Besides the ATI driver list I have been keeping. I recently put together one for Nvidia drivers. The NV list needs lots of information filled in at the moment, but if it is useful then I'll populate it as I gain information. Something like the current NV list might be needed for Intel GPU drivers at this point as well.
ATI Driver Version Cheat Sheet
Nvidia Driver Version Cheat Sheet

---

SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[

The Einstein@Home project found it necessary to block out a range of drivers between 290.53 and somewhere around 301.xx

That takes us back over three years, and Einstein's search tool only takes us back one year. The only certified (WHQL) driver I can find that would be excluded is 296.10 dated 13 March 2012.

There were a total of three 295.xx and 296.xx drivers that had the Nvidia missing GPU when monitor goes to sleep Bug, from my driver stash:

295.51-desktop-win7-winvista-64bit-international-beta.exe

295.73-desktop-win7-winvista-64bit-international-whql.exe

296.10-desktop-win7-winvista-64bit-international-whql.exe

Edit: The Bug isn't apparent when connected via a VGA connection,

Claggy

I don't recall having any issues with 500 or 700 series in terms of bad S@h results or anything like that. Outside of the known 100% CPU usage issue. I suppose you'll want more solid information than that for your reference page, though.

Thanks for maintaining the ATI/AMD one for all this time, I've found it useful on occasions, since it got confusing with all the various version numbers they used (Catalyst, CAL, OpenCL, etc).

---

Soli Deo Gloria

Something comes to mind that could be mentioned, is the drivers that sometimes ship on CD in the box are generally GPU model specific, and sometimes a bit dicey. Not much option sometimes if it's a brand new model released yesterday, but the mainstream downloads that quickly follow are usually much better.

---

"Living by the wisdom of computer science doesn't sound so bad after all. And unlike most advice, it's backed up by proofs." -- Algorithms to live by: The computer science of human decisions.

There were a total of three 295.xx and 296.xx drivers that had the Nvidia missing GPU when monitor goes to sleep Bug, from my driver stash:

295.51-desktop-win7-winvista-64bit-international-beta.exe

295.73-desktop-win7-winvista-64bit-international-whql.exe

296.10-desktop-win7-winvista-64bit-international-whql.exe

Edit: The Bug isn't apparent when connected via a VGA connection,

Claggy

I added all the drivers that are currently available to download from the Nvidia website. I could cut the list down to start with the 3xx.xx drivers if that makes sense to that. Perhaps it should start the oldest working driver for the OpenCL AP app? I'm unsure what that might be off the top of my head. It may be in one of the app readmes from the lunatics installer. However from suggestions in the @Pre-FERMI nVidia GPU users: Important warning 266.xx drivers were being suggested.
I only have a 8500 GT to muck around with & I have been running 306.23 on it probably since 2012. Which may not be the most ideal driver, but it isn't any more than any previous driver I used. Then again I haven't tried to run AP on that card either.

---

SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[

Besides the ATI driver list I have been keeping. I recently put together one for Nvidia drivers. The NV list needs lots of information filled in at the moment, but if it is useful then I'll populate it as I gain information. Something like the current NV list might be needed for Intel GPU drivers at this point as well.
ATI Driver Version Cheat Sheet
Nvidia Driver Version Cheat Sheet

On your XP version list, you have all drivers listed as "card not supported" for 600, 700, 900 series cards. My XP box has been running a GT 630 on 335.28 for, well about a year now, according to the release date you list for that driver. It has *not* been returning errors.

---

David
Sitting on my butt while others boldly go,
Waiting for a message from a small furry creature from Alpha Centauri.

I noticed last week that Windows Update said there was a new driver for the 440 on my i7 box. Of course, I didn't let Windows install it, but I wondered if I should get it myself.

---

David
Sitting on my butt while others boldly go,
Waiting for a message from a small furry creature from Alpha Centauri.

