• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

GPU-Z installer broken on Windows Vista since 2.57, NVIDIA driver version detection issue

Joined
Dec 25, 2020
Messages
8,941 (5.38/day)
Location
São Paulo, Brazil
Processor 13th Gen Intel Core i9-13900KS
Motherboard ASUS ROG Maximus Z790 Apex Encore
Cooling Pichau Lunara ARGB 360 + Honeywell PTM7950
Memory 32 GB G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB @ 7600 MT/s
Video Card(s) Palit GameRock OC GeForce RTX 5090 32 GB
Storage 500 GB WD Black SN750 + 4x 300 GB WD VelociRaptor WD3000HLFS HDDs
Display(s) 55-inch LG G3 OLED
Case Cooler Master MasterFrame 700 benchtable
Audio Device(s) EVGA NU Audio + Sony MDR-V7 headphones
Power Supply EVGA 1300 G2 1.3kW 80+ Gold
Mouse Microsoft Classic IntelliMouse
Keyboard IBM Model M type 1391405
Software Windows 10 Pro 22H2
Benchmark Scores I pulled a Qiqi~
Hey @W1zzard, I have a couple of bug reports for GPU-Z, might already be known but anyway, it seems that the last version that can successfully launch the installer on 64-bit Vista is 2.56. Fresh install of Ultimate with SP2, fully updated, all runtimes in order, no path settings messed with.

Did some quick regression testing, 2.57 runs but the installer does not launch, 2.58 has a driver signature issue that you've already fixed and doesn't run at all, 2.59 runs but the installer does not launch either. Earlier versions into the 2.40 and 2.30 releases seem to be ok.

I also have another bug to report, GPU-Z is incorrectly reporting driver versions on older NVIDIA driver branches, with newer drivers you can deduce the release number by reading the last few digits (for example, 31.0.15.5212 is 552.12), but this is not the case with older drivers. For example, I'm running the 309.08 driver on my 2010 Mac mini's 320M, this driver's internal version is 9.18.13.908 and it's being reported as 139.08, presumably due to the last 5 digits. This seems to have been happening for some time.

Capture.PNG


Maybe it's time to consider a Vintage Edition like CPU-Z's for Windows 8.1 and below, since driver support and GPU releases for these OSes are done and there won't be anything new in the future?

Hope you're enjoying Computex! Cheers :lovetpu:
 
Possible solution, don't install it, run in portable mode and manually create shortcuts. Only a thought.

That works indeed, but still worth reporting the feature to install is not working. It just closes without displaying an error :)
 
I'm having trouble getting it to run on Windows 3.1. Maybe I should file a bug report.
 
I'm having trouble getting it to run on Windows 3.1. Maybe I should file a bug report.

I understand the joke, but GPU-Z is still supported on older XP/Vista/7 machines.

Some older computers can't run the latest and greatest OS, at least not with any meaningful degree of usability, this 14 year old Mac is such a system, hence my suggestion of a Vintage Edition to help GPU-Z move forward without the baggage into the new era.
 
So I looked more into it .. InnoSetup stopped supporting Vista (and hasnt supported XP for a long time): https://jrsoftware.org/isdl.php

On XP, the GPU-Z code will already show a "The GPU-Z installer requires Windows Vista or newer", I've adjusted this check to ".. requires Windows 7 and newer"

This will be included in next release
 
Thanks W1zz. I noticed reading that page that the minimum requirement is 7 SP1, that should be noted too, a lot of people seem to insist on running unpatched 7 for whatever reason :kookoo: so probably a good idea to make it say that it requires 7 SP1. Hopefully the driver version readout is an easy fix as well.

Appreciate all the hard work :)
 
I also have another bug to report, GPU-Z is incorrectly reporting driver versions on older NVIDIA driver branches, with newer drivers you can deduce the release number by reading the last few digits (for example, 31.0.15.5212 is 552.12), but this is not the case with older drivers. For example, I'm running the 309.08 driver on my 2010 Mac mini's 320M, this driver's internal version is 9.18.13.908 and it's being reported as 139.08, presumably due to the last 5 digits. This seems to have been happening for some time.
Nice find. This will be fixed in next release
 
Back
Top