Drivers Video nVIDIA GeForce Drivers for Windows 9x/Me

nVIDIA GeForce Drivers for Windows 9x/Me 81.98 for Windows

by NVIDIA Corp.

Avg. Rating 3.4 (75 votes)

File Details

File Size 11.6 MB
License Freeware
Operating System Windows 9x/Me
Date Added
Total Downloads 55,792
Publisher NVIDIA Corp.
Homepage nVIDIA GeForce Drivers
Other Versions

Publisher's Description

Recommended driver for Nvidia cards. It is Microsoft WHQL-certified and will also be available for download via Windows Update.

Latest Reviews

sam13484

sam13484 reviewed v77.72 WHQL Official on Dec 22, 2005

These drivers that are found on the nVidia download page have not changed for some time. However, if you go to the FTP site:

ftp://download.nvidia.com/Windows/81.98

You will see that there are 81.98 drivers for Windows 9X machines!

Jeffsoft

Jeffsoft reviewed v45.23 Official on Aug 14, 2003

finally an excellant one!

unger71

unger71 reviewed v41.09 on Jan 2, 2003

my old agfa scanner 1212p(newest driver) from 2001 doesn't work with 40** and 4109 (2942 does)

eviljolly

eviljolly reviewed v40.72 on Nov 11, 2002

Don't get me wrong, these drivers are still on the cutting edge of technology, but I saw a small loss of performance on my 3Dmark benchmarks. Not much, but not a 25% gain as claimed either. Perhaps they are making this claim based on benchmarks against the standard OEM drivers that came with the card because I could definitely see a 25% improvement there. These drivers are worthy of a 5 star rating as far as their overall quality, but they are not a necessary upgrade. The largest improvement I have seen over my previous 29.42 drivers would be the user interface in the configuration page of the display properties. Overall a good driver, but I would have waited longer before bothering to release it.

Tux0Racer

Tux0Racer reviewed v40.72 on Nov 10, 2002

Is it just me, or do they claim "Up to 25% preformance increase" in *every* release? Hell if that's true by now the cards are 10-20 faster then they were when they were first released, just due to the drivers.

seany187

seany187 reviewed v40.72 on Nov 10, 2002

over all, they are very nice drivers, I like the new control panel a lot, lots of new features there. One problem. Lord of the rings, now has a garbled screen, other then that, everything is excellent.

cupnoodle

cupnoodle reviewed v40.72 on Nov 9, 2002

just another .01 update that claims to be faster
personally i dont get higher fps in anything
everything appears to run the same speed

Mr Crisp

Mr Crisp reviewed v28.32 Official on Apr 9, 2002

I own a Geforce3 Ti card, and found no real improvement in framerates using XP drivers.
Some apps and games hate the drivers, and Counterstrike flickers bad in 1024x768 mode even tho the refresh rate is set to 100hz, some reason the XP drivers lag to, being a GF3 owner with a 21" monitor, i should be able to run 1600x1200 mode, no probs, but alas, the Detonator XP drivers usually crash at anything above 1024x768!
Pap! I hate these new all-in-one drivers!

stalinhb

stalinhb reviewed v28.32 Official on Mar 30, 2002

Sorry!
I meant Detonator XP 23.11 instead of 11.23....Sorry!

OddFox

OddFox reviewed v28.32 Official on Mar 21, 2002

Disregard my previous comments on past reviews, I didn't notice that they were for previous versions (even the topmost reviews, figured at least SOMEONE would have reviewed so far). My bad, kinda tired, I guess.

Avg. Rating 3.4 (75 votes)
Your Rating
sam13484

sam13484 reviewed v77.72 WHQL Official on Dec 22, 2005

These drivers that are found on the nVidia download page have not changed for some time. However, if you go to the FTP site:

ftp://download.nvidia.com/Windows/81.98

You will see that there are 81.98 drivers for Windows 9X machines!

