agent_x007 wrote on 2026-11-05, 01:19:

You mean this :
Firmware 32-bit : LINK ?

What it does (my guess) : Updates card's vBIOS configuration for DP ports, to match 1.3/1.4 standard settings (since those weren't finalized when older cards were made).

I found this version, it's older 1.0 while 64-bit is 1.1. If it would just change something in videobios why wouldn't they release it as classic bios update for nvflash? But it would require adopting by card manufactuters so maybe they patched some block of vbios that is the same for all manufacturers (some blob that came with nvidia reference vbios)...

SupraGSX wrote on 2026-11-05, 10:06:

myne wrote on 2026-11-05, 07:55:

So... I'm a little bit wondering if you might be approaching this a bit backwards. […]
Show full quote

So... I'm a little bit wondering if you might be approaching this a bit backwards.

You're modding an existing XP driver to suit new cards. 368.81

Have you considered modding a win10-32 driver back to xp?
391.35 | Windows 10 32-bit
https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/drivers/details/132839/

Yeah I considered it but you absolutely would not want to do that. wddm vs xddm is first obvious reason. Stability is next thing. Just porting the gpu you're not changing any of the os facing components, so all the tweaks and bug fixes Nvidia included through 15 years of xp driver development are in 368.81. With GPU only port it's more finite, there's clear things to get right and you can reference working drivers behavior. You also have to realize there's no source code to reference this is all binary patching.

Fair enough.
Does make me wonder if XDDM could be backported, though with only effectively a couple of years of driver support for x32, it hardly seems worth the headaches.
I'm assuming a 64bit backport complicates things even more.

myne wrote on 2026-11-06, 01:12:

Fair enough. Does make me wonder if XDDM could be backported, though with only effectively a couple of years of driver support […]
Show full quote

SupraGSX wrote on 2026-11-05, 10:06:

myne wrote on 2026-11-05, 07:55:

So... I'm a little bit wondering if you might be approaching this a bit backwards. […]
Show full quote

So... I'm a little bit wondering if you might be approaching this a bit backwards.

You're modding an existing XP driver to suit new cards. 368.81

Have you considered modding a win10-32 driver back to xp?
391.35 | Windows 10 32-bit
https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/drivers/details/132839/

Yeah I considered it but you absolutely would not want to do that. wddm vs xddm is first obvious reason. Stability is next thing. Just porting the gpu you're not changing any of the os facing components, so all the tweaks and bug fixes Nvidia included through 15 years of xp driver development are in 368.81. With GPU only port it's more finite, there's clear things to get right and you can reference working drivers behavior. You also have to realize there's no source code to reference this is all binary patching.

Fair enough.
Does make me wonder if XDDM could be backported, though with only effectively a couple of years of driver support for x32, it hardly seems worth the headaches.
I'm assuming a 64bit backport complicates things even more.

Perhaps this might be something you could look into ? you seem to be fairly interested in whether it can be done or not.

I feel that even if it did work you may run into some of the very same issues that plagued Vista.

I don't have a 10 anymore.

Curiosity/interest != commitment, dedication, or time

myne wrote on 2026-11-06, 02:11:

I don't have a 10 anymore.

Curiosity/interest != commitment, dedication, or time

Ahh I see.

I tried to install the modded Forceware-382.69-382.69 driver on my XP-SP3, GTX 970 and just got a BSOD on next boot.
I had to revert the NV4_MINI.SYS to previous version to boot again...

RayeR wrote on 2026-11-06, 20:41:

I tried to install the modded Forceware-382.69-382.69 driver on my XP-SP3, GTX 970 and just got a BSOD on next boot.
I had to revert the NV4_MINI.SYS to previous version to boot again...

https://github.com/SupraGSX/Forceware-382.69/ … 2.69-2026-11-01.

Use that version and when installing select custom install clean install. If issue persists open a GitHub issue it's easier to track that way.