Besides the ATI driver list I have been keeping. I recently put together one for Nvidia drivers. The NV list needs lots of information filled in at the moment, but if it is useful then I'll populate it as I gain information. Something like the current NV list might be needed for Intel GPU drivers at this point as well.
ATI Driver Version Cheat Sheet
Nvidia Driver Version Cheat Sheet

On your XP version list, you have all drivers listed as "card not supported" for 600, 700, 900 series cards. My XP box has been running a GT 630 on 335.28 for, well about a year now, according to the release date you list for that driver. It has *not* been returning errors.

I was using http://www.nvidia.com/Download/Find.aspx & it looks like for the 600 & 700 series leaving Product: at the default value for XP was my problem. I had changed it to a few different ones when I first started & everything was showing the same. So I figured they would all be like that. Looks like I would need to have a 2nd look.

---

SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[

Looks like I would need to have a 2nd look.

Yes, it is known, e.g. by "Computers belonging to Richard Haselgrove":
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/hosts_user.php?userid=5509

... that GeForce GTX 750 Ti is supported on Windows XP
The NVIDIA page lists ~15 drivers from 335.04 to 347.88

Richard uses 335.28 (obviously successfully) but if he tried other versions I don't know (or remember)

Maybe easier is to look in 'SUPPORTED PRODUCTS' tab of a driver page:
http://www.nvidia.com/download/driverResults.aspx/74421/en-us

In some fields of your table you may need 'fuzzy' words like Most/Some/Few or some ~% of supported GPUs

---

 


- ALF - "Find out what you don't do well ..... then don't do it!" :)
 

IIRC, I installed with the supplied day 0 driver from CD, then updated to the then-current WHQL downloadable driver. But on those mainly BOINC-only machines, I haven't bothered to chase the dragon with each new release.

There is one drawback: at GPUGrid, that driver is restricted to cuda60, whereas my GTX 670 is running cuda65, which is the project's preferred version. I'll check the state of play, and maybe try an upgrade, when I get home.

Looks like I would need to have a 2nd look.

Yes, it is known, e.g. by "Computers belonging to Richard Haselgrove":
http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/hosts_user.php?userid=5509

... that GeForce GTX 750 Ti is supported on Windows XP
The NVIDIA page lists ~15 drivers from 335.04 to 347.88

Richard uses 335.28 (obviously successfully) but if he tried other versions I don't know (or remember)

Maybe easier is to look in 'SUPPORTED PRODUCTS' tab of a driver page:
http://www.nvidia.com/download/driverResults.aspx/74421/en-us

In some fields of your table you may need 'fuzzy' words like Most/Some/Few or some ~% of supported GPUs

It does looks like it is a bit more complicated than I first thought.
The main objective is to source out which driver(s) are a ones we don't think should be used for the project. Which may mean there should be an indication of CUDA: OK & Open CL: NG.

Is there even an issue with Fermi & newer generation NV GPUs & driver combo nations at this point? Should this chart be focused only on Pre-Fermi GPUs?

---

SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours
Join the [url=http://tinyurl.com/8y46zvu]BP6/VP6 User Group[

I've upgraded two of the Windows XP / GTX 750Ti computers to driver version 347.88

All seemed to go smoothly, with possibly even a slight speed increase (MB tasks), but I haven't got enough validations through to have total confidence yet.

(I've also triggered bloody David's absurd runtime estimation initial conditions for the new app_version at GPUGrid. That's going to take over a week to sort out)

On the other hand, 347.88 on a Win 8.1 / GTX 970 machine that isn't faring nearly as well: http://=http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/results.php?hostid=7451897.

---

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/show_host_detail.php?hostid=7451897

http://setiathome.berkeley.edu/results.php?hostid=7451897&offset=0&show_names=0&state=5&appid=

Simple - he installed Cuda 3.20 app
Which means he ("Simone[E.R.]") just click [Next] in Lunatics_Win64_v0.43a_setup using the default selection/choice

He should use CUDA 5.0 app

---

 


- ALF - "Find out what you don't do well ..... then don't do it!" :)