<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: PhysX System Software 9.10.0223</title>
	<atom:link href="http://physxinfo.com/news/3226/physx-system-software-9-10-0223/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://physxinfo.com/news/3226/physx-system-software-9-10-0223/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 10:23:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: GenL</title>
		<link>http://physxinfo.com/news/3226/physx-system-software-9-10-0223/#comment-765</link>
		<dc:creator>GenL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jun 2010 18:10:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://physxinfo.com/news/?p=3226#comment-765</guid>
		<description>In reality it should be called 9.10.0529 (or 0528 if my timezone is too far from nvidia) - you can tell it by looking to digital signature, plus i can tell it by looking on timestamps of dlls inside.

They&#039;ve only updated initialization files to more strict control for Hybrid systems, everything else is the same as it was in 9.10.0222.

I assume it was a different person who re-compiled the dlls, because it&#039;s so much difficult to miss this obvious version-number scheme.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reality it should be called 9.10.0529 (or 0528 if my timezone is too far from nvidia) &#8211; you can tell it by looking to digital signature, plus i can tell it by looking on timestamps of dlls inside.</p>
<p>They&#8217;ve only updated initialization files to more strict control for Hybrid systems, everything else is the same as it was in 9.10.0222.</p>
<p>I assume it was a different person who re-compiled the dlls, because it&#8217;s so much difficult to miss this obvious version-number scheme.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Zogrim</title>
		<link>http://physxinfo.com/news/3226/physx-system-software-9-10-0223/#comment-764</link>
		<dc:creator>Zogrim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jun 2010 17:57:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://physxinfo.com/news/?p=3226#comment-764</guid>
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.ngohq.com/graphic-cards/17706-hybrid-physx-mod-v1-03-a.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;According&lt;/a&gt; to GenL, nope</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.ngohq.com/graphic-cards/17706-hybrid-physx-mod-v1-03-a.html" rel="nofollow">According</a> to GenL, nope</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: xDee xDee</title>
		<link>http://physxinfo.com/news/3226/physx-system-software-9-10-0223/#comment-763</link>
		<dc:creator>xDee xDee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jun 2010 17:45:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://physxinfo.com/news/?p=3226#comment-763</guid>
		<description>1.03 patch working with these drivers and physx ss? Can&#039;t test myself because my comp is not together atm.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>1.03 patch working with these drivers and physx ss? Can&#8217;t test myself because my comp is not together atm.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

