Sunspark @Minimax I don't know what CPU generation you are, but if you're 4th-5th like myself, I'd like you to look at this one: https://downloadmirror.intel.com/29313/a08/win64_15.40.44.5107.zip in addition, https://downloadmirror.intel.com/28662/a08/win64_15.40.42.5063.zip Do 5063 first since you're coming from 4352 and it's quite similar (yes, I popped that one on too). So, the idea is that you will look at 5063 which I find to have a fairly similar refresh on the screen like 7, and if it's the same, great, then next move on to 5107 which I think is more stable/flatter. Between the two on 2004, I preferred 5107.

My current acer laptop is based on the Broadwell architecture, so it's 5th gen. I will try out your mentioned driver versions in the preferred order as soon as I have some time spare. But it can take some days before I will be able to report back my experiences. Thanks for your patience.

    Sunspark Assuming it's a 7th, if you feel like it, give this one a try

    I tried this newest driver and straight away my eyes found it hard to focus. I didn't give it more than a couple of minutes as I already have a perfect working setup with the 2016 driver. Can't understand how Intel have not picked this up over the last few years, it must be causing a lot of people trouble.

      Minimax What to do to downgrade to WDDM to version 2.0 or is this version directly active after fresh 2004 installation?

          I've just installed 2004. Initial impressions coming from 1909 are not good.

          The image looks clean and solid, but I'm getting low grade eye strain that seems to build over time.

          More testing is required, and I'm reinstalling the video drivers. Might even roll back if that's possible.

            Markus It's directly active. I think it is specific to Broadwell. I can't get it to go higher or lower no matter what driver version I look at. I haven't tried yet to see if drivers for the later generation GPUs will install.

            It's interesting to me how the base it wishes to install (or comes with) is 20.19.15.4531 for Broadwell GT3 (HD 6000), but if you tell it to look in the device manager it will find 20.19.15.4624 and install it, but it won't force install that version, only if you ask it to. Picture looks different. In fact, every version of the drivers I have tried all look different, I think that is ridiculous. What could they possibly be doing that there are differences?

            When I say differences, I am talking about subjective picture "stability" whether the backlight seems to have a slight shimmer or not (some have varying intensities of this). Whether colours are more saturated or not, etc. I can absolutely see that with some the colours seem a little more muted while with others (e.g. red and yellow) are boosted, etc. We're not talking large differences, but they are there. Even one landscape scene wallpaper I sometimes throw up for testing, I look for how the picture is rendered, and whether it appears to be crawling (frc effect), some versions have more or less of it.

            I might try other branches for fun to see if they can be installed and if so, if the wddm changes. It's the newest wddms that allow for gpu offloading of processes. I don't mind screwing around with drivers (or even OS builds within reason), because 2004 is not my daily driver.

              Markus

              Markus What to do to downgrade to WDDM to version 2.0 or is this version directly active after fresh 2004 installation?

              Hi there. No, as far as my understanding goes the WDDM version is dependent on the CPU/GPU architecture and its supported DirectX feature levels. There is no way to downgrade from initially supported WDDM 2.7 to 2.0 using drivers and OS versions alone. Your best bet is to own a laptop with Haswell or Broadwell legacy architectures. I own laptops with either architecture, and on both laptops the WDDM version stays at 2.0 no matter what Windows version (e.g. 7, 8, 10) is installed. Hope this clarifies things.

                    Sunspark

                    Sunspark @Minimax I don't know what CPU generation you are, but if you're 4th-5th like myself, I'd like you to look at this one: https://downloadmirror.intel.com/29313/a08/win64_15.40.44.5107.zip in addition, https://downloadmirror.intel.com/28662/a08/win64_15.40.42.5063.zip Do 5063 first since you're coming from 4352 and it's quite similar (yes, I popped that one on too). So, the idea is that you will look at 5063 which I find to have a fairly similar refresh on the screen like 7, and if it's the same, great, then next move on to 5107 which I think is more stable/flatter. Between the two on 2004, I preferred 5107.

                    As promised here are my subjective observations after having tried drivers 4352, 5063, 5107, 5126, 4352 in the given order. I just updated drivers without uninstalling the previous one. My results mostly coincide with yours but there are surprises.

                    4352/5063: Drivers gave a rather Win 7 like viewing experience with whites/bright tones being soft and "milky". Font rending was somewhat unstable though. But no problems reading text and viewing at pictures. Actually my eyes liked it.

                    5107/5126: Whites/bright tones were harsher. Font rendering appeared to be more stable and calmer. But nevertheless I noticed some slight pinching in one eye. So back to the initial version.

                    4352 again: Now it seems to me that the screen has become brighter and font rendering calmer but the colors are still soft. I assume that during my tests some properties of the newer drivers have made it somehow into this driver installation. Perhaps there are leftovers of the previous drivers in the registry. So literally the best properties of the drivers have joined. No eye problems so far. That's strange.

                        Minimax True, up to a point.. I was able to force-install branches from 22.* and 21.*, don't bother it's not worth doing, but it was interesting to see because WDDM stayed at 2, however on Windows 7 using the driver I use in 7 (which also has support for 10, build 4279) dxdiag reports it at wddm 1.1 in 7, and 2.0 in 10 using the same file. So the OS plays a role as well. I don't have the platform update installed, so that's probably part of it. Otherwise, 4279 is not worth using on 10.

                        Thanks for testing. Kind of weird how unpredictable it all is. I was poking around windows update catalog as well to see if I could find anything interesting. Not really, just intermediate builds, with 5107 being the last one. They never bothered to put 5126 in there. I have a feeling that it's going to be very infrequent to see updates now. There was a year + gap between versions recently which I think was only forced because of a security update.

                        Personally, without evidence, I think their update model must be awful at Intel. They have so many branches for different architectures and each is updated independently. To me it seems more logical to have a single harmonized universal driver, and for each silicon chipset, just have flags toggled on and off for support of various features.

                        I feel fairly confident that our Broadwell GPU is never going to be able to take advantage of the Windows 2004 support feature to allow for offloading from the CPU to the GPU.

                            Sunspark Personally, without evidence, I think their update model must be awful at Intel. They have so many branches for different architectures and each is updated independently. To me it seems more logical to have a single harmonized universal driver, and for each silicon chipset, just have flags toggled on and off for support of various features.

                            Probably explains why Intel couldn't find anything as part of their "investigation" into eyestrain issues. That and I strongly suspect they were looking into the wrong place anyhow.

                              Sunspark

                              Sunspark True, up to a point.. I was able to force-install branches from 22.* and 21.*, don't bother it's not worth doing, but it was interesting to see because WDDM stayed at 2, however on Windows 7 using the driver I use in 7 (which also has support for 10, build 4279) dxdiag reports it at wddm 1.1 in 7, and 2.0 in 10 using the same file. So the OS plays a role as well. I don't have the platform update installed, so that's probably part of it. Otherwise, 4279 is not worth using on 10.

                              Thanks. I stand corrected. The OS plays a significant role in WDDM support. So I think on Win 7 you will never get past 1.1.

                              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Display_Driver_Model#WDDM_1.1

                              Sunspark I feel fairly confident that our Broadwell GPU is never going to be able to take advantage of the Windows 2004 support feature to allow for offloading from the CPU to the GPU.

                              I agree. Some algorithms and filters used by my graphics software are awfully slow. :-(

                                    AgentX20 I've just installed 2004. Initial impressions coming from 1909 are not good.

                                    The image looks clean and solid, but I'm getting low grade eye strain that seems to build over time.

                                    More testing is required, and I'm reinstalling the video drivers. Might even roll back if that's possible.

                                    Quoting myself! So I've rolled back to 1909 and I'm more comfortable. I was then prompted to upgrade my video drivers to the newest version and... I thought there was eye-strain.

                                    So, right now I'm very suspicious about v2004 AND the newest Nvidia drivers. I vaguely recall reading that 2004 users needed newer Nvidia drivers.

                                    I dunno what to make of all of this, as the problem sensations are slow and insidious and can be hard to assess.

                                        AgentX20 the problem sensations are slow and insidious and can be hard to assess.

                                        This. Add in to the mix that everyone has a slightly different neurological response to things and it's impossible to translate one person's experience to another. Definitely the most frustrating thing about it.

                                        I'm now 1 month in to my 2004 install and it has actually changed my life. I'm gaming again (first time in 8 years) and I can even use my computer late at night. I'm still using Intel drivers 21.20.16.4475 and Nvidia drivers 26.21.14.4614 on my Dell XPS 15 9560 FHD.

                                        Switching to modern Intel drivers instantly makes my eyes unable to focus and I get the familiar dizzy / nauseus / eyegrain / migraine feelings coming on eventually. So in my case everything is working as it should except the Intel driver. Not a major issue at all though, the 2016 driver works just fine.

                                        • JTL replied to this.

                                            It took 2 weeks to recover. Now i can use again the iphone X, Ipad air 2, Oled tv LG B8(with PS4, Swtich and chrome cast) and the dell E5550.
                                            Unfortunately i didn't make a copy of my old installation on my desktop and now i am still sick when i try to use it. I've tried the 1803 and 1903 with no success. I should try the 1709 or i can try to buy an nvidia 2070 but now i am scared / tired to try and get sick 🙁

                                            si_edgey Switching to modern Intel drivers instantly makes my eyes unable to focus and I get the familiar dizzy / nauseus / eyegrain / migraine feelings coming on eventually. So in my case everything is working as it should except the Intel driver. Not a major issue at all though, the 2016 driver works just fine.

                                            I'm beginning to think issues like this are a mix of hardware and drivers interacting with each other.

                                            Like I've said before, wish you could visit me and there's a good chance with my capture hardware and analysis software we could probably find out what's different.

                                            • diop replied to this.
                                                6 days later

                                                JTL I'm beginning to think issues like this are a mix of hardware and drivers interacting with each other.

                                                Like I've said before, wish you could visit me and there's a good chance with my capture hardware and analysis software we could probably find out what's different.

                                                The GPU output stage (maintained by the VBIOS?) is the elephant in the room. There could be a 'perfect' Windows driver/OS, but does the Windows driver interact with the actual VBIOS settings? All dithering could be disabled at the driver/OS level, but at the BIOS/VBIOS level, the output might be fixed to dither regardless of the monitor/OS. Although for an image to display at all I would imagine there would be some sort of handshake from the OS through to the GPU output stage.

                                                This is perhaps why I'm having trouble with some devices even on W10 V2004 and older drivers. If the output itself is dithering or otherwise then I have no control over changing it. (Or the opposite, as mentioned above, a 'good' video output with a bad driver is causing issues). 😛

                                                @si_edgey Did you get any update from Microsoft/Intel? A few members of the GFX team are active on Reddit. I am hopeful that this is the year we find a solution.

                                                • JTL replied to this.

                                                    diop but does the Windows driver interact with the actual VBIOS settings

                                                    It can in certain circumstances. (This is how "ditherig.exe" with Intel graphics works) but the methods can differ (pun not intended) based on GPU model and driver involved so having a universal control isn't easily attainable

                                                      2 months later

                                                      Upgraded today to 2004 and massive improvement. Seem to get no problems.

                                                      Only other things I did were move down from say 30% brightness to 20%. And re-try doing the IntelPWMcontrol although I got an error when I ran it.

                                                      (Dell laptop)

                                                      a month later

                                                      si_edgey I've installed W10 2004 on my desktop machine too (Nvidia GTX 770) and updated to the latest drivers and I'm pretty confident in saying I can use that without issues also - so far I've not had any symptoms but it needs more testing. I would say that the newest Nvidia drivers feel better to me than the older ones which is also good news.

                                                      good day, @si_edgey
                                                      can you write your detailed "desktop machine" config?
                                                      motherboard/ OS(version_build)/ possibly registry tweaks?/ 770 vendor_model/ GPU driver version/ interface(DP_DVI_HDMI)/ monitor_model /monitor color profile
                                                      ..and please make a screenshot of the GPU-Z, your "known-good GeForce 770"

                                                        19 days later

                                                        Windows 20H2 is out. Who will be the first brave enough to try it? 😃
                                                        I am still on 1903 on my desktop and 1809 on my working laptop. I need to buy a second SSD for trying this type of upgrade.

                                                          Lauda89 Me, actually. Stuff blew up last night on my drives, so I had to clean up the mess which took a long time. I was just in 20H2 just now as a clean install in the testing partition I have for it. It's exactly the same as 2004 and the Intel drivers for it are still the same ones as before. Edge Legacy has been removed from this build--too bad because I used to stream from within that browser. People who are fine with 2004 will be fine with 20H2 too, the difference after the cumulative monthly updates is apparently only a few megabytes, that's how similar they are. 7 is still my daily driver though.. my computer is a dual-core and W10 is heavier and slower on it so I really only pop into it sometimes for streaming services.

                                                          You don't need another SSD, if you don't have other OSes other than Windows, then it's easy to have multiple Windows versions on the same drive. 40 GB is all you need for a W10 partition. When you do an install, you just select custom install and select the partition you want it to use. The bootloaders for 7 to 10 are aware of each other and you'll have a boot menu to choose from. The menu can also see other OSes as well, but it's harder to work with, and frankly next time I play with one of those on my external SSD, I am going to disable the internal SSD to do the install on the external, and then when I want to use it, I will use the computer's UEFI boot menu itself to select to boot from the other drive like a USB stick.. this way I can leave 1 drive with an untouched Windows bootloader instead of daisy-chained.

                                                            dev