Skip to main content

Digital Trends may earn a commission when you buy through links on our site. Why trust us?

Nvidia calls out AMD about GPU drivers. Is it hypocritical?

Yesterday, Nvidia published a blog post (and an accompanying video) about the importance of well-developed and well-designed GPU drivers, and included a dig at AMD in the process.

Most of the article reads just like any blog post from the desk of a company like Nvidia — explanatory and full of infographics. It’s not a particularly eye-catching article, until it mentions beta drivers and Windows Hardware Quality Labs (or WHQL) certification. This section of the blog post is seemingly a (not entirely) subtle jab at AMD’s beta video drivers.

GPU inside the MSI Aegis RS 12.
Jacob Roach / Digital Trends

The blog post says: “Microsoft recommends only using WHQL-certified drivers, as only these guarantee compatibility and a smooth user experience… because the Game Ready Driver Program and our promise of quality relies on all of this work, we don’t release sub-par beta drivers with minimal testing, let alone multiple conflicting beta drivers forked from different development branches that support different games and products, which confuse customers.”

Nvidia obviously doesn’t mention AMD by name, but AMD is the only other “GPU vendor” that makes gaming GPUs (though that is soon to change). AMD often releases “optional” or “beta” GPU drivers and less frequently releases “recommended” WHQL certified drivers. While Nvidia asserts that drivers without WHQL certification are “sub-par” and unreliable for a “smooth user experience,” it isn’t clear that this necessarily applies to AMD’s beta drivers.

Get your weekly teardown of the tech behind PC gaming
Check your inbox!

In the blog post, Nvidia says, “we don’t release sub-par beta drivers with minimal testing” and that Nvidia is “the only GPU vendor to WHQL certify every single driver,” but that actually isn’t true. Just two months ago, Nvidia released GeForce Hotfix Driver 511.72, and the driver’s release blog says:

“To be sure, these Hotfix drivers are beta, optional and provided as-is. They are run through a much abbreviated QA process. The sole reason they exist is to get fixes out to you more quickly. The safest option is to wait for the next WHQL certified driver. But we know that many of you are willing to try these out.”

Nvidia’s only beta drivers appear to be hotfixes, whereas AMD seems to mostly release beta drivers. Ultimately, not all of Nvidia’s drivers are WHQL certified by their own admission — unless Nvidia means to say they will never release another hotfix driver ever again.

We’ve reached out to AMD on what it means for their drivers to be beta or WHQL and whether or not that distinction matters for performance and stability.

Matthew Connatser
Former Digital Trends Contributor
Matthew Connatser is a freelance writer who works on writing and updating PC guides at Digital Trends. He first got into PCs…
I wish more games did this with their PC requirements
A character shoots stormtroopers in Star Wars Outlaws.

Over the weekend, Ubisoft put out the system requirements for Star Wars Outlaws, which is set to release on August 30. It's a feature-packed release on PC, with support for DLSS 3.5 and the latest versions of XeSS and FSR 3, as well as unique aspect ratios. But the system requirements go beyond just listing some components and calling it a day. They're actually useful.

Like most modern AAA releases, Ubisoft provided four tiers for the system requirements. And also like most modern AAA releases, each of those tiers has a resolution, frame rate, and quality setting linked to them. The critical change is that the system requirements also list the setting for the upscaler. In games like Alan Wake 2 or the upcoming Black Myth: Wukong, we get a slate of hardware recommendations, but it's hard to know how big of a factor tools like DLSS and FSR are playing when it comes to performance estimates.

Read more
AMD has nothing to lose, and that’s the problem
AMD CEO holding a Ryzen 7000 processor.

Being the underdog has its benefits. AMD's been running on the sheer momentum of its uphill battle against Intel -- and it's been working.

Over the past seven years, AMD has gone from being a second-rate CPU builder, only judged by its undercutting of the competition from Intel, to an absolute titan. Each generation, it has consistently released some of the best processors money can buy, and even when Intel bites back, AMD holds strong.

Read more
No one is buying AMD’s new Zen 5 CPUs, and it’s painfully obvious why
The Ryzen 9 9900X sitting on its box.

AMD's new Ryzen 5 9600X and Ryzen 7 9700X, which were aimed at claiming a spot among the best processors, are off to a rocky start. According to early sales numbers from German retailer Mindfactory, the number of new AMD CPUs the website has shipped is only in the double digits, despite being on the market for nearly a week.

Mindfactory is only one retailer, but it actually displays the number of products it sold on its website. The Ryzen 5 9600X has seen over 20 sales, while the Ryzen 7 9700X has had over 30. You can see the lack of enthusiasm for Zen 5 CPUs elsewhere, though. On Amazon's bestsellers page, the last-gen Ryzen 7 7800X3D ranks in the first spot. The first Zen 5 CPU on the list, the Ryzen 7 9700X, is in 47th place.

Read more