GTA 5 to look way better on PC.

[futurefields]

there are a couple that go to ultra i think, like reflection quality i think is one

 

[Scarpozzi]

Console controllers make the game more fun than keyboard/mouse....not to mention, playing on a TV. It's really best on a console platform for that style of game since it's 3rd person.

I really dig the reflections on the car paint and the sharp images. It definitely needs that if it's on a computer monitor (small screen & close viewing distance). I bet the online experience on PC would still be fun... Otherwise, I'll stick to the console version. I've got it on 360, but haven't played in a while. I need to next time the kids fall asleep before I do.

 

[Josh123]

Console controllers make the game more fun than keyboard/mouse....not to mention, playing on a TV. It's really best on a console platform for that style of game since it's 3rd person.

I really dig the reflections on the car paint and the sharp images. It definitely needs that if it's on a computer monitor (small screen & close viewing distance). I bet the online experience on PC would still be fun... Otherwise, I'll stick to the console version. I've got it on 360, but haven't played in a while. I need to next time the kids fall asleep before I do.

I agree when it comes to driving but nothing beats aiming with a mouse.

 

[cbrunny]

Might be a good candidate game for the Steam controller.


I was playing last night & experienced some mild artifacting. I cranked everything up to max except MSAA w hich I left at 2x. In the bottom right corner there was a square of about 200w x 100h pixels - a rough guess - htat was artifacting. Nothing else was behaving oddly. 2 x 7970 CF OC @ 1050/1500. Not sure if my OC is dying or some other thing. It was minor.

 

[Attic]

Anybody playing on a G3258 Pentium? From feedback here the game sounds worth a purchase if my dual core can provide decent frames. I'm seeing other limited feedback that the G3258 (OC'd to 4.0-4.4) is ok for this game.

 

[JeffMD]

Console controllers make the game more fun than keyboard/mouse....not to mention, playing on a TV. It's really best on a console platform for that style of game since it's 3rd person.

Accept that one of its newer and arguably better modes are the first person mode. Also bar none, I will own any (excluding those "gifted" players who are autistic geniuses with the thumb pad) game pad player when it comes to aiming. Especialy head shots. I laughed and agreed with the ign reviewer when he said that the game kinda got easier with the mouse, during the opening mission most of the cops didn't really make it out of their cars as we snipped them driving up.

I won't deny having an analog button for the gas when driving makes it all better, but I have been getting by on the mouse/keyboard (the free mouse look when driving is addicting, its kind of annoying how when driving with a game pad, I feel like I have blinders because my camera isn't turning in the direction I am wanting to go.

As for the TV, well, my pc monitor is a 32 inch 1080p tv. Does that count?

 

[Atomic Playboy]

I am curious about something regarding Xfire, perhaps to include SLI:
in this game, I see the VRAM usage slider showing up to 8GB available VRAM, and shows the game is set to use around 7GB based on my settings.

Does this game make use of SFR and is able to pool all of the VRAM? Or is that just a weird result of multi-GPU?

It's an internal calculation error in the game. It adds all the RAM across every card you have, which isn't how SLI or XFire actually work, but it also multiplies the VRAM usage by the number of cards you have. So if it says you're using 7 GB out of 8 GB with 2 cards in SLI, you're actually using 3.5 GB out of 4 GB. People with quad Titan Xs were showing VRAM usage of 24 GB out of 48 GB, which was clearly not accurate.

The internal VRAM slider is not a perfect indicator of performance anyway. I'm using Very High textures on a 2 GB GTX 680 and I haven't had a single performance issue, despite being ~500 MB over max VRAM. After swapping out MSAA in favor of FXAA, I'm averaging 60 FPS with occasional dips in the wooded/grassy areas and no sign of microstutter or hitching that usually accompanies frequent VRAM swapping, so ignore the VRAM slider and play around with settings until you find something stable and suitably pretty.

 

[JeffMD]

Engine doesn't see that stable. Performance sure but general stability still away's to go. Around 7hrs of gameplay, 3 generic D3D crashes. The game just dumps and errors out. One seemed to be not following a scripted ish path, another going online, then offline a bit later locked it up, and a third just random. This is after 400MB of patches yesterday. More screens:

I havn't had a single crash... game says I am 20 hours in but its weird.. i'm only like 10, my first save for some reason had a boost. The only issue I had scripting wise was the game did hang up when I drove into Michael's drive way for the first time and it was supposed to cycle through the areas of the house. However switching to online and then back to single player (Something I learned from the ps3 days) got me out of it and it didn't happen again.

I rarely have crashes, I know how to keep my computer configured properly and I don't cheap out on hardware. It seems like most problems other people are having are with the crappy downloader which corrupted pre downloads, the incompatible characters in the windows logon which is related to the save engine, and then you have all the people playing it with hardware not covered by minimum requirements. (oh, and idiots who disable their swap file).

 

[flexy]

>>
Found a odd issue,i got 8gb of ram in my system and no pagefile usually as i simply game.This game crashes the second i hit a hairline over 4gb of ram
>>

This is because you're exceeding maximum video memory allocation. (By the way, do you have a GTX 970?) It's a rather known fact that exceeding 3.5GB on the GTX 970 (and likely exceeding 4gb on the GTX 980, but not sure there) causes the creation of a 8GB pagefile. You can test this with EVGA OC Scanner with the test that used 3GB of video memory, it will also create (respective allocate) 8GB of page file.

(The question here is WHAT is actually paged out, is video memory allocated by Windows paged out??)

The other question, and one that always puzzled me is WHY ON EARTH are people disabling their pagefile?

If you have 16GB+ memory, it does not create the pagefile on HD but likely uses your other 8GB of system ram (Windows is smart, why use a file on HD if you have enough spare memory left?)....if you only have 8GB it pages out. If you disabled your pagefile, or you set it to fixed at a lower value than 8GB...you get a crash since the system [in this case the video drivers] allocates memory which you obviously don't have and cannot allocate. Therefore it's best A) to set pagefile at "system managed" so it can actually create the 8GB when needed B) to make sure you have that space left on your system drive so it can expand to this size or (best option) C) have a card with plenty (!!) of video memory or D) have 16GB of system memory

But good to know this *does* happen in GTA V.

Edit2: This also shows that 16GB system memory would be better for performance, also for systems which seem to otherwise NEVER make use of 16GB. (Like mine, I hardly ever see my 8GB used). But while this of course means that more real VIDEO MEMORY would be needed, having this virtual memory created in your system memory would still be better than having it created on HD, especially if this pagefile would contain game assets which are actually be used. (As said not sure here WHAT actually is getting paged out in such a scenario).

 

[Fire&Blood]

Anyone here (USA) get the game via Nuuvem+Hola route? If so, any issues?

 

[JeffMD]

It's an internal calculation error in the game. It adds all the RAM across every card you have, which isn't how SLI or XFire actually work, but it also multiplies the VRAM usage by the number of cards you have.

The internal VRAM slider is not a perfect indicator of performance anyway. I'm using Very High textures on a 2 GB GTX 680 and I haven't had a single performance issue, despite being ~500 MB over max VRAM.

I actually found the vram indicator to be too lax. Mine targeted like 2.1 gb with my 1080p settings, but after several minutes of running around I found my gpu memory was filling up and hung around at the 3.5gb mark. Mind you there was no performance issues, I believe I recall that the drivers will utilize unused memory to cache used shaders so they don't need to be recompiled.

 

[JeffMD]

>>
Found a odd issue,i got 8gb of ram in my system and no pagefile usually as i simply game.This game crashes the second i hit a hairline over 4gb of ram
>>

This is because

Already got into this with another user on steam. Don't disable your swap file..ever. windows has been designed around using a swap file as part of its normal operating specifications since windows 2k. Your ram requirements skyrocket just from windows overhead without it.

 

[JeffMD]

Does anybody know if this game got some kind of patch overnight? I mean it was very optimized before, but now it seems unbelievable good. I was running at 1080p with almost max settings. Now I'm playing at 1440p with almost max settings and everything seems really smooth.


The only thing I did different was OC my video card but there is no way I'm seeing these kind of gains from that.

I heard from one other user that his performance increased after rebooting for some strange reason. No patch afaik.

 

[destrekor]

Anybody playing on a G3258 Pentium? From feedback here the game sounds worth a purchase if my dual core can provide decent frames. I'm seeing other limited feedback that the G3258 (OC'd to 4.0-4.4) is ok for this game.

It might not be TOO bad, but I think the CPU will be your limiting factor, for sure.

Take a look at this:

And look at Anandtech's bench comparing the i3-4330 vs G3258. The i3 in this instance is also favorable for this game, considering it has 4 threads (dual core, HT), whereas the G3258 only has 2 threads (dual core, no HT). Considering the scaling in the image above, that is also with a top-end GPU SLI setup, which is usually more demanding of CPU and platform performance. You may get away with a playable framerate, but you should at least know there is potential to have a CPU bottleneck. The OC on it and the per-core performance may be enough of a boost, for sure. Healthy OC's on modern Intel cores provide a tremendous boost, so that cannot be ignored.

 

[flexy]

That honestly is the only issue i have ran into

It's not a bug, game simply allocates more video memory than you have.
It has been discussed at depth in particular during the recent "GTX 970 3.5GB fiasco", since people see the pagefile created once 3GB or so are allocated, no matter what game or bench.

If this causes any performance issues (which it should since, after all, you're using more video memory than you physically have) you need to turn down graphics settings and not exceed what your card can handle. On the other hand it could be that the pagefile merely pages out video memory (say, from Windows) to free up video memory....and that it won't have a significant effect on actual performance in game.

 

[destrekor]

Already got into this with another user on steam. Don't disable your swap file..ever. windows has been designed around using a swap file as part of its normal operating specifications since windows 2k. Your ram requirements skyrocket just from windows overhead without it.

Yep. No matter how much RAM you have in your system, even 32GB or more, keep that page file on. It's integral to system performance, virtual memory is in fact integral to modern OS architecture. Windows, Linux, OS X (and thus BSD, Unix, etc), rely on virtual memory of some sort.

 

[cmdrdredd]

what can you do in the world besides the missions?

Tennis, golf, flying planes and helicopters, boat and car races off road too, sky diving, shooting range, scuba diving, Ferris wheel and roller coaster, strip clubs, hunting challenges, amateur photography contest, yoga, find all the alien artifacts, mountain biking, Bmx ramp park, customize your cars.

The golf mini game is actually very good.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Question, I've seen a few people here mention "Ultra" as an option for graphic effects, yet all I see is Very High as the max. I have a 980, and this pertains to a friend who is running SLI 980s - so, are people just using the wrong terms or am I missing something? Because GeForce Experience also "maxes" all my settings and none are at Ultra.

Only a few settings actually go to ultra as an option. Check manually. I know grass does because I had to turn it down to very high.

 

[cmdrdredd]

how do I show the FPS?

I use MSI afterburner's on screen display to show my fps. You could also use fraps.


As for the windows memory error I fixed it by turning off the page file on my SSD and turning it on for my mechanical drives. Then I set it to system controlled for all of them. Hasn't happened again. I think it errors out when doing Virtual memory on an SSD. Other people on rockstar forums say the same thing so I tried it and viola.

 

[JeffMD]

I did some speed ripping test on the disc and found out the dual layered read mode is pretty different.

On a normal dvd-r my lite-on will read 6.4x-16x (Single disc speed) no problem. On dual layer disc it's specifications is 4.8x - 12x (and then reverses when it reaches the outer edge and switches layers). Also I wasn't quite getting that, during the iso copy I started at 3.6x (5 megs a second) so the rotation speed was a little lower then max.

So yea these installs are kinda slow.

 

[finbarqs]

>>
Found a odd issue,i got 8gb of ram in my system and no pagefile usually as i simply game.This game crashes the second i hit a hairline over 4gb of ram
>>

This is because you're exceeding maximum video memory allocation. (By the way, do you have a GTX 970?) It's a rather known fact that exceeding 3.5GB on the GTX 970 (and likely exceeding 4gb on the GTX 980, but not sure there) causes the creation of a 8GB pagefile. You can test this with EVGA OC Scanner with the test that used 3GB of video memory, it will also create (respective allocate) 8GB of page file.

(The question here is WHAT is actually paged out, is video memory allocated by Windows paged out??)

The other question, and one that always puzzled me is WHY ON EARTH are people disabling their pagefile?

If you have 16GB+ memory, it does not create the pagefile on HD but likely uses your other 8GB of system ram (Windows is smart, why use a file on HD if you have enough spare memory left?)....if you only have 8GB it pages out. If you disabled your pagefile, or you set it to fixed at a lower value than 8GB...you get a crash since the system [in this case the video drivers] allocates memory which you obviously don't have and cannot allocate. Therefore it's best A) to set pagefile at "system managed" so it can actually create the 8GB when needed B) to make sure you have that space left on your system drive so it can expand to this size or (best option) C) have a card with plenty (!!) of video memory or D) have 16GB of system memory

But good to know this *does* happen in GTA V.

Edit2: This also shows that 16GB system memory would be better for performance, also for systems which seem to otherwise NEVER make use of 16GB. (Like mine, I hardly ever see my 8GB used). But while this of course means that more real VIDEO MEMORY would be needed, having this virtual memory created in your system memory would still be better than having it created on HD, especially if this pagefile would contain game assets which are actually be used. (As said not sure here WHAT actually is getting paged out in such a scenario).

not to mention if you're running off a SSD... I know RAM > SSD, but still, i'd be hard pressed if you actually notice the difference... Keep your Pagefile on people...

 

[skipsneeky2]

Does your benchmark give overall results at the end, like GTA4 did? Mine doesn't.

Just goes back to the game,nothing else happens.

Edit:Found in the Document folder in the games folder a benchmark folder with a notepad which includes the results.


rames Per Second (Higher is better) Min, Max, Avg
Pass 0, 34.381618, 77.085838, 59.643768
Pass 1, 22.977438, 57.092354, 38.793510
Pass 2, 31.403717, 132.859070, 66.677696
Pass 3, 36.346931, 100.010292, 69.233116
Pass 4, 26.501669, 112.003548, 55.023735

Time in milliseconds(ms). (Lower is better). Min, Max, Avg
Pass 0, 12.972551, 29.085310, 16.766211
Pass 1, 17.515480, 43.520954, 25.777508
Pass 2, 7.526772, 31.843365, 14.997519
Pass 3, 9.998971, 27.512638, 14.443954
Pass 4, 8.928288, 37.733471, 18.173975

768p with 4x msaa+2x reflection msaa,all other options maxed out on a 970+i7 3770 non k.

 

[DeadFred]

Just goes back to the game,nothing else happens.

Edit:Found in the Document folder in the games folder a benchmark folder with a notepad which includes the results.


rames Per Second (Higher is better) Min, Max, Avg
Pass 0, 34.381618, 77.085838, 59.643768
Pass 1, 22.977438, 57.092354, 38.793510
Pass 2, 31.403717, 132.859070, 66.677696
Pass 3, 36.346931, 100.010292, 69.233116
Pass 4, 26.501669, 112.003548, 55.023735

Time in milliseconds(ms). (Lower is better). Min, Max, Avg
Pass 0, 12.972551, 29.085310, 16.766211
Pass 1, 17.515480, 43.520954, 25.777508
Pass 2, 7.526772, 31.843365, 14.997519
Pass 3, 9.998971, 27.512638, 14.443954
Pass 4, 8.928288, 37.733471, 18.173975

768p with 4x msaa+2x reflection msaa,all other options maxed out on a 970+i7 3770 non k.

Thanks, I found it.

 

[futurefields]

I agree when it comes to driving but nothing beats aiming with a mouse.

and it really sucks having to switch back and forth all the time, or else suffer handicapped aiming or robotic keyboard driving

 

[JeffMD]

Well I wanted to test it on my laptop that has a 745m gtx, but the game is pretty broken when it comes to dual gpu laptops.

My nemesis "administration rights" was keeping the stupid social club in a retry loop. I think I got this now. -_- You would think game updaters would have mastered UAC by now?