Jeffsoft

Jeffsoft reviewed v45.23 Official on Aug 14, 2003

finally an excellant one!

unger71

unger71 reviewed v41.09 on Jan 2, 2003

my old agfa scanner 1212p(newest driver) from 2001 doesn't work with 40** and 4109 (2942 does)

eviljolly

eviljolly reviewed v40.72 on Nov 11, 2002

Don't get me wrong, these drivers are still on the cutting edge of technology, but I saw a small loss of performance on my 3Dmark benchmarks. Not much, but not a 25% gain as claimed either. Perhaps they are making this claim based on benchmarks against the standard OEM drivers that came with the card because I could definitely see a 25% improvement there. These drivers are worthy of a 5 star rating as far as their overall quality, but they are not a necessary upgrade. The largest improvement I have seen over my previous 29.42 drivers would be the user interface in the configuration page of the display properties. Overall a good driver, but I would have waited longer before bothering to release it.

Tux0Racer

Tux0Racer reviewed v40.72 on Nov 10, 2002

Is it just me, or do they claim "Up to 25% preformance increase" in *every* release? Hell if that's true by now the cards are 10-20 faster then they were when they were first released, just due to the drivers.

seany187

seany187 reviewed v40.72 on Nov 10, 2002

over all, they are very nice drivers, I like the new control panel a lot, lots of new features there. One problem. Lord of the rings, now has a garbled screen, other then that, everything is excellent.

cupnoodle

cupnoodle reviewed v40.72 on Nov 9, 2002

just another .01 update that claims to be faster
personally i dont get higher fps in anything
everything appears to run the same speed

Mr Crisp

Mr Crisp reviewed v28.32 Official on Apr 9, 2002

I own a Geforce3 Ti card, and found no real improvement in framerates using XP drivers.
Some apps and games hate the drivers, and Counterstrike flickers bad in 1024x768 mode even tho the refresh rate is set to 100hz, some reason the XP drivers lag to, being a GF3 owner with a 21" monitor, i should be able to run 1600x1200 mode, no probs, but alas, the Detonator XP drivers usually crash at anything above 1024x768!
Pap! I hate these new all-in-one drivers!

stalinhb

stalinhb reviewed v28.32 Official on Mar 30, 2002

Sorry!
I meant Detonator XP 23.11 instead of 11.23....Sorry!

OddFox

OddFox reviewed v28.32 Official on Mar 21, 2002

Disregard my previous comments on past reviews, I didn't notice that they were for previous versions (even the topmost reviews, figured at least SOMEONE would have reviewed so far). My bad, kinda tired, I guess.

BillyBoy666

BillyBoy666 reviewed v21.85 on Oct 16, 2001

You will not get any performance increase out of any of the new nVidia DetonatorXP drivers unless you are using WindowsXP or have a GeForce3.

Unfortunately, I have neihther of these :(

ditoa

ditoa reviewed v21.85 on Oct 16, 2001

yup are you right, if they do make a final release because ICQ aint open source they would technically have to charge, i think! AOL would make them anyways! so keeping it in BETA is just a way of saying it is finished but still has minor updates etc, just like WinAmp. at least i think this is right, i could be wrong tho! ICQ is crap now anyways, download an older version from icq-4u.com or something and use the 99b versions they are the best, SMS was great but is now capped :(

espectro

espectro reviewed v21.85 on Oct 16, 2001

You realize they call the final software "beta" just because if Icq goes non-beta then they will start charging for the software? Says so on the webpage... So what i am trying to say, is that, on Icq, beta is final and alpha is beta
Anyway, you can kill the banners, and icq is still good piece of software then. But the principle of IM software is dying, back in the old days all you could do was type messages and send files, but now everyone wants to support phone calls, videoconferencing and lots of other crap most people dont need chewing off their pc's ram. I guess that's why purists like icq99 or 98, and why the old 3.6 messenger it's still there. Now with msn 4.5 coming, prepare to get some more ram chewed

snol

snol reviewed v21.85 on Oct 16, 2001

yeah, why are they messing with 2000b when they really ought to go all the way back to 99b...?

FunkyFred

FunkyFred reviewed v21.85 on Oct 16, 2001

Clide Frog, considering all versions of ICQ have either been alpha or beta, your statement isnt very accurate.

Why are they still messing with 2000b though?!

© 1998-2019 BetaNews, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy.