GTA IV Performance

[Steevo]

Tonight.............

[erocker]

Originally Posted by pagalms

It has poor graphics with insane requirements. For example GRID - great graphics with friendly requirements, but here...
I will wait for some patches and hope they'll optimize the game.

I understand where you are coming from (I love GRID!), but no amount of optimization is going to help any current mainstream video card to process the abnormal amout of textures this game has. Crysis and the like can't touch the amount of textures there are in GTAIV, hence it's size. I'm trying to secure a GTX280 to see how this game looks with high textures at a high resolution. I'm hoping the lack of AA support won't be as much of a problem, though really it isn't, like I said I've been playing this game a lot since I got it yesterday and it's awesome. No, I can't play on the highest settings and that's just fine.

[newtekie1]

Originally Posted by pagalms

It has poor graphics with insane requirements. For example GRID - great graphics with friendly requirements, but here...
I will wait for some patches and hope they'll optimize the game.

You have to consider what is going on in the game. You can't simply say it doesn't look as pretty as other games, so it has poor graphics. The number of textures, NPCs, cars, and buildings in GTA:IV is huge, no other PC game probably even comes close to how much is going on. Yes, everything in the game doesn't look as good as it might look in other games, however other games don't have as much stuff in them. The more stuff in the game, the less detailed everything has to be. It isn't like Crysis, where you might have maybe 3 vehicles being rendered at once, and maybe 5 NPCs. You can stand still and look around in GTA:IV and see 15+ vehicles all being rendered, and 30-40 NPCs. That is a lot to render, of course it isn't going to nearly as detailed. But, IMO, considering the number of things being rendered, they are pretty damn detailed. Each has semi-realistic damage characteristics, and they do look like cars and people.

[Steevo]

So I could try and play it at high with a gig of vram and a quad at 3Ghz and 4Gb RAM?

[erocker]

Originally Posted by Steevo

So I could try and play it at high with a gig of vram and a quad at 3Ghz and 4Gb RAM?

Don't know. According to the way the settings work in the game you should be able to. As you raise the settings it counts how much V-RAM it's going to use.

[RadeonX2]

darn another game that would surely crawl to hell on my PC

[Steevo]

25%.......

[FordGT90Concept]

I will never buy this game until Rockstar gets rid of all the DRM (SecuROM and Games for Windows). I can deal with one or the other but not both. It demonstrates a customers-last mentality. Their loss.

[wolf]

it'd be interesting to see the new quadro with 4gb of ram play this game at maxx :P perhaps when sli works for GTA4 someone will somehow get 2 of those beasts (quadro fx5800?) working together for blissness

does a quadro game as well as its geforce sibling or is some modding needed?

[xubidoo]

i bought GTA 4 on release and tbh im very happy with it .

Runs pretty decently in High settings 1680*1050 ,getting around 40 - 50 fps most of the time.

can't go any higher than "high" due to gfx card ram which is 896mb,but is enough to get me off medium.According to the game im using 876mb of avail gfx vram ,i assume the remaining 20mb vra is being used for windows etc.
I'm also averaging roughly 75% - 78% CPU usage and around 70% ram usage.

yeah the R* Social Club thing is a pain but i can live with it ,hopefully they may remove the disk check in a patch.

[Steevo]

I flashed a new BIOS to fix some issues I was having and low and behold. Windows did not like it. So I was up untill 3AM reinstalling. It is at 21% when I left home as it went to sleep last night. So mebey later tonight, but probablu not as I have a anniversary dinner with my wife, and she might be disappointed if I stay home to play GTA. AKA lackanookie disease.

[DaMulta]

http://files.filefront.com/3danalyze.../fileinfo.html

anyone wanna try this program and see if they can get it running better?

[PCpraiser100]

Saw the videos on Youtube, the damn game can't takes dual-cores for $h*t. Its playable, however 30fps with an E8400 /w/HD 4850 1650x1050? C'mon.

[farlex85]

Originally Posted by PCpraiser100

Saw the videos on Youtube, the damn game can't takes dual-cores for $h*t. Its playable, however 30fps with an E8400 /w/HD 4850 1650x1050? C'mon.

30fps? Sounds good to me. Newteckie really explained it well on the first post of the last page. I'll be picking this up shortly.

[PCpraiser100]

Originally Posted by farlex85

30fps? Sounds good to me. Newteckie really explained it well on the first post of the last page. I'll be picking this up shortly.

Thanks farlex. However the perfmance is still somewhat unacceptable for high-res gamers.

[Steevo]

At lunch is my next chance.

[jbunch07]

So would a system like mine be able to run this game on max settings @1680x1050?

@erocker, you playing on a 4870 right?

[farlex85]

Originally Posted by PCpraiser100

Thanks farlex. However the perfmance is still somewhat unacceptable for high-res gamers.

I consider 1680x1050 to be fairly high res. 1920x1200 will be a challenge, but such is pc gaming. If you drop the dough on a monitor of that res, you can expect to drop lots of dough for a system to run games smoothly on it. To expect anything less is an exercise in futility. As already said, this game has a ridiculous amount of textures to render, they could have dumbed it down to make it run smoother on lesser hardware, but I personally would rather them push the limits of what the hardware can do, even if I can't enjoy it fully for a bit down the road.

[ShadowFold]

Originally Posted by jbunch07

So would a system like mine be able to run this game on max settings @1680x1050?

@erocker, you playing on a 4870 right?

No. Unless you find 15-20 fps smooth.

[farlex85]

Originally Posted by jbunch07

So would a system like mine be able to run this game on max settings @1680x1050?

@erocker, you playing on a 4870 right?

I would imagine it would run fairly smooth, you have about as powerful a gaming rig as one could have right now w/ that x2. You might have to tone down the aa or af a tad, but you should have it looking great no problem.

[jbunch07]

Hmm, well I would like to buy it but I want to play at max settings...Eh what the hell cant hurt I guess. Ill give it a try and report back

[ShadowFold]

My friend has a HD 4870X2 and a QX9650 and he can't run this game at all. He has to play it with everything at 0% and low render just to get 30fps. I don't even want to talk about it on my rig, got my money back on steam by opening a dispute with my bank.

[jbunch07]

what cat was he using?

[farlex85]

Originally Posted by ShadowFold

My friend has a HD 4870X2 and a QX9650 and he can't run this game at all. He has to play it with everything at 0% and low render just to get 30fps. I don't even want to talk about it on my rig, got my money back on steam by opening a dispute with my bank.

What res? I would have to say it doesn't seem like your friend has everything running properly. If he does and that is the case, then that is poor indeed.

[ShadowFold]

Originally Posted by jbunch07

what cat was he using?

Probably 8.11 what ever the latest is. He usually calls me when they release the new ones so I'm guessing he is up to date

Originally Posted by farlex85

What res? I would have to say it doesn't seem like your friend has everything running properly. If he does and that is the case, then that is poor indeed.

I was at his house when he got it because I wanted to see how it ran on a super computer.. He tried 1024x768 on his 15" then he hooked it up to his normal 1920x1200 then tried doing 1360x720 and no luck.