My discoveries on Vaio Z’s Hybrid Graphics

[Nautis]

I've just been doing some extensive testing with these drivers (at least for my uses). This is probably going to be a long post, and I'm not sure of the best way to lay it all out, but here goes...

Thanks for the fantastic report Eddy2.

Since you asked, from the writeup I started working on...
More information on the drivers:
The two critical files that allow for everything to work properly with hybrid graphics are “nvtmmhyb.dll” and “nvBridge_int.kmd.” Be sure to note the “_int” at the end of “nvBridge_int.kmd” which stands for “Intel” as this was the key file I originally overlooked. [nvBridge.kmd is not the same as nvBridge_int.kmd!] ..*snip*.. The INF on the other hand is a task in itself, I recommend using a tool like Winmerge to compare the original INF from the Sony drivers with the one from the 185.20 package to see what entries are the same and which are different. You will notice the largest difference is just in identifying and loading any new files correctly. The INF of course also includes the critical settings central to the drivers and video chipsets functioning properly. For this reason and many more I really only recommend this for people who know what they are doing!

With with that said.. I have tried combining some other NVIDIA drivers to make a hybrid set and haven't had much success beyond the 185.20 set. The INF section is a little hard to explain but most of it can be figured out by comparing the differences between the Sony, 185.20 and other NVIDIA drivers. If you need some specific help drop me a line.

[Eddy2]

Thanks Nautis

I was thinking of trying to compare the inf files anyway, with a program I'd used before to compare files, but I don't have that installed on here and it was only a trial version anyway... so WinMerge looks perfect, thanks

I'm a bit stuck now though... in the 179.28 drivers that I linked to, there are 24 inf files! And none of them match either the usual nv_disp.inf or the name of the inf in the Sony drivers. I can't see anything in any of them that says what the difference is, but they all have lots of differences between eachother when comparing in WinMerge. Any ideas how I might be able to figure out which inf I should start with? (I'm guessing nv_disp.inf must be the one used in the desktop display drivers, and isn't here because these are a notebook version?)

I also can't find the actual NVIDIA download for the 185.20 drivers either... notebook or desktop... I was going to try comparing the inf to Sorg's modified one, but the latest version I can find is only 181.22.

Edit: As a side question... what would happen if I simply added the necessary lines (device id, etc) to the inf to allow these drivers to install for this graphics card (although I'd still need to figure out which is the most appropriate inf first)? I know none of the hybrid graphics switching stuff will work at all, but will the NVIDIA card still work? If so, that would be much easier for testing different driver versions before trying to hybrid-ify them, and at the moment I'd rather stop it crashing even if I have to lose access to the Intel graphics for now.

[Stardust]

Thanks Nautis
I also can't find the actual NVIDIA download for the 185.20 drivers either... notebook or desktop... I was going to try comparing the inf to Sorg's modified one, but the latest version I can find is only 181.22.

Try http://www.laptopvideo2go.com, you will find every version of nvidia drivers.

[Vovus]

tried all possible drivers in W7 incluing 174.49 - all drivers has issue with awaking

[ZoinksS2k]

Is CUDA functional with the newer driver sets? Anyone try a video conversion with Baddaboom or TMPGEnc?

If so, is GPU conversion faster than normal CPU operation? The 9300 GS isn't mighty by any means, but if you can offload the processing to the GPU, it should allow you to use the laptop without much impact to normal usage.

On my GTX 295 and the 9800's before it, the CPU only hit about 15% while converting a DVD to iPOD format.

[Metsn]

OK, I got fed up with the choppy performance of original drivers even with older games and installed the latest Sorg's package. So far so good. I was a bit disappointed, when at the end of driver installation dialog box came out with "Windows encountered a problem installing the driver software for your device" and in the Device manager the Nvidia card had yellow mark. But after reboot everything looks fine. What's a bit fishy, after reboot the name of Nvidia card in Device Manager is "NVIDIA GeForce 9300M GS" without Sorg's signature.

