Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Darkyyy

Vista Black load screen?

Recommended Posts

I had the same black screen the 158 drivers solved it for me.....the memory bug was fixed with the maxmem 256 fix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So guys, if I go back to the old Nvidia drivers that will solve the problem or do I need to do the memory change command line AS WELL?

I'm running Vista 32bit with 4GB Ram and I've got the black load screen with 1.08 installed

Many Thanks

Cuzer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nvidia 158.24 drivers solves the problem and the maxmem command keeps it running bit longer. thumbs-up.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do we think this will be sorted with a patch gents?

I've just recently brought a new PC and I've not started playing Arm A yet and I don't want to do the above and have a game which could crash at any moment if a patch will solve the problem, if that's the case I'll wait for a patch. What's the thoughts here? Do you think a fix will become apparant?

Cheers in advance

Cuzer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally i dont think it'll be patched soon. Using 158.xx nvidia driver makes the loading screen problem go away. But i like the latest driver, finally i can see the whole desktop on my LCD. But i cant play the friggin game.   crazy_o.gif

I think they r to buzzy working on their next release.

banghead.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any idea's boys? Are we likely to see a patch do you reckon? Or will Nvidia solve the problem with new drivers?

Cuzer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So Nvidia released a new driver yesterday. Hopes where high yet another time. But no!!  

Still blackassed loading screen with Vista. And yes, still the crapped ass old error 'NVLDDMKM has stopped responding'  haunting my system. Guess we need a patch to even get it started now on vista. Or is it the ordinary message from BIS (505) "Dont use Vista"  band.gif

Well, whatever.. Cant we get it fixed soon? More and more users will probably use Vista soon, so why not fix it?

Like, pls? Want me to beg?   notworthy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't realise Nvidia had released another driver but reading your comments it ain't solving our problem then? GREAT! banghead.gif

Does this thread help at all? I've copied it in full but it's about memory usage I'm guessing you've already tried it mate but thought I would ask?

Posted: Aug. 21 2007,01:52

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From the good folks at Locker Gnome: http://www.lockergnome.com/nexus....g-vista

Quote

Those who have been following the problems when using Vista for gaming are certainly aware of the memory problems being faced. Anyone using video cards with large memory caches (512 and up) have certainly hit the ceiling where games can do strange things without warning - and up until lately, without explanation.

The testers at AnandTech have been doing a series on this problem, and have noted when and where the problems occur, but until part 3 of the series have only been able to postulate what the root cause could be.

Now Microsoft is helping out, with the release of the above mentioned hotfix, which is not, as yet, available widely. While awaiting the widespread release, the reasons for the fix, and the cause of the memory grab by the operating system, not duplicated in Windows XP, have been given.

The Windows Display Driver Model, rewritten for Vista, is the culprit here. The explanation for the problem has to do with Microsoft making the memory management for the system video a part of the OS, and relieving applications from doing the management. The problem occurs when older games (at this point, nearly all of them)are used. The games are trying to manage memory, and setting aside a pool, while Vista is doing the same. The memory pool is doubled, and there is where the system runs out, and experiences strange behavior.

KB940105 will take care of this - but Microsoft also says that the fix is still ‘really hot’, as it is still in the process of change. It will be available for wide release soon, and testing shows it does alleviate some of the memory usage. Perhaps the further tweaking will bring memory usage in line with the same game’s memory footprint when used with XP.

Here's the AnandTech article (good read) : http://www.anandtech.com/systems/showdoc.aspx?i=3060&p=1

Quote

Microsoft has published knowledge base article 940105 on the matter, and with it has finalized a patch to reduce the high virtual address space usage of games under Vista. From this and our own developer sources, we can piece together the problem that was causing the high virtual address space issues under Vista.