Thanks,

I already had DL this version. I tried again with clean install, only driver and nview selected, but BSOD problem still persist.

RayeR,
Explain what you're trying to do to chatgpt, have it write prompt for codex work, then have codex write something to collect your logs and crash dump, put it on a usb, run it on your xp computer, then put the usb in your main computer, and have codex analyze the logs and crash dump and the driver itself. Then have codex start troubleshooting. It will work. It might take over a dozen times, but eventually codex will figure it out. You don't have to wait for SupraGSX to figure out your problem. You can solve it with Codex.

It's 2026. We live in a different world now.

Yeah please don't do that. I'll look into seeing if I can replicate the issue.

I'm glad you got the p2200 working but if you don't share any of it it's pointless. The goal I hope we all work for is one really good stable driver for the community.

My onedrive is having issues.

I got 4k 120hz working on my Asus monitor, and I've been working on getting 5120x1440 @ 120hz on my G95SC, but I'm currently thinking that these fixes will not carry over to other monitors.

I'm investigating to see if I can get something to work that would work on every 1440 ultrawide or 4k monitor.

Current 382.69 driver already included hbr3/HDMI 2.0b resolutions. Not sure what you mean? I guess you didn't use it as base for your driver mod which highlight my above statement. Alot of repeat work instead of iterating together.

https://github.com/RedCharles9001/P2200-XP-Driver

I started with 382.69, and it didn't work at 4k 120hz or 5120x1440 at 120hz. These were the errors:

ASUS 4K120: The old driver’s parser skipped CTA video codes above 34, including the ASUS monitor’s 4K120 code, 118. The driver had the code but skipped it.

Samsung 5120 × 1440 at 120 Hz: The monitor declared three EDID blocks, but the XP driver’s internal capture contained only the first two.

Codex fixed both of them after a few tries, but if you had it set up to do these resolutions in general, there's some miscommunication going on between the driver inf and the monitor edid on newer monitors.

I'm having codex investigate further.

RedCharles wrote on 2026-11-07, 16:08:

https://github.com/RedCharles9001/P2200-XP-Driver […]
Show full quote

https://github.com/RedCharles9001/P2200-XP-Driver

I started with 382.69, and it didn't work at 4k 120hz or 5120x1440 at 120hz. These were the errors:

ASUS 4K120: The old driver’s parser skipped CTA video codes above 34, including the ASUS monitor’s 4K120 code, 118. The driver had the code but skipped it.

Samsung 5120 × 1440 at 120 Hz: The monitor declared three EDID blocks, but the XP driver’s internal capture contained only the first two.

Codex fixed both of them after a few tries, but if you had it set up to do these resolutions in general, there's some miscommunication going on between the driver inf and the monitor edid on newer monitors.

I'm having codex investigate further.

Thanks for uploading your work I'll see if there's a gap in my edid handling that can fix this broadly.

RedCharles wrote on 2026-11-07, 16:08:

https://github.com/RedCharles9001/P2200-XP-Driver […]
Show full quote

https://github.com/RedCharles9001/P2200-XP-Driver

I started with 382.69, and it didn't work at 4k 120hz or 5120x1440 at 120hz. These were the errors:

ASUS 4K120: The old driver’s parser skipped CTA video codes above 34, including the ASUS monitor’s 4K120 code, 118. The driver had the code but skipped it.

Samsung 5120 × 1440 at 120 Hz: The monitor declared three EDID blocks, but the XP driver’s internal capture contained only the first two.

Codex fixed both of them after a few tries, but if you had it set up to do these resolutions in general, there's some miscommunication going on between the driver inf and the monitor edid on newer monitors.

I'm having codex investigate further.

Latest build fixes edid handling but 4k120 is not supported under HBR3 without compression to reduce bandwidth or timing to reduce bandwidth. Normal 4k120 8bit resolution requires 28gb and hbr3 tops out at 25gb. So it still won't do that unless you play with the custom resolution section.