Overal performance looks better, Photoshop loads quicker (don't know why)...and while with old drivers the FlatOut game was sometimes choppy, when many things on the screen and many other problems with scenery drawing occured...now it goes flawlessly on the highest settings and resolution.

If you trust the "Windows Experience Index" (I don't), the "Gaming graphic performance" increased from 5,1 to 5,2.

At the side I really like the software switch, as it's not connected with the hardware one so it's like another switch giving me more options of power management

[Lt.Glare]

Question on PhysX. Since the processor on the sony Z seems to be faster than the GPU, wouldn't PhysX load even more instructions onto a GPU that is already running as fast as possible? Wouldn't we WANT the CPU to do the physics in game so that the GPU can render as fast as it can?

Yes, I know, the GPU is great for doing insane amounts of stuff simultaneously, but the only games I have that might take advantage of PhysX would be Garry's mod for half life 2 (lots of independent objects) or MAYBE World of Goo (which is very simplistic anyway). I mean, would PhysX really improve the speed of, say, left 4 dead?

And for that matter, since PhysX is relatively new, wouldn't it only improve on newer games that can barely run on the Z as is?

Or does PhysX use some obscure cluster of transistors on the chip that aren't used unless PhysX support is ready?

[Gibbo]

First point; love the Vaio Z27; best laptop I have had to date and plugging it into our LCD TV to play BD/DVD is great. 1.5kg is pretty cool too!

This isn't a deal breaker, but I am still battling with the issue of my PC remembering different display settings for different sceanrios and I hope that some of the smart folks here may be able to help.

The main issue is that when I undock from work, where I have a dual screen set-up (not clone) and use my PC in stand-alone mode, then re-dock the PC, usually after it either sleeps, hibernates re-starts or variations on all of those power states, it doesn't remember the settings.

The strange piece to this puzzle is that it does intitially get the setting correct wehn I re-dock, with my second screen positioned above the laptop in the dock, but then after a few seconds, it flashes on and off a few times and returns to a basic setup with the second screen to the right of the laptop display.

I guess there is a service running over the top of the screen setting that detects the second monitor and sets it up, even though it is already there and running fine. I have disabled TMM, so it isn't that.

Any ideas (do you need more details; I don't know if I have explained this very well).

Cheers all,
Gibbo

[ZoinksS2k]

Question on PhysX. Since the processor on the sony Z seems to be faster than the GPU, wouldn't PhysX load even more instructions onto a GPU that is already running as fast as possible? Wouldn't we WANT the CPU to do the physics in game so that the GPU can render as fast as it can?

Yes, I know, the GPU is great for doing insane amounts of stuff simultaneously, but the only games I have that might take advantage of PhysX would be Garry's mod for half life 2 (lots of independent objects) or MAYBE World of Goo (which is very simplistic anyway). I mean, would PhysX really improve the speed of, say, left 4 dead?

And for that matter, since PhysX is relatively new, wouldn't it only improve on newer games that can barely run on the Z as is?

Or does PhysX use some obscure cluster of transistors on the chip that aren't used unless PhysX support is ready?

NVIDIA purchased Ageia, the maker of PhysX and the old hardware accellerator boards. They mothballed the hardware and rolled the software into the Forceware drivers.

Yours is close to my question about CUDA. Both CUDA and PhysX take advantage of the GPU's multiple cores and parallel processing power. There isn't any special hardware. The software just allows the GPU to do more than polygon rendering.

I share your interest if it, CUDA or PhysX, is practical on the 9300 GS. I imagine you'd want PhysiX off if you are playing a demanding game. PhysX in practical application adds dynamics to in-game play. Doesn't necessarily make things faster.

There are new PhysX drivers, btw. Haven't installed them on the Z because I'm still on Sony provided drivers.

http://downloads.guru3d.com/NVIDIA-P...load-2164.html

[runee1000]

thanks so much nautis, im really looking forward to the future of the Z. Keep up the great work!