As it turns out, our initial guess about the issue being related to memory allocations being limited to the 2GB of user space for security reasons was wrong, the issue is simpler than that. One of the features of the Windows Vista Display Driver Model (WDDM) is that video memory is no longer a limited-sharing resource that applications will often take complete sovereign control of; instead the WDDM offers virtualization of video memory so that all applications can use what they think is video memory without needing to actually care about what else is using it - in effect removing much of the work of video memory management from the application. From both a developer's and user's perspective this is great as it makes game/application development easier and multiple 3D accelerated applications get along better, but it came with a cost.

All of that virtualization requires address space to work with; Vista uses an application's 2GB user allocation of virtual address space for this purpose, scaling the amount of address space consumed by the WDDM with the amount of video memory actually used. This feature is ahead of its time however as games and applications written to the DirectX 9 and earlier standards didn't have the WDDM to take care of their memory management, so applications did it themselves. This required the application to also allocate some virtual address space to its management tasks, which is fine under XP.

However under Vista this results in the application and the WDDM effectively playing a game of chicken: both are consuming virtual address space out of the same 2GB pool and neither is aware of the other doing the exact same thing. Amusingly, given a big enough card (such as a 1GB Radeon X2900XT), it's theoretically possible to consume all 2GB of virtual address space under Vista with just the WDDM and the application each trying to manage the video memory, which would leave no further virtual address space for anything else the application needs to do. In practice, both the virtual address space allocations for the WDDM and the application video memory manager attempt to grow as needed, and ultimately crash the application as each starts passing 500MB+ of allocated virtual address space.

This obviously needed to be fixed, and for a multitude of reasons (such as Vista & XP application compatibility) such a fix needed to be handled by the operating system. That fix is KB940105, which is a change to how the WDDM handles its video memory management. Now the WDDM will not default to using its full memory management capabilities, and more importantly it will not be consuming virtual address space unless specifically told to by the application. This will significantly reduce the virtual address space usage of an application when video memory is the culprit, but at best it will only bring Vista down to the kind of virtual address space usage of XP.

Here are the fixes that you otherwise have to contact MS to get. They'll probably be made available later in the month on the KB article page... But for now...These folks have made them available to us. Download away!

Download the Vista 32-bit Hotfix:

http://thehotfixshare.net/board....le=2830

Download the Vista 64-bit Hotfix:

http://thehotfixshare.net/board....le=2840

===== NEW nVidia Drivers!! =====

Just in time for the new BioShock game, nVidia has released updated 163.44 drivers for XP and Vista. These fix TONS of issues with many games and could very well have some positive impacts on ArmA. They're at least certain to be more likely compatible/compliant with the above fix, anyhow.

http://www.nzone.com/object/nzone_downloads_rel70betadriver.html

[EDIT: Changed verbage to better reflect that there are indeed download links. You don't have to contact MS. Everything is here; Thank you, drive through.]

Edited by ixnay on Aug. 21 2007,06:13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ive given up on mine but there is a plus point,I wont need to buy the add on pack if I cant get it to work well unless a future Nvidea driver fixes it sad_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sigh, ok.. So nvidia released yet another driver, beta i might add..

Anyone tested it? Still black ugly crappy game destroying non playable loading screen??  crazy_o.gif

DL'ing it now..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No luck ages ago.. Hmm, i guess this post died.

Nvidia 158.45 didnt have this problem, but why coldnt the following drivers keep it away??

Also BI doesnt care, because the game doesnt support Vista..

Sigh...

goodnight.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even though they never said it in their expectations. They called Vista an 'inconvenience', and never stated it will be supported... I guess my years of OFP/ArmA are over... confused_o.gif

A realistic war simulation game thats played on consoles for one is astounding, the PC version uses much more than 26 controls/buttons, they even had to go to double keystrokes to maintain all of the possible controls. Now they want to waste time on a console version that only supports view buttons with very limited aiming accuracy. I wouldn't be surprised if they stopped making PC games all together, since they obviously don't believe in it by saying essentially it's a dieing market. I guess that's what drives great games like Bioshock/Crysis to be made.

No surprise though, OUR expectations should be nothing more than what my signature quotes.

If Codemasters doesn't pick up the pieces and make an honest attempt, I guess I'm done playing computer games. The majority of games are now unrealistic BS pieces of crap, with their 5 headshots per one kill, linear game play, and repetitive boring play experience.

All my chips were on BIS. I've got this same black screen. I've got Vista. I've tried ALL beta and official video and/or microsoft patches. Tell me this: I got Vista in January. ArmA was released already. I just dont see how they didn't think anyone would be using an OS... from Microsoft. If this IS Vista's fault, what are other game makers doing? How are they getting their games to work with Vista?

Even though most if not all Vista owners are in an uproar, I have yet to hear from BIS on this issue, and its been 9 months! I could have gone commando when Vista came out and popped a kid out already.

Perhaps in their next blog.. whistle.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Omg Victor, you hit the nial right on the head there.

I was very exited, mark was, when this game was on its way.

Even bought meself a new rig to play it with full graphix and really enjoy it. 4000 euro !!! down the drain.. Now we have a black loading screen that noone bothers to fix. Neither BIS or Nvidia. Tho i reported it several times since the preceeding driver from nvidia (154.xx)... Now we have release upon release that changes nothing. No patches upcoming for the game. Just that arma 2 is coming soon, like wth???

Spew out new game even before the first has settled.

Seems like money is more important than reputation.

But.. Back to why i came here.. again.. Nvidia has new beta 169.71.. Do i even need to bother try DL it and try if the blackscreen is gone???

Anyone??    help.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Black loading screen, add an extra boot entry for vista "3gb limit" and edit it using msconfig, limit ur memory to 3072 and you can play, all you gotto do is choose that boot entry when starting up the PC. Works for me, in the hope any of the parties resolves it completely.

How to get ArmA running on Vista

[*] Use -maxmem=512 arma shortcut parameter

[*] Limit to 3GB system memory

[*] Install all windows updates incl. driver updates, check Windows Update manually.

[*] Install Vista Hotfixes http://www.nvidia.com/object/windows_vista_hotfixes.html

[*] And install latest video drivers. For Nvidia: 16x.xx series

And you should be set without system crashes and whatever smile_o.gif

edit:

For ppl that have no clue what to do with the info further down below, just press windowskey+R, and run msconfig

then at boot tab, pick advanced options and put maximum memory to 3072, reboot, and it should work aswell. I read that the limitmemory functionality is less good than using removememory, but removememory is only a command you can execute manually in a dos prompt so when I get some more time I might write a guide for that.

I actually used: bcdedit /set removememory 1024 on the new entry and rebooted.

Info:

http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms791501.aspx

my bcdedit output looks like:

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr><td>Code Sample </td></tr><tr><td id="CODE">Windows Boot Manager

--------------------

identifier {bootmgr}

device partition=C:

description Windows Boot Manager

locale en-US

inherit {globalsettings}

default {current}

displayorder {b64f2673-4dc5-11dc-840d-e9de4da511d2}

{current}

toolsdisplayorder {memdiag}

timeout 5

Windows Boot Loader

-------------------

identifier {b64f2673-4dc5-11dc-840d-e9de4da511d2}

device partition=C:

path \Windows\system32\winload.exe

description Microsoft Windows Vista

locale en-US

loadoptions DDISABLE_INTEGRITY_CHECKS

inherit {bootloadersettings}

testsigning No

osdevice partition=C:

systemroot \Windows

resumeobject {b64f2674-4dc5-11dc-840d-e9de4da511d2}

nx OptIn

Windows Boot Loader

-------------------

identifier {current}

device partition=C:

path \Windows\system32\winload.exe

description Microsoft Windows Vista MemoryLimit

locale en-US

loadoptions DDISABLE_INTEGRITY_CHECKS

inherit {bootloadersettings}

testsigning No

osdevice partition=C:

systemroot \Windows

resumeobject {b64f2674-4dc5-11dc-840d-e9de4da511d2}

nx OptIn

removememory 1024

Works fine with latest 163.xx series drivers, and the hotfixes supplied by microsoft, linked by Nvidia: http://www.nvidia.com/object/windows_vista_hotfixes.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Omg Sickboy.. You should be called smartboy..

It works!!!! OMG it works!!!!  thumbs-up.gif

Why cant BIS make a fix for it then??? WHY?? 4 gig doesnt work but 3gig. Like , hello huh.gif

Praise Sickboy!!!!    notworthy.gif

But, errr... Could u fix the 'nvlddmkm has stopped responding'  error too?? Its plaguing my system in every game. Also could play 30mins now until the error came..

Thanks again Sickboy, youre the man.

PS, how do i remove that entry if i want all memory back?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heya ZoLoco,

BIS aint fixing it cause they do not support Vista, and when you don't support something, you don't waste time on it, especially considering the thousands of XP users that have issues and a game that still can use patches here and there for way more important things, I mean, how many people do you think own 4GB(+) Vista64 machines, compared to how many ppl that do not own such machine? I guess the math will give you a good answer on why BIS hasn't fixed it yet smile_o.gif

THAT plus the fact that MS+GPU Manufacturers are still hotfixing their products every few weeks. I guess BI doesnt want their time wasted with a workaround that might get undone at the next MS or GPU Driver update, etc.

A good example is the problem where ArmA on Vista had to run under -maxmem=256 and not on 512 or higher like on XP.

The problem was caused by the OS+Graphics Driver+Non DX10 applications, as on Vista/DX10 the Graphics Driver assigns virtual memory, but under XP/DX9, the application does. So what happens when you run a DX9 application on Vista? The virtual memory is assigned twice, which causes issues especially on large memory using 32-bit applications as their memory is limited to 2GB.

GPU Makers and MS resolved this by the hotfixes linked earlier. It would've been a waste of time by BIS to put any amount of time in creating their own workarounds/fixes etc.

Who knows though, Suma is sometimes full of surprises.... biggrin_o.gif

About your problem, more ppl are complaining here:

http://forums.nvidia.com/index.php?showtopic=25381

I myself had the problems once before aswell IIRC, I think it had to do with heat, and in my case it was the overclock I put on the card, when lowering to default values I stopped getting these issues.

About the memory,you can use: bcdedit /deletevalue removememory. But if you create an extra boot entry as I've done in my example, you can just pick the desired configuration at boot time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do agree with you Sick. If BIS had at least the gall to come out and explain that, I'll understand. But having them hide under a rock and not say anything is a mere insult.

If I know I wont be playing ArmA, at least I can feel at ease knowing that ArmA2/OFP2 is on the rise and I can play other things while I wait. Otherwise, I can keep ArmA on my hard drive and continue to hope something comes along. I just wish they had some sorta official statement.

In any event, I believe BIS should've supported huge memory types and GPU's, I mean hey... It's odd they they can say something like: "Here's 10,000 View Distance and high graphic options, but if you get a good video card that can use that 10,000 and high gfx options, you wont be able to play ArmA with Microsofts new OS".

----------------------

Anyways: The option you presented Sick, is tempting to try. I may try it just to see if it works. But I currently am a long time video editing guru at heart and use my 3 monitors to run Premiere, Photoshop, Illistrator at once. I don't want to have to 'undo' this fix just to get my RAM back for my everyday programs. Otherwise its just not worth it for a game.

edit: I started reading your post a little more indepth Sick and checked the link out. I'm a little confused as to where I start. Msconfig/boot.ini? Options?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The easy way:

Enable

bcdedit /set removememory 1024

reboot

Disable

bcdedit /deletevalue removememory

reboot

The hard way:

Read up on the bcdedit program and simply create a copy of your boot entry, so you get 2 boot entries, and on one of them you enable the removememory, so at boot time you can simply pick what you want... 3GB or full memory smile_o.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, you should execute this in a dos prompt ("Command prompt" under accessoires in the start menu).

type in: bcdedit /set removememory 1024

and press enter

Just thinking now, you probably must run the command prompt as administrator to make it work, you can do that by right clicking the command prompt icon and choosing "Run as Administrator", otherwise you get:

  [b said:
Quote[/b] ]Microsoft Windows [Version 6.0.6001]

Copyright © 2006 Microsoft Corporation.  All rights reserved.

C:\Users\sb>bcdedit

The boot configuration data store could not be opened.

Access is denied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the responsible item has been identified meanwhile at german official support website. it seems that BIS's ArmA has an issue with system havin 4GB or more running. Since PC architecture needs remapping for accessing high memory address ranges, most boards do the remap automaticly or have a switch for it in the bios (e.g. memory hole, ...).

if you want to use 4gb or more you need to enable that switch. the PCs/OSs memory remapping collides with BIS's unusual way how they remap videomemory to the mainmemory of the system. they just developed ArmA too close to the hardware. now they got the answer of the PC - the got a memory bug in the engine (good work!wink_o.gif.

so until BIS is solving this somewhere in the year of 2030 in a parallel universum where coders decide to code stable code and not fast ugly code, we the paying customers have to decide if we want to have an unstable system (due the fact that we are banned from using recent vid-drivers (e.g. the guy with that cat7.4 wont have fun with other games e.g. bioshock)) or we have to limit ourselfes to UNDER 4gb memory (max 3gb). well, OR we have to ban BIS products until they learn their lessons.

just try it out urself. disable 4gb+ memory (e.g. disabling memory hole function) and suddenly the texture creation bug (aka blackscreen bug) is gone and you can enjoy all the other ArmA bugs (sloppy performance on highend systems, dx10 bug, wrong arms physics, stupid ai, ...)

Besides: those who have 4gb and have it running are lucky bastards wink_o.gif since they have the rare condition where the remapping does NOT overlap. its a lottery game. you could have luck that it will work with 4gb+ on ur system too, but the chances are real low. i have spoken with lots of ArmA 4gb ppl and read a lots of forums on this globe and if i had to tell a number i would say that at least 99% of all 4GB users have that issue.

ah well, and those who say its an vista issue. same bug shows on xp64. wink_o.gif

and those who say that xp64 or vista are not supported...

(1) the call it MINIMAL requirements NOT exactly requirements

(2) a 9800 is higher as a 9500 and a HD2900 is higher than a X1800, but you are not forced to use a 9500

(3) vista superiors xp. if ppl would use win95 or 3.11 they were right, but since vista is the comon and actual used os and their package does not say "NOT RUNNING WITH VISTA" (just see point1) they have to support it.

(4) on the package is NO indication sayin that you must not use 4GB+. it only says MINIMAL requirements!!! not maximum possible environment!

and now take ur rocks. those may throw who are not guilty.

Simon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  (sickboy @ Oct. 07 2007,11:03) said:
Enable

bcdedit /set removememory 1024

reboot

bcdedit /deletevalue removememory

reboot

Disable

I tried that but Vista 64 didnt boot anymore...I tried command again when my computer had only 3gb memory installed, command worked, only 2gb was available when vista started.

So why that command doesnt work with 4gb installed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  (Lange @ Oct. 09 2007,02:54) said:
Well, the responsible item has been identified meanwhile at german official support website. it seems that BIS's ArmA has an issue with system havin 4GB or more running. Since PC architecture needs remapping for accessing high memory address ranges, most boards do the remap automaticly or have a switch for it in the bios (e.g. memory hole, ...).

if you want to use 4gb or more you need to enable that switch. the PCs/OSs memory remapping collides with BIS's unusual way how they remap videomemory to the mainmemory of the system. they just developed ArmA too close to the hardware. now they got the answer of the PC - the got a memory bug in the engine (good work!wink_o.gif.

Frankly, this does not make any sense to me. We are not performing any video memory remapping - fact it, even if we would be crazy enough like to try to do things like this, we would not know how to do it. All we do is we use Win32 + DirectX APIs which handle all of this on their own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×