Using the system in my sig, It runs like crap. about 20-26 fps. Latest patch and drivers. How is it running for you?
GTA4
- Thread starter Jules
- Start date
zerocool84
Lifer
- Nov 11, 2004
- 36,041
- 472
- 126
RallyMaster
Diamond Member
- Dec 28, 2004
- 5,581
- 0
- 0
That actually won't do much. GTAIV needs a quad. Experience tells me that a system using the same video card (HD4850) and same amount of memory (4GB) but different CPUs (E7200 at 333x9 vs Q6700 at 333x9) indefinitely shows the quad running GTAIV tons smoother than with the dual.
I played GTA4 with a dual core and it runs pretty well. Sick of people saying GTA4 needs a quad core processor. Recommended maybe but it doesn't need one to run good enough.
Anyway I never would of thought GTA4 would be the game to beat Crysis with system requirements.
zerocool84
Lifer
- Nov 11, 2004
- 36,041
- 472
- 126
QueBert
Lifer
- Jan 6, 2002
- 22,983
- 1,179
- 126
it does not need a quad, my GF has a regular C2D that's not even overlocked. While I've never bench marked the game to get exact FPS numbers. I have played 25% thru it and it hasn't been choppy yet. If it wasn't running @ 30FPS it was damn close. Could it have gone faster? Sure, but it was 100% playable. There's been zero un-smoothness thus far for me. I'd rather have a constant 27fps than a 60 max with dips into the mid teens all over the place. Without benchmarking I can tell you if definitely never dropped in the teens. Whatever the FPS her system gets is, it stays very steady.
The game does run much better on a Quad, and its not necessarily because its a poor port, there's just a ton of crap going on, tons of cars, tons of people, tons of dynamic objects that all need to be kept track of and require CPU time. I've also read the shadows use a soft-renderer that can slow things down. Try turning down viewing distance, car density and shadows and see if you get better performance.
Otherwise, try this Mod/Tweak . I've found it works quite well, with best results with Depth of Blur = OFF, Motion Blur = ON, Smooth Shadows = ON. Contrary to popular belief, Motion Blur is not always a bad thing and in the case of low FPS it clearly makes frame rates look smoother overall. You'll see similar with Crysis' implementation of Motion Blur.
GTA 4 seems to run decent on my system at the settings determined by auto configure and 16x10. It's not great, but fps avg around 30-35 which is not great, but not terrible either. I've lowered my resolution to 12x8 and have not really noticed any significant improvement, so I will go back to 16x10. I'm sure it runs better with a quad, but it's not a necessity as some wqould leave you to believe.
I noticed the same thing with GH III. There were/are alot of people saying that it ran like crap and was not even playable unless you had a top of the line PC. Yet even with a single core Opteron/X1900XT/2GB RAM that is currently in my kids PC, it is perfectly playable and they have no issues.
I think the majority of complaints with GTA 4 come from the fact that it seems to be more CPU dependent than VC dependent which we are not used to. That's why when I drop to 12x8 I do not see any real improvement in fps since I am CPU limited witht is game.
I noticed the same thing with GH III. There were/are alot of people saying that it ran like crap and was not even playable unless you had a top of the line PC. Yet even with a single core Opteron/X1900XT/2GB RAM that is currently in my kids PC, it is perfectly playable and they have no issues.
I think the majority of complaints with GTA 4 come from the fact that it seems to be more CPU dependent than VC dependent which we are not used to. That's why when I drop to 12x8 I do not see any real improvement in fps since I am CPU limited witht is game.
Then buy the game and get the version that doesn't require Microsoft games live and social club! Not sure if it will help any but it is worth a try!
GTA4 is cool but I prefer just playing GTA San Andreas now sense it is not a horrible console port. At least it never seem like that.
Games are not always about the graphics.
Games are not always about the graphics.
GTA4 for the PC is a really, really crappy port and runs badly for just about everyone. The fact that it has horrible DRM and really bad performance makes it a horrible buy IMO. Stay away...
GTA4 is a great game that runs very smoothly (especially since the second patch) if your machine meets the recommended specs. The PC version is far superior to the 360 version graphically if your machine is up to the task.
I got a huge performance boost going from an E8400 at 3 GHz to an Q6700 at 3 GHz. Yes, a quad helps, and the windows sidebar cpu meter showed all 4 cores maxing out while playing GTA4.
A quad does make a difference, at least in my fucking computer.
A quad does make a difference, at least in my fucking computer.
RallyMaster
Diamond Member
- Dec 28, 2004
- 5,581
- 0
- 0
Roger this, bro.
When was the last time a game ran smoothly on the "recommended" specifications? 2005? Ever since console ports came about, I've pretty much had to wait a generation for new hardware to run last year's games.
GTA4 is shit. Utter shit. I get the magical striped shadows on everything, tried ALL the fixes, reinstalling, drivers, etc... and still looks like shit. No AA. And on top of that if I alt-tab for any reason in multiplayer, I get kicked since my computer is obviously too 'slow' to run the game :roll:
Last time I listen to my friend's game recommendations.
edit:
shens. 3.2GHz C2D, 4GB RAM (on 32bit XP, so not all used), 4870 and the game runs like crap and looks like crap.
Last time I listen to my friend's game recommendations.
edit:
shens. 3.2GHz C2D, 4GB RAM (on 32bit XP, so not all used), 4870 and the game runs like crap and looks like crap.
EarthwormJim
Diamond Member
- Oct 15, 2003
- 3,239
- 0
- 76
GTA IV runs great on my computer, Quad at 3.8ghz and an 8800gt.
This is running unpatched. I did recently upgrade to the 2nd patch (didn't notice any difference). The first patch broke all sound in the game for me.
I play at 1920x1200 with most settings maxed (except draw distance).
I do wish my card had 1gb of vram though. I can't use any AA or else I get constant stuttering since the game would use more vram than what my video card has.
I'm glad I bought a Quad when I did. I just knew a situation like what you have with GTA IV would pop up in the near future. I never understood people buying a Dual core for a gaming pc, even a year ago just to save a few bucks.
This is running unpatched. I did recently upgrade to the 2nd patch (didn't notice any difference). The first patch broke all sound in the game for me.
I play at 1920x1200 with most settings maxed (except draw distance).
I do wish my card had 1gb of vram though. I can't use any AA or else I get constant stuttering since the game would use more vram than what my video card has.
I'm glad I bought a Quad when I did. I just knew a situation like what you have with GTA IV would pop up in the near future. I never understood people buying a Dual core for a gaming pc, even a year ago just to save a few bucks.
ConstipatedVigilante
Diamond Member
- Feb 22, 2006
- 7,670
- 1
- 0
GTA4 is quite possibly the worst-coded port ever. My machine:
Athlon 64 3700+ (yes, single core)
2gb RAM
8800GT 512mb OC
My machine runs Crysis pretty well on medium-high settings, and Call of Duty 4 plays smoothly at max. Dead Space also plays smoothly at max. GTA4 stutters like a retarded kid doing public speaking, and it doesn't even look THAT good.
Edit: Saying "your computer doesn't meet the recommended specs" isn't an excuse. NO OTHER GAME uses resources in such a half-assed way. It's the developer's responsibility to make sure the game runs as well, or better, than other games on the market on common hardware.
Athlon 64 3700+ (yes, single core)
2gb RAM
8800GT 512mb OC
My machine runs Crysis pretty well on medium-high settings, and Call of Duty 4 plays smoothly at max. Dead Space also plays smoothly at max. GTA4 stutters like a retarded kid doing public speaking, and it doesn't even look THAT good.
Edit: Saying "your computer doesn't meet the recommended specs" isn't an excuse. NO OTHER GAME uses resources in such a half-assed way. It's the developer's responsibility to make sure the game runs as well, or better, than other games on the market on common hardware.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter