![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
GTA IV PC Benchmarks
- Thread starter mr_zen256
- Start date
So, you are either:
A. Calling me a liar, and stating that those benchmark results couldn't POSSIBLY correspond to a "good gameplay experience" (as hardOCP would say in their reviews)
B. Have PC gaming standards that are way too high.
How long have you been playing PC games? If you say over 15 years, then surely you remember the sheer multitude of occasions in which our machines struggled when we tried to raise the resolutions.
It's strange to see the current generation of PC gamers cry and moan when they can't get a solid 60fps in a game. Some games run slower than others. Call it whatever you want. "optimized" "code" "port" "blah blah"
jesus christ, get over it.
I don't think you're calling me a liar. Option B is probably right.
I'm gonna go back to playing the game now... you know... having that thing called "fun." You should try it some time.
edit: I would also like to add that I am using an ATI 4850. It's not even the top of the line card. I'm thrilled that I can play a brand-new PC game as well as I can with a card that isn't even top-notch. Hell, the card cost 150 bucks.... lol that's NOTHING.
Also, remember the days of playing a new game when it came out, only to find out that it brought your PC to its knees? This could be because of many factors (like the ones always bantered on about that I mentioned above). But, it could also be because of an insane amount of shit going on in the game.
edit again:
I would also like to add that at the DEFAULT, AUTO settings that the game gave me, the gaming experience is still MUCH better than on the consoles.
Read the graphics read-me.
It compares the settings between PC and Consoles. PCs are able to blow the consoles away - not only in the resolution department, shadows, details, draw distance, traffic density, etc.
There's a lot of shit going on in this game. Your CPU is crunching all the weird AI shit, there's all kinds of shit on the screen to render....
Man, you get all these cool radio stations, a living, breathing, city- actual actors that played a lot of the voices, and kick-ass sandbox gameplay.
For all of that, not getting your magical 60fps gameplay is not the end of the world in my opinion.
However, to you- it may be. If so, sorry man.
Phoenix '97
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- May 4, 2000
- Messages
- 4,539
I'd like to see how the game scales from 1 to 4 cores. For someone with a quad:
While the game is running, go into Task Manager, right click on the game's .exe, and Set Affinity. Select between 1 to 4 of the cores and run the in-game benchmarks.
I have a quad myself but FutureShop doesn't have the game available until tomorrow.
While the game is running, go into Task Manager, right click on the game's .exe, and Set Affinity. Select between 1 to 4 of the cores and run the in-game benchmarks.
I have a quad myself but FutureShop doesn't have the game available until tomorrow.
Ok, so I don not want to be rude or start any fights, but some of you are spoiled as shit. Welcome to PC gaming, sorry you came late to the party. Remember Doom 3? Took a while to get playable. I remember decompressing the bin files to make textures load faster. Remember TESIV:Oblivion? Still can bring a modern computer to it's knees. Then add the texture packs and mods... crawl. Hell, I remember LOMAC kicking my PC's ass at the time. Crysis has FAR better graphics that GTAIV, but notice the lack of AI objects. Compare and contrast to GTAIV, SUPCOM and WIC. They have far inferior graphics, but the resources needed are sky high due to the sheer number of objects on the screen that need to be told to do something. That takes resources, that quite frankly do not fully exist at this time on most desktops. Hell, FS9 & X kick the crap out of most computers and it's graphics are stone-age in comparison. There is more than big textures and resolution going on.
There is a steep curve to this hobby, which is why it attracts adults, as adults have more discretionary income. To say that you refuse to play a game if it does not run at 60+ FPS minimum is silly. Give it a year of hardware advances, Nvidia and ATI patches, Windows patches and GTAIV patches, and we will run this game at full throttle. As is common, the hardware lags behind the software.
From bench results, I am guessing the game only utilizes 3 cores.
Dual cores are getting a constant %100 load, where as quads are getting 65-75% load, which would suggest that one core isnt being utilized. Keeping in mind that the recommended specs are a quad or a Phenom X3. I dont think this is coincidental.
Dual cores are getting a constant %100 load, where as quads are getting 65-75% load, which would suggest that one core isnt being utilized. Keeping in mind that the recommended specs are a quad or a Phenom X3. I dont think this is coincidental.
In my opinion, this game is NOT a poor "port." Bully was a poor port lol.
There are tons of features (both technical and otherwise) that the consoles didn't even have.
"Optimized?" You guys do know that new games will come out, and keep coming out, and even top-of-the-line systems get pushed eventually.
oh, and just to be clear (and to dispel any thinking that this game is without flaws)
The shadows are grainy.
At least they are on my system. I've read that they were like this on the consoles as well, but you could only notice it using a certain display type, whatever.
So, yeah, the shadows definitely need improvement. That's the one flaw I've found so far. I'll post about more if I find any....
The shadows are grainy.
At least they are on my system. I've read that they were like this on the consoles as well, but you could only notice it using a certain display type, whatever.
So, yeah, the shadows definitely need improvement. That's the one flaw I've found so far. I'll post about more if I find any....
Preach Brotha!!..
Lol,
Now if I can just figure out what the fuck is causing the Flash errors that are CTD'ing, I can play the damn game.
okay, so, I installed FRAPS (yeah, didn't have it installed. I'm not a benchmarking kind of guy lol)
It never dipped below 34fps, even when doing crazy shit with all kinds of stuff going on.
It was sitting in the mid to high 40s most of the time.
Happy?
Now time to uninstall FRAPS.
(oh, and some more info: alt-tab works perfectly with this game. I love having 8GB of ram.... alt-tabbing effortlessly is great)
It never dipped below 34fps, even when doing crazy shit with all kinds of stuff going on.
It was sitting in the mid to high 40s most of the time.
Happy?
Now time to uninstall FRAPS.
(oh, and some more info: alt-tab works perfectly with this game. I love having 8GB of ram.... alt-tabbing effortlessly is great)
Brownstone
Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2007
- Messages
- 873
Fuck this game
I wanna buy it on Steam, but for some reason it doesn't have Add to cart option
Srry for offtopic =)
I wanna buy it on Steam, but for some reason it doesn't have Add to cart option
Srry for offtopic =)
I have a GTX 280 SSC and I can max out all the settings at 1920X1200 except the game refuses to allow me to max out viewing distance and even gives me warning about exceeding tolerances for optimum performance. The game literally will not allow me to set the viewing distance past about 41 or so.
Are you kidding me? For a console port, no less?
I don't care if it's less than 60fps as long as it's nice and playable.
I agree with you in general with this nice rant but c'mon guy. This is a console port for which they've been working on for months. It's not something new from the ground up like some of the games you're talking about from the past.
If someone like me can have the literal top of the line GPU from one of two leading companies out there and I'm running into brick walls, again this is on a CONSOLE PORT...then frankly, I think it's pretty ridiculous myself.
I just bought this video card about a month ago as a splurge to myself and I expect games like Crysis or even Far Cry 2 to post a challenge (they don't now) but some friggin' console port?
Are you kidding me? For a console port, no less?
I don't care if it's less than 60fps as long as it's nice and playable.
schizrade said:
I agree with you in general with this nice rant but c'mon guy. This is a console port for which they've been working on for months. It's not something new from the ground up like some of the games you're talking about from the past.
If someone like me can have the literal top of the line GPU from one of two leading companies out there and I'm running into brick walls, again this is on a CONSOLE PORT...then frankly, I think it's pretty ridiculous myself.
I just bought this video card about a month ago as a splurge to myself and I expect games like Crysis or even Far Cry 2 to post a challenge (they don't now) but some friggin' console port?
I also must say, that this is part of what drew me into the IT field. Problems. I make a GREAT living fixing problems. Video games got me into computers back in the Atari 400/800 days when I used to make games in BASIC. While this is frustrating, it is part of what I and many other love. Fixing problems.
I program CUDA apps. I love doing that. It is problem after problem. By the time you have an app 99% debugged, you are sitting on top of the world... only to start over when a new function is needed or you make a new realization on how to make it better.
Same with resolving screwy DNS and LDAP/AD issues.
It is a hobby that never ends and ALWAYS presents a challenge. It also parlays into real world applications.
Oh and it is fun too.
I program CUDA apps. I love doing that. It is problem after problem. By the time you have an app 99% debugged, you are sitting on top of the world... only to start over when a new function is needed or you make a new realization on how to make it better.
Same with resolving screwy DNS and LDAP/AD issues.
It is a hobby that never ends and ALWAYS presents a challenge. It also parlays into real world applications.
Oh and it is fun too.
you can set a command line parameter of
-norestrictions
or something.... that will allow you to set everything high I believe.
Oh, also, I wanted to clarify what I said when I said "grainy" shadows.
The shadows aren't grainy.... the borders of the shadows are grainy.
If you really pay attention to it, you'll notice. But, if you're just playing the game, it's really not a big deal.
-norestrictions
or something.... that will allow you to set everything high I believe.
Oh, also, I wanted to clarify what I said when I said "grainy" shadows.
The shadows aren't grainy.... the borders of the shadows are grainy.
If you really pay attention to it, you'll notice. But, if you're just playing the game, it's really not a big deal.
Where? Is there an .ini file somewhere?
This game even on less than highest settings is drop dead gorgeous and way better than what I saw on the consoles.
GoldenTiger
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2004
- Messages
- 29,690
I remember perfectly fine... in fact I remember editing autoexec.bat and config.sys just to get games to run
. Thanks, but... as I said, this game obviously doesn't run well on today's top-end hardware, so I'll wait for it to hit the bargain bin. I'm not an impatient guy who has to have the game NOW because it's new... once it's in the bargain bin I'm sure newer hardware will run it fine. I don't see why you want to go off the handle at me when all I am saying is that I'm going to wait it out .I'm not calling you a liar, we just happen to have different gameplay tolerances on framerate
. I *personally* notice a game running what appears to be with a small amount of choppiness at anything below 45FPS, and unplayable at 25-30FPS for most games. Thus to me, it would not be running well. I don't feel a need to shell out full-price and play it immediately with patches already obviously needed from this thread. I've already waited several extra months after owning the poorly-performing 360 version then selling it to wait for PC... I can wait a few weeks for a deal.Agreed.
That's kind of dumb for a console port that they've had months to work on but look in my thread history and look up the Bully PC thread. That's another Rockstar "gem" they still haven't fixed.
The Fatal MMA10 error I just ran into and found the work around for is also dumb and certainly doesn't set a great tone going into this.
Can you sum it up quickly? What was the issue?
guitarguy6
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2007
- Messages
- 1,948
How did you get around the MMA10 error? The only way I could was to signout of the social club. When I did and started the game anyways it said the save feature would not be available... Also when I go into graphics options I can't change anything past the default values they give me. It also only detects 512mb video ram even though I have 2 X 4870 512mb...
You go to fire the game up, you get to the opening Rockstar logo, it stutters, freezes for a second, crash to desktop and message reads "GTAIV Fatal Error MMA10."
No way you or me should have much if any limits on this game's settings. This is a console port, folks!
You have to log out of the stupid Social Club thing they married this game to. Log out in the upper right corner of that thing's screen and then hit the "play" option for the game. You'll have access to singler player and nothing else.
Nice.
That is the issue. Staying logged into the Social Club thing apparently causes that error. I found that out by hitting Google. So at least I worked around that problem.
I'm still trying to figure out how a console port makes a GTX280 SSC sweat more than the likes of Crysis, Far Cry 2, Fallout 3 or any number of other games I could mention both PC exclusive and otherwise.
you can enter command line parameters on the game's exe shortcut I believe. I don't have Steam.
If you have steam, I believe steam has a way to do that from the steam interface as well. (I remember doing it with HL2 once before)....
here's the excerpt from the readme file on the DVD:
Code:
12) COMMAND LINE PARAMETERS
_______________________
Tools:
-benchmark: Runs the benchmark tool and immediately exits game.
-help: Display list of all command line options
Graphics:
-renderquality: Set the render quality of the game. (0-4)
-shadowdensity: Set the shadow density of the game. (0-16)
-texturequality: Set the texture quality of the game. (0-2)
-viewdistance: Set the view distance of the game (0-99)
-detailquality: Set the detail quality of the game. (0-99)
-novblank: Disable wait for vblank (No Vsync)
-norestrictions: Do not limit graphics settings
-width: Set width of main render window (default is 800)
-height: Set height of main render window (default is 600)
-safemode: Run the graphics in the lowest setting possible
-frameLimit: Limit frame to interval of refresh rate
(ex If refreshrate is 60HZ frameLimit 1 = Locks down to 60HZ)
-refreshrate: Set the refresh rate of main render window
Warning - Monitor must support (ex. refreshrate 60)
-fullscreen: Force fullscreen mode
-windowed: Force windowed mode
-availablevidmem: Set amount of physical Video Memory(ex. availablevidmem 0.9)
-percentvidmem: Percentage of video memory to make available to GTA
Audio:
-fullspecaudio: Force high-end CPU audio footprint
-minspecaudio: Force low-end CPU audio footprint
System:
-noprecache: Disable precache of resources
-nomemrestrict: Disable memory restrictionsTheGooch69
Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2007
- Messages
- 633
With my rig in sig, the game runs like utter shit at 1680x1050 on medium settings.
I wish I could get a refund.
I wish I could get a refund.
Sigh.. that's not a good sign for me either.. :\
lol I'm bowling right now-
just a tip: to bowl, when it says you have to move the mouse back and forth, what they really mean, is that you have to move it back and then forward as fast as you possibly can lol. it seems to work well though.
TheGooch:
that sucks man. perhaps you can turn down settings (maybe not resolution, unless you have a CRT and you don't have to fuck with stupid LCD native resolution bullshit).
LCDs are the worst thing to happen to gaming lol
It used to be that if a game was too demanding, you just turned down the resolution, and it was still good looking (for the most part).
Stupid LCDs and their native resolutions....
I always used to think anything above 1024x768 in a game was "high resolution."
I still feel spoiled playing at 1280x1024.
1600x1200 used to be the holy grail lol
just a tip: to bowl, when it says you have to move the mouse back and forth, what they really mean, is that you have to move it back and then forward as fast as you possibly can lol. it seems to work well though.
TheGooch:
that sucks man. perhaps you can turn down settings (maybe not resolution, unless you have a CRT and you don't have to fuck with stupid LCD native resolution bullshit).
LCDs are the worst thing to happen to gaming lol
It used to be that if a game was too demanding, you just turned down the resolution, and it was still good looking (for the most part).
Stupid LCDs and their native resolutions....
I always used to think anything above 1024x768 in a game was "high resolution."
I still feel spoiled playing at 1280x1024.
1600x1200 used to be the holy grail lol
MrGuvernment
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 21,823
you are DA MON! SHABBA!
i remember doom 3!! they said it could play on a radeon 8500, YA my arse it could..LOL!!
you cant expect "new" games to play on all high with your "not as new" video card
personally ilove game makers make games that bring rigs to their knee's, it makes me want to reinstall the game later again when i get new gear!
Blackstone
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2007
- Messages
- 3,580
I totally noticed that too!
they're bitching because their computers aren't powerful enough.
sucks, but it's the truth.
and, because of that, there will be 10000 threads about how it is "poorly optimized"
just like crysis.
but this time, they'll blame it on being a "port" too.... not just "poorly coded"
sigh.
sucks, but it's the truth.
and, because of that, there will be 10000 threads about how it is "poorly optimized"
just like crysis.
but this time, they'll blame it on being a "port" too.... not just "poorly coded"
sigh.
GoldenTiger
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2004
- Messages
- 29,690
Did you even read my post? I have a GTX 280
. I don't mind if a game performs badly because it looks incredible (see: Crysis and my defense of it constantly around its launch period), but GTA 4 just isn't that good looking that it should run so poorly, nor does it have some amazing elaborate physics that should cause it to either.You go to fire the game up, you get to the opening Rockstar logo, it stutters, freezes for a second, crash to desktop and message reads "GTAIV Fatal Error MMA10."
No way you or me should have much if any limits on this game's settings. This is a console port, folks!
You have to log out of the stupid Social Club thing they married this game to. Log out in the upper right corner of that thing's screen and then hit the "play" option for the game. You'll have access to singler player and nothing else.
Nice.
log out of the social club. start the game.
alt-tab.
log back into the social club.
go back to the game.
done.
no big deal.
There is windows live stuff too.... I have mine auto-login to that.
I expect they'll fix the social club issue. It's not like it's a huge deal though... it takes what, like a second to alt-tab? lol
- yeah, I'm still alt-tabbed... I forgot.
on another note-
whoever was dogging people for buying 8GB of ram must have forgotten how great it is to not have your hard drive swap-file thrash when you alt tab
RAM ftw