GTA IV for PC (official)

By alphaomegainfinity
in PC Gaming

 Share

Recommended Posts

Veteran

Caleo Global Moderator

Posted
  • Global Moderator
Posted
What resolution do you play at? 1440x900? I've yet to break the 35 FPS barrier with my rig: C2D E6750 @ 3.2 GHz, HD 4870, and 8GB DDR2 RAM + Windows Vista Ultimate x64 w/ SP1.

The game is heavily cpu dependant. A quad-core cpu in a multithreaded game is a lot beefier than a dual core cpu.

I'm on an X2 4200+ (2.2ghz stock @ 2.75ghz) / 2GB of ram / 9800GTX and nothing I do to the graphics settings make the game playable (as far as I'm concerned) due to my mediocre cpu. I suspect things would be different if I had a new Q9450 or something else beefy/quad-core.

Frequent dips below 30fps = unplayable.

The game is so crappily ported that it runs 360 code via qemu.

Grand Master

Yusuf M. Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
The game is heavily cpu dependant. A quad-core cpu in a multithreaded game is a lot beefier than a dual core cpu.

I'm on an X2 4200+ (2.2ghz stock @ 2.75ghz) / 2GB of ram / 9800GTX and nothing I do to the graphics settings make the game playable (as far as I'm concerned) due to my mediocre cpu. I suspect things would be different if I had a new Q9450 or something else beefy/quad-core.

Frequent dips below 30fps = unplayable.

The game is so crappily ported that it runs 360 code via qemu.

The game definitely favours more than 2 cores. Anyway, I've started playing the game (for real now) and I'm enjoying it a lot. The missions are fun and I'm always finding new and interesting looking cars to drive.

  • 3 weeks later...
Grand Master

Prosidius

Posted
Posted

So I bought this game on steam and it looks like crap graphics wise on low but even still it punishes my video card. I can only play the game for a minute before my X1900XT beeps signaling it's overheating.

Grand Master

Srugie Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
So I bought this game on steam and it looks like crap graphics wise on low but even still it punishes my video card. I can only play the game for a minute before my X1900XT beeps signaling it's overheating.

This is what we have to live with for a bad PC port.

Grand Master

Sethos

Posted
Posted

I'm still playing the game, can't believe how addictive it is. Also, with the latest patch I've been able to tweak the game quite a bit and found the sweet spot between smooth gameplay and looking good. These settings allow me to hit the Vsync roof at 60 FPS and that's constantly, it never dips in-game ( Okay, perhaps a few frames but nothing noticeable );

Untitled-2.png

A tip for anyone who's experiencing constant FPS dips and tiny freezes, Vsync is the key!

Experienced

Lyric

Posted
Posted
People that don't have money or incentive to upgrade. It's a decent video card but it's definitely not good enough for GTA IV. I have an HD 4870 and it's playable, but barely enjoyable. You'll need a Core i7 gaming rig coupled with a very high end CrossFire or SLI configuration to run the game (maxed out) at 60 FPS.

lol...no way. I can play GTA IV fine on my current setup....also GTA IV doesn't utilize SLI or Crossfire yet, so that would be a waste of money until it does so.

E8400 @ 4.1GHz, GTX-275 @ 720/1584/1215 clocks and I have everything on high @ 1680x1050 resolution and average 62fps on the benchmark. Game play is fine as well.

Grand Master

Sethos

Posted
Posted
lol...no way. I can play GTA IV fine on my current setup....also GTA IV doesn't utilize SLI or Crossfire yet, so that would be a waste of money until it does so.

E8400 @ 4.1GHz, GTX-275 @ 720/1584/1215 clocks and I have everything on high @ 1680x1050 resolution and average 62fps on the benchmark. Game play is fine as well.

Actually, it does utilize Crossfire from what I've heard, even displays the Crossfire icon if you activate it. I have heard it doesn't / didn't support SLI, which was supposed to be added in a patch at some point ... not sure if its one of the previous patches or its still being worked on.

Oh and just to make it clear, just because it doesn't show the full amount of available video RAM in options, it's still doing Crossfire.

Experienced

Lyric

Posted
Posted
Actually, it does utilize Crossfire from what I've heard, even displays the Crossfire icon if you activate it. I have heard it doesn't / didn't support SLI, which was supposed to be added in a patch at some point ... not sure if its one of the previous patches or its still being worked on.

Oh and just to make it clear, just because it doesn't show the full amount of available video RAM in options, it's still doing Crossfire.

ok, well I am a nvidia user....so I just assumed because SLI didn't work, XFire doesn't as well. I'm not sure...so its a possibility.

Grand Master

Yusuf M. Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
lol...no way. I can play GTA IV fine on my current setup....also GTA IV doesn't utilize SLI or Crossfire yet, so that would be a waste of money until it does so.

E8400 @ 4.1GHz, GTX-275 @ 720/1584/1215 clocks and I have everything on high @ 1680x1050 resolution and average 62fps on the benchmark. Game play is fine as well.

Question is, do you have the game maxed out? And by maxed out... I mean every possible setting as high as possible. It isn't achievable with the GTX 285 so it's definitely not achievable with the GTX 275. For that, you'll need a dual-GPU/dual video card solution coupled with a high end quad-core CPU. Anyway, as far as I'm aware the game does support CrossFire configurations. I'm not so sure about SLI configurations.

Experienced

Lyric

Posted
Posted
Question is, do you have the game maxed out? And by maxed out... I mean every possible setting as high as possible. It isn't achievable with the GTX 285 so it's definitely not achievable with the GTX 275. For that, you'll need a dual-GPU/dual video card solution coupled with a high end quad-core CPU. Anyway, as far as I'm aware the game does support CrossFire configurations. I'm not so sure about SLI configurations.

The GTX 275 is basically a GTX 285, there are several benchmarks of both cards and they are within .5 - 1fps of each other when tested in games. It's just the GTX-275 is a better choice because it is $90 cheaper. Also, with my E8400 @ 4.1GHz, it barely sees 85% usage...so I don't see how you'd absolutely need a Quad-Core CPU to play this game with good frame rates as it doesn't even utilize my CPU 100%.

And to max out every single setting in GTA IV would be a complete waste....some of the settings in GTA IV I can't even tell a difference visually when I turn them up.

Anyway, I don't remember my exact settings as I already pretty much beat the game and got bored with it, but every setting was/is on High or more and a few settings are on very high. 1680x1050 resolution, vsync off, every other option is on. view distance is like 100, forget the other settings...

Grand Master

Yusuf M. Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
The GTX 275 is basically a GTX 285, there are several benchmarks of both cards and they are within .5 - 1fps of each other when tested in games. It's just the GTX-275 is a better choice because it is $90 cheaper. Also, with my E8400 @ 4.1GHz, it barely sees 85% usage...so I don't see how you'd absolutely need a Quad-Core CPU to play this game with good frame rates as it doesn't even utilize my CPU 100%.

And to max out every single setting in GTA IV would be a complete waste....some of the settings in GTA IV I can't even tell a difference visually when I turn them up.

Anyway, I don't remember my exact settings as I already pretty much beat the game and got bored with it, but every setting was/is on High or more and a few settings are on very high. 1680x1050 resolution, vsync off, every other option is on. view distance is like 100, forget the other settings...

No, the GTX 275 is not a GTX 285. It's half of a GTX 295, and it sits between the GTX 260 Core 216 and GTX 285 (see here). As for CPU usage, it isn't indicative of performance. GTA IV benefits from the use of multiple cores because it has the support for it. As indicated by this benchmark, a C2E QX6850 @ 3.0 GHz beats a C2D E8500 @ 4.0 GHz. Also, take a look at the FPS difference with the E6850 and QX6850. There's a huge jump in performance when you go quad-core.

You don't have the game maxed out. To say that maxing the game out is a waste is ludicrous. Why? Simply because you don't notice it doesn't mean I, or anyone else, wouldn't. The settings are available for a reason: to make the game look better visually. As I said before, you need a hefty system to max out the game and achieve 60 FPS. Rockstar themselves have said that the higher settings are "reserved for future computer hardware".

Experienced

Lyric

Posted
Posted
No, the GTX 275 is not a GTX 285. It's half of a GTX 295, and it sits between the GTX 260 Core 216 and GTX 285 (see here). As for CPU usage, it isn't indicative of performance. GTA IV benefits from the use of multiple cores because it has the support for it. As indicated by this benchmark, a C2E QX6850 @ 3.0 GHz beats a C2D E8500 @ 4.0 GHz. Also, take a look at the FPS difference with the E6850 and QX6850. There's a huge jump in performance when you go quad-core.

You don't have the game maxed out. To say that maxing the game out is a waste is ludicrous. Why? Simply because you don't notice it doesn't mean I, or anyone else, wouldn't. The settings are available for a reason: to make the game look better visually. As I said before, you need a hefty system to max out the game and achieve 60 FPS. Rockstar themselves have said that the higher settings are "reserved for future computer hardware".

275 is better than a 285 in Price/Performance ratio, if you'll pay $90-$100 for a 1-3fps increase, you are very retarded to say the least. If you look at your own review that you just posted here: http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardw...-review-15.html you'll see that even in the higher resolutions where the 1GB of VRAM (GTX-285) is suppose to be better vs the 896MB of the 275 there is only a 1fps difference.

here is another benchmark test result sheet for you, all within 1fps of each other basically, so now again...if you still think I'm wrong....then I don't know what to say.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/...force-gtx-275/7

I'll agree with you somewhat on the Processor part, if you have a low end dual core (3.5ghz and under)...then sure the quad will be better. But if you have a E8400, E8500 or E8600 @ 4GHz +, there is absolutely no reason to go Quad, it would be a waste of money. It doesn't even utilize over 85% of my Processor at 4.1GHz.

Despite your processor review, the 5fps increase doesn't justify the $1,000 Price tag of a QX Processor....show me a bench of a Q6600 vs a E8500 thats around the same price level, and then I'll take that review seriously.

Grand Master

Yusuf M. Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
275 is better than a 285 in Price/Performance ratio, if you'll pay $90-$100 for a 1-3fps increase, you are very retarded to say the least. If you look at your own review that you just posted here: http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardw...-review-15.html you'll see that even in the higher resolutions where the 1GB of VRAM (GTX-285) is suppose to be better vs the 896MB of the 275 there is only a 1fps difference.

here is another benchmark test result sheet for you, all within 1fps of each other basically, so now again...if you still think I'm wrong....then I don't know what to say.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/...force-gtx-275/7

I'll agree with you somewhat on the Processor part, if you have a low end dual core (3.5ghz and under)...then sure the quad will be better. But if you have a E8400, E8500 or E8600 @ 4GHz +, there is absolutely no reason to go Quad, it would be a waste of money. It doesn't even utilize over 85% of my Processor at 4.1GHz.

Despite your processor review, the 5fps increase doesn't justify the $1,000 Price tag of a QX Processor....show me a bench of a Q6600 vs a E8500 thats around the same price level, and then I'll take that review seriously.

Forget about price. What I'm saying is that you'll need better hardware to max out the game at 60 FPS. The price/performance ratio is a topic for another discussion and is therefore irrelevant. The GTX 275 is beaten by the GTX 285 (by 2.89 FPS) as well as the HD 4870 (by 1.64 FPS) @ 1680x1050 (see here). Even if it's a 0.1 FPS difference, it's still better. My original statement still stands: "You'll need a Core i7 gaming rig coupled with a very high end CrossFire or SLI configuration to run the game (maxed out) at 60 FPS."

A) You didn't have to post the Far Cry 2 benchmark because it's unrelated. B) Price/performance isn't an issue if you want the best of the best. And in the case of GTA IV, you definitely need the best of the best [of PC hardware].

Grand Master

Prosidius

Posted
Posted

Am I the only one that hates the car chases, especially those that require you to go on a motorcycle? :p They murder my computer so often the guy gets away. >.< Not to mention there hard and I'm bad at video games. :p

Mentor

san.W10

Posted
Posted (edited)

i wish the "interaction" features of BULLY make it into GTA next.

i really enjoyed the ones in GTA SA, where CJ pwnd :p

i thought atleast that kind of interaction (Yes / No) wud make it into GTA4.

but anyways, i'm hoping that R* bring the interaction features into GTA next. :D

some features like these would also be awesome :D

-edit

R* shhould also bring bully's cop/prefect type of system, i.e., when we hide somewhere, cops should go away "wanted" stars reduce...

Edited by san.W10
Grand Master

deletedxyz

Posted
Posted

I just uninstalled GTA IV. The graphics (played it at 1920x1200 on very high settings on my laptop) and environment interaction are fantastic but that's all there is to it. The plot felt like it was trying to emulate Mafia and I got bored of it by the 43rd mission. All the missions ended up being "collect and drop packages" or assassinations. Here's to hoping that Mafia II will be a pleasurable experience like its predecessor this October.

Grand Master

Victor Rambo

Posted
Posted
I just uninstalled GTA IV. The graphics (played it at 1920x1200 on very high settings on my laptop) and environment interaction are fantastic but that's all there is to it. The plot felt like it was trying to emulate Mafia and I got bored of it by the 43rd mission. All the missions ended up being "collect and drop packages" or assassinations. Here's to hoping that Mafia II will be a pleasurable experience like its predecessor this October.

Oh dear! :no:

Its a sin not to complete GTA 4. :p

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.