Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Eurogamer review

84 replies to this topic
ParoXum
  • ParoXum

    Proud PC Gamer

  • Feroci
  • Joined: 28 Jul 2005
  • None
  • Best Texture/Model 2013 "SRt3 2012 Mipmap Edition"

#61

Posted 01 December 2008 - 10:01 AM

Time to prepare the overclock of my 9600GT + Zalman Cu turn.gif

Zeta
  • Zeta

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Nov 2008

#62

Posted 01 December 2008 - 10:12 AM

goodman Alucard155 thx for taking the time to do that + cookie.gif hehe nearly double the Pixel Fill Rate and near 3x as much Bandwidth LOL awesome + the memory size. thx again and Im sure GTAIV will run smooth as silk :-)

Alucard155
  • Alucard155

    Snitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Nov 2008

#63

Posted 01 December 2008 - 10:15 AM

QUOTE (Zeta @ Dec 1 2008, 10:12)
goodman Alucard155 thx for taking the time to do that + cookie.gif hehe nearly double the Pixel Fill Rate and near 3x as much Bandwidth LOL awesome + the memory size. thx again and Im sure GTAIV will run smooth as silk :-)

Hope so m8.. confused.gif Been hearing some bad stuff like square boxes on NVIDIA cards in general and framedrops all around.. Normally my card should pull this off no problem but hey, I have been disappointed before lol.gif

$[email protected]
  • $[email protected]

    WERZ DA DAM PATCHZ

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Dec 2007

#64

Posted 01 December 2008 - 10:24 AM

QUOTE (Frostshocker @ Dec 1 2008, 03:42)
I had to knock down the default graphic options quite a bit on my PC (dual-core 2.4GHz, 2GB RAM, 640MB GeForce 8800) until I got an acceptable rate, and even then there was the occasional really nasty drop.

i really dont like the idea of this im running a e8400 4Gb ram and a 9600GT and i was hoping to get most of the settings on high if not medium

Well...

That was a sore point of the review, not even stating what settings where run and at what FPS the game ran at.

Its a very big factor in the PC gaming world to know what the performance of the games are and how well they are optimized, the average 'gamer' review tends to drop the ball on the benchmarking to... well just say complete garbage, telling us to read the x360 AGAIN... no!

Anyhow in 36 i will have this game and i will make my own mind up.

Later

Zeta
  • Zeta

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Nov 2008

#65

Posted 01 December 2008 - 10:35 AM

Alucard155 yea thats true I hope where fine well I hope we all are but only time will tell yea I forsee spending quite abit of time tweaking with ingame options...
Just remember to Defrag ur HD after u install the game while its defragging to prepare some munchies and drinks and by the time you get that done u be ready to play biggrin.gif , always better to give it the best possible start.

Alucard155
  • Alucard155

    Snitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Nov 2008

#66

Posted 01 December 2008 - 10:41 AM

QUOTE (Zeta @ Dec 1 2008, 10:35)
Alucard155 yea thats true I hope where fine well I hope we all are but only time will tell yea I forsee spending quite abit of time tweaking with ingame options...
Just remember to Defrag ur HD after u install the game while its defragging to prepare some munchies and drinks and by the time you get that done u be ready to play biggrin.gif , always better to give it the best possible start.

Lol I hate that pre-game messing around with the options! bored.gif Still as long as there's chips and coke I'll be fine biggrin.gif

iristrauma
  • iristrauma

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 May 2008

#67

Posted 01 December 2008 - 10:42 AM

If any of you chaps need a decent Graphics card on a budget, go for the HD 4850/70.. The 4850 is blisteringly fast and you should be able to max the game out on that card pretty much depending on how much CPU and ram you have..

Got my HD 4850 for only 120 quid..

Fallout 3 Maxed out at 1280 x 1024
Crysis Maxed out..
COD WaW Maxed out..

Great card all round.. icon14.gif

J Hater
  • J Hater

    Crows

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Nov 2002
  • Romania

#68

Posted 01 December 2008 - 10:46 AM

QUOTE (iristrauma @ Dec 1 2008, 12:42)
If any of you chaps need a decent Graphics card on a budget, go for the HD 4850/70.. The 4850 is blisteringly fast and you should be able to max the game out on that card pretty much depending on how much CPU and ram you have..

Got my HD 4850 for only 120 quid..

Fallout 3 Maxed out at 1280 x 1024
Crysis Maxed out..
COD WaW Maxed out..

Great card all round.. icon14.gif

I submit i also have a Sapphire 4850 wich was pretty cheap and runs like HELL wink.gif Better than any 9600-9800GTX

Malik
  • Malik

    IV

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2008

#69

Posted 01 December 2008 - 10:47 AM

QUOTE (iristrauma @ Dec 1 2008, 10:42)
If any of you chaps need a decent Graphics card on a budget, go for the HD 4850/70.. The 4850 is blisteringly fast and you should be able to max the game out on that card pretty much depending on how much CPU and ram you have..

Got my HD 4850 for only 120 quid..

Fallout 3 Maxed out at 1280 x 1024
Crysis Maxed out..
COD WaW Maxed out..

Great card all round.. icon14.gif

LOL 'only'?

Here in holland I bought it for 140 euros last week and google says 1 British pound = 1.20 Euros


also how do you play it maxed, can we have any cpu ram details of your rig plz

Zeta
  • Zeta

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Nov 2008

#70

Posted 01 December 2008 - 10:51 AM

HD 4850 fancy Grabbing GPU-Z and uploading the Info me and Alucard155 did would be nice as a wee comparison just to see...
I wont be upgrading PC for awhile, well I plan to make 2 new rigs next year a energy efficent mini-itx pc for web browsing and watching movies and a new Gaming rig, Mini-itx pc 80watts sounds good to me cuz atm electricity went up so only going to use gaming PC for actual gaming once I get that mini pc build 20cm x 20cm the mb is its tiny + u can fit dual+quad cores on them but not sure if thats nessarcy still in early research phase.

Vasil
  • Vasil

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Nov 2008

#71

Posted 01 December 2008 - 11:31 AM

QUOTE ($[email protected] @ Dec 1 2008, 10:24)
That was a sore point of the review, not even stating what settings where run and at what FPS the game ran at.


Exactly. Neither a word about which resolution used. I mean, these reviews are bs.

SkapeGote
  • SkapeGote

    Snitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 Jun 2008

#72

Posted 01 December 2008 - 01:03 PM

Yeah that bothers me, knowing this is a PC release you would think they would have come up with benchmarks and the lot. I dunno, seems fishy.

Skape

j_f_mac
  • j_f_mac

    Punk-ass Bitch

  • Members
  • Joined: 09 May 2007

#73

Posted 01 December 2008 - 02:53 PM

user posted image
I believe this one won't have any problems with max settings at 1280X1024
In combination with 3 gb ram and c2d 3.16 gHz

Or i'll just lower traffic density and turn off AA.

Tomern11
  • Tomern11

    RIP forums.gamer.co.il

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Aug 2008
  • Israel

#74

Posted 01 December 2008 - 04:29 PM

Damn, i guess that a core 2 quad, 3 gb ram, and a 512 mb ATI radeon hd 3870 won't max it at all... confused.gif

13th_Disciple
  • 13th_Disciple

    Square Civilian

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Nov 2008

#75

Posted 01 December 2008 - 04:29 PM

In comparison to my rig i think I'll be able to run GTA slightly better then this 'eurogamer' reviewer, would be nice to know the resolution smile.gif obviously, i run at 1650x1050 with an over-clocked 8800GTX and i think a quad core CPU will better the results even further, even though my card is getting on bit the results of a quick benchmark (see below) fairs admirably amongst todays cards and GTA-IV being a new PC game you would like to use a 'new' graphics card to boot, not affordable of course for most, but how much are we just hoping and needlessly pushing for the best eye candy while ignoring the obvious game play enjoyment of GTA, thus the 9/10 score in this review...

If you cannot play GTA-IV on an older card without having fun whether or not it's maxed out to the hilt graphically then your missing the point slightly i feel, although we do like to show off our bits...ewww didn't mean to sound like that... smile.gif

Those with 4:3 native resolutions should have an easier time of things on most cards, remember to always get the latest drivers for your card, clean out any rubbish from your system if you need to, defrag, drivers etc etc, you know what i mean... do yourself some extra frame-rate favors! smile.gif kill those stutters!

...and you always know maybe a month or two later comes... the patch! - If at first you don't succeed, call it Version 1.0!

user posted image

GTAMonkey2012
  • GTAMonkey2012

    Hustler

  • Awaiting Authorization
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2008

#76

Posted 01 December 2008 - 04:42 PM

Ive said it before that if I get 20 percent better graphics at 1400x900 with 2x AA, draw distance and traffic density than the console version running at about 30fps with a few drops now and again then Im happy, anything else is a bonus.

Remember the scaling tweaks in the readme for this game, and all you driver updates and tweaks and any other config stream tweaks that we can do, this wont have even been touched by reviewers. They just had stock pre release review versions.

Rockstar1
  • Rockstar1

    Square Civilian

  • Members
  • Joined: 28 Nov 2008

#77

Posted 01 December 2008 - 07:57 PM

QUOTE (NonToXIC @ Dec 1 2008, 09:33)
[QUOTE=oc student,Dec 1 2008, 09:27] [QUOTE=NonToXIC,Dec 1 2008, 09:23]I rather ment major framerate drops, which do not happen on a console at all I believe. (I may be wrong, errare humanum est)

The consoles do have major framerate drops, when you get a lot of action at once.

LOL at the people worried about performance with 8800s and C2D. With those PC specs, if the game doesn't run and look considerably better than the consoles, than Rockstar did a sh*tty job of optimizing.

I'm hoping my X1900 can pull this off.


Rcguy150
  • Rcguy150

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2005

#78

Posted 01 December 2008 - 08:00 PM

Simply put, if your PC runs other higher end games well, then you shouldn't worry. Reviewers and Rockstar are simply scaring you into buying new parts.

Zeta
  • Zeta

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Nov 2008

#79

Posted 01 December 2008 - 08:08 PM

Nice, gj uploading the data from GPU-Z guys cookie.gif + cookie.gif cheers!.

asd23
  • asd23

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