Has anyone else noticed after you install the 270.61 driver your Seti times go up by about 25% without downclocking? I was also having issues with getting downclocked and locking up with that driver. I switched back to 267.24 and the problems go away and my times are back to normal. It seems the GTX 480's don't like that driver in Windows 7 64 bit.

---

Has anyone else noticed after you install the 270.61 driver your Seti times go up by about 25% without downclocking? I was also having issues with getting downclocked and locking up with that driver. I switched back to 267.24 and the problems go away and my times are back to normal. It seems the GTX 480's don't like that driver in Windows 7 64 bit.

Yes, my GTX 460 also had such issues. I also run Windows 7 x64. I switched back 266.58 and all is well again.

---

Everyone is seeing the same issue with the 270.xx drivers, downclocking for no reason and only a reboot gets them back up to normal.

I also went back to 266.58 as that is a stable config for me.

---

'Incompatibility of Lunatics CUDA x32f with new 270.61 driver ...'

;-)


- Best regards! - Sutaru Tsureku, team seti.international founder. - Optimize your PC for higher RAC. - SETI@home needs your help. -

---

Well I was going to install them yesterday. Now I'm glad I waited, after seeing some of you having slow downs and down clocks etc with them I think I'll stick with the 266.58's then. Dang.

---

Traveling through space at ~67,000mph!

I'm usually one of the first to explore new versions, mostly beta, but something told me not to do it this time. Seeing that a lot of us are having problems especially with GTX400/500 series cards, I'm glad that I didn't, will stick to 266.58 for now.

I recently bought a second 460 card and windows installed the new driver and I imediately had problems I thought it was my new card but it was the driver that windows update installed.

---

These 270.61 drivers may as well be for water cooling as they seem to push the hardware...

This wasn't my issue. With the aftermarket heat sinks I have on my 2 GTX 480's they don't get above 80C in Seti even with them overclocked.

---

These 270.61 drivers may as well be for water cooling as they seem to push the hardware...

Well now I gotta find out. I've got a water cooled 480, and the suspense of confirm or deny is eating me alive. I've had friends comment that as far as gaming goes they aren't any worse than the 266.58's. So I'm going to throw them on and see what's up on my rig. Be back.

This wasn't my issue. With the aftermarket heat sinks I have on my 2 GTX 480's they don't get above 80C in Seti even with them overclocked.

Mine doesn't get above 48-50 under water with 26.5c ambient temps. Most of the time lower but the days are getting a bit hot here.

*Edit*
Well it must only be on the 295 hardware that it's pushing it, I am seeing about a 4C increase in temps though?! I am however not seeing any downclocking at all, and my completion times have only changed by a few seconds to the shorter. Before I installed on was saying 19 minutes to complete now it's dropped to 18 minutes 39 seconds. Any little bit helps though I suppose! Far as I'm concerned like most things I've heard about these drivers they are certainly no worse but not hugely better than the 266.58's on my end.

---

Traveling through space at ~67,000mph!

Well it also seems that the 270.61 drivers show my 480's to have a different amount of ram then it should. They were showing 1472MB ram where they actually have 1503MB. The other drivers show the correct amount of ram though.

---

Well it also seems that the 270.61 drivers show my 480's to have a different amount of ram then it should. They were showing 1472MB ram where they actually have 1503MB. The other drivers show the correct amount of ram though.

I think that may be an issue with how BOINC polls the system, or how the driver is reporting it? I had an older version of GPUz that after going to these drivers wouldn't pull the correct amount of memory. After updating that has went away. It's not really an issue I don't think. Mine have been running for the past day or two and everything seems fine on this end, times are still just as fast as they were, no down clocking, trashed work units, computer crashes, and temps have returned to the normal threshold they were at before. Still looking like good drivers on my end, though I still may end up dumping them because I'm not too wild about the "update" manager you can't get rid of and I do have one game that acts weird after awhile and it didn't happen before these drivers.

Overall they seem ok, but they aren't perfect. Going to be rolling back to either the 270.51's or the 266.58's those have seemed to be the most trouble free in everything for me. Just as a side note there are people at f@h who are also reporting issues.

---

Traveling through space at ~67,000mph!

While on these drivers ....

I run a couple of NV PCI 9500GTs with 258.96 as the driver.

Is ther likely to be a problem with these legacy GPUs if I was to move to 270.61?

---

It's good to be back amongst friends and colleagues

Well it also seems that the 270.61 drivers show my 480's to have a different amount of ram then it should. They were showing 1472MB ram where they actually have 1503MB. The other drivers show the correct amount of ram though.

I think that may be an issue with how BOINC polls the system, or how the driver is reporting it? I had an older version of GPUz that after going to these drivers wouldn't pull the correct amount of memory. After updating that has went away. It's not really an issue I don't think. Mine have been running for the past day or two and everything seems fine on this end, times are still just as fast as they were, no down clocking, trashed work units, computer crashes, and temps have returned to the normal threshold they were at before. Still looking like good drivers on my end, though I still may end up dumping them because I'm not too wild about the "update" manager you can't get rid of and I do have one game that acts weird after awhile and it didn't happen before these drivers.

Overall they seem ok, but they aren't perfect. Going to be rolling back to either the 270.51's or the 266.58's those have seemed to be the most trouble free in everything for me. Just as a side note there are people at f@h who are also reporting issues.

Actually I wasn't looking at how Boinc read the ram, I was looking at the EVGA tool. If you look on the Nvidia website there is a lot of talk about the issues with the 270.51 and 270.61.

---

Actually I wasn't looking at how Boinc read the ram, I was looking at the EVGA tool. If you look on the Nvidia website there is a lot of talk about the issues with the 270.51 and 270.61.

If you have rolled to SP1 on windows7 it could also be an issue with that, precision crashes one of my machines totally and the other it's fine on, go figure both were updated the same way to SP1. I got one machine they are fine on that hasn't been put into SP1, the other which is SP1, Gaming, and Boinc has caused me some issues, but the memory was reporting correctly in everything now.

With that being said my machine experienced a graphics driver crash when I exited Boinc earlier and quit crunching. Then the machine locked up. Rolled back to 270.51 to see how it does, all else fails there is always 267.24 and 266.58's to roll back to which were trouble free the entire time I used them.

As far as looking at the Nvidia website about issues, there is always issue with every driver they release with a group of vocal people there. The 'beloved' 266.58's in the community, had a lot of people complaining about how bad they were and how awful they are, suppose it's the bain of the computer industry and the mish mosh of hardware and environments there are, each to his own my final determination is these are not good on this computer, but have worked perfect on the other. But there is hardware and environment differences, major ones lol.

---

Traveling through space at ~67,000mph!

Throw me into the down clocking group gtx580.

---

Right after I loaded the 270.61 drivers and rebooted, I got a slight downclock. After verifying the downclock in CPU-Z, the clocks went back to normal and they have stayed that way through multiple reboots and poweroffs. So something must have straightened itself out eventually. No real observed changes in times or temperatures on my dual GTX460's.

Keith

---

Seti@Home classic workunits:20,676 CPU time:74,226 hours

A proud member of the OFA (Old Farts Association)

Vista 32bit GT240: should I go for it?

Vista 32bit GT240: should I go for it?

I don't think the issue showed up in the 200 series cards.

---

Decided to try 270.61 on my (i7/950 SP1, EVGA GTX460SE) machine and had to back out to 266.58. GPU tasks went from approx 15 - 30+ min per task. GPU memory went from 993Mb to 958, even though EVGA Precision & CPU-Z is reporting correctly as 1 Gb. Not acceptable even after several machine recycles. Don't even want to think what it would to with my slower (Q6600, EVGA GTX275/GTS250) machine.

By selecting a clean install, the new install manager came in handy as it accomplished everything in one swipe. Un-installed the old software, recycled the machine and automatically picked up where it left off. Always had a problem with upgrading the video drivers in-place prior to the new installer package, so I always did a complete manual un-install, recycle, install. Time consuming, but it worked without screwing everything up.

I do have some idea as to where the files should go in the projects folder. But I don't know what I did wrong, If I did anything wrong at all that is.

Hi Victor,
Only a couple of things. Firstly Cuda 4.0 hasn't reached final release status, but is only in release candidate 2, and appears to have several issues on Windows (one being that it seems to be slower). No doubts many of those will be resolved prior to release (hopefully all :) )

Secondly, the old trick of swapping DLLs (as with 2.2->2.3) to upgrade has been discouraged by nVidia since Cuda 3.0, because they now only guarantee compatibility of application & DLLs corresponding to the relvant SDK it was built with. They call that being now 'strongly versioned'. That's because as new hardware comes out, features are being added that change some semantics and fucntionality in the language itself, so the DLL interface changes too.

If it's a matter of thinking 4.0 must be faster, well I can tell you that so far it isn't. It's primarily to add new programming features for multi card evironments, and speedups will probably come down the line in a newer version.

Jason

---

"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.