but now it rarely causes an issue.



Wouldn't it be better to just cut out the back of the PCI-E slot on the motherboard? I know people used to do that to their PCI-E x4 slots to allow second graphics cards.

Edit: Here is some information on the mod: http://whirlpool.net.au/wiki/?tag=Dell_SC430_42
I know, but the plastic is too thin. if a small part sticks in (inside the slot cavity) during cutting, it will be a pain to keep the whole board under a watch-glass and use syringe needles to clear it, (the contact points are finer (delicate) than PCI or EISA for that matter (EISA's contacts were thick as those of the NES cartridge slot lol) With the card, I can just hold and cut it. I need to count the number of bars precisely and using a red felt tip pen mark the bar from where the notch can be cut.
Posted on Reply
#6
CDdude55
Crazy 4 TPU!!!
I have the drivers and they run fine. I still have yet to try them in any games.

I am currently downloading the rest of the pack.
Posted on Reply
#7
Unregistered
Read This

This needs to be put up in the first post to clear people's questions .
Posted on Edit | Reply
#8
CDdude55
Crazy 4 TPU!!!
wolf2009 said:
Read This

This needs to be put up in the first post to clear people's questions .
Got some more questions tho:

Do i need to enable the Physx to work with my card? If so, where do i go to enable it?

Also should i run is standard mode? I have a 8600 GTS so i guess that not a lot of horsepower, so should i go with multi GPU?
Posted on Reply
#9
CDdude55
Crazy 4 TPU!!!
Ok, so i found the ''Physx properties'' and it is enabled to ''Gerforce Physx'' so my guess is that i am fine.
Posted on Reply
#10
ShadowFold
Yea. If you get a 9800GTX or GTX 260 you can keep your 8600 and use it as a physx card too :)
Posted on Reply
#11
hat
Enthusiast
warmonger for free huh? doesn't get aby better than that
Posted on Reply
#12
Tatty_One
Senior Moderator
btarunr said:
I'm trying this:

My mobo lacks two long (x16) slots. So I'm buying a 8400GS, creating a notch after the bars of the first PCI-E lane on the card's PCI-E interface, so as to fit it into a PCI-E x1 slot. 250 MB/s looks enough bandwidth for a GPU that's just crunching PhysX and handling the second display head, since PhysX cards used PCI at one point.
2nd display head? are you talking you need to hook up the PX card to a monitor also...cause if you are.....you dont need to in XP, only Visita.
Posted on Reply
#13
ShadowFold
I should have a 8400GS soon so I will test out the Radeon 4850 for graphics(the way its supost to be played ;)) and nVidia PhysX 8400GS :D
Posted on Reply
#14
chron
Would there be any benefit from using an 8800gt as a physX card over something like an 8400gs? What I mean is, either it can or it can't right? There's no difference in performance from processing power is there?
Posted on Reply
#15
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
Tatty_One said:
2nd display head? are you talking you need to hook up the PX card to a monitor also...cause if you are.....you dont need to in XP, only Visita.
You don't need one. Extend your desktop at a software level (even without a display connected) and you're good to go.
Posted on Reply
#16
ShadowFold
You would think a 8400GS is enough for PhysX. I understand how it works and its really not that bad. The Ageia physx cards were about as powerful as a 7200GS!
Posted on Reply
#17
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
ShadowFold said:
You would think a 8400GS is enough for PhysX. I understand how it works and its really not that bad. The Ageia physx cards were about as powerful as a 7200GS!
lol, I can't run a 7200 GS (if there is one), PhysX driver needs 8-series or above. The bare minimum discrete that I can get is 8400GS.

I think you have a point. There will be a rise in sales of motherboards with GeForce 8200. People will use a decent primary card on the slot, the IGP does physx. Intel and AMD IGPs could be in for trouble.
Posted on Reply
#18
alexp999
Staff
ShadowFold said:
You would think a 8400GS is enough for PhysX. I understand how it works and its really not that bad. The Ageia physx cards were about as powerful as a 7200GS!
We're having a discussion in the the Phyx crazy thread.

Trying to work out if having an 8400GS for Physx will improve anything for people with a GTX200 series card. Something about built in CUDA...? :confused:
Posted on Reply
#19
Unregistered
ShadowFold said:
You would think a 8400GS is enough for PhysX. I understand how it works and its really not that bad. The Ageia physx cards were about as powerful as a 7200GS!
How can you say that ?
Posted on Edit | Reply
#20
Tatty_One
Senior Moderator
alexp999 said:
We're having a discussion in the the Phyx crazy thread.

Trying to work out if having an 8400GS for Physx will improve anything for people with a GTX200 series card. Something about built in CUDA...? :confused:
Good point, I have been doing some reading on this subject and I think not TBH, I dont know for sure though.
Posted on Reply
#21
Tatty_One
Senior Moderator
wolf2009 said:
How can you say that ?
They were pretty weak in comparison to a dedicated GPU, slow processor, 128mb on board memory that was only GDDR2 on a 128bit bus I beleive.....could even have been a 64 bit bus :eek:
Posted on Reply
#22
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
wolf2009 said:
How can you say that ?
When Ageia was still Ageia and fresh out with a physics card (something new), both NVIDIA and ATI (yes, ATI was just ATI) were alarmed and saw opportunity. Both made tall announcements on GPU physics, With 8800 GTX and GTS (the first 8 series cards), initial specs carried a spec that read "Featuring NVIDIA Quantum Physics Technology!", that's what NV called its technology, while ATI worked it out, they showed their RDX series chipset based motherboard designs to come with three PCI-E x16 slots (x8, x8, the last doing x1), where they talked about configs with 2x X1900 XTX (XTX + CF Edition) and X1300 doing physics.

It was believed then that a GPU the level of Radeon X1300 could surpass the math crunching ability of the PhysX PPU.
Posted on Reply
#23
ntdouglas
btarunr said:
You don't need one. Extend your desktop at a software level (even without a display connected) and you're good to go.
btarunr, what do you mean extend the desktop at a software level?
Posted on Reply
#24
OnBoard
Dang, 2.7GB full download. Good that server is fast, already have warmonger downloaded and don't need UT3 mod, but still 1.8gigs for a "display driver" :D

edit: my Warmonger is 437MB and the one in nvidia page is 445MB. Says it's v2.1, maybe it's never then. Probably just NVIDIA PhysX stuff added, as the smaller version is everywhere else.
Posted on Reply
#25
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
ntdouglas said:
btarunr, what do you mean extend the desktop at a software level?
Even without a monitor connected to your second card, the "Extend desktop" option is available with Display Properties. Check that and you force your OS to believe there's another display head to send output to.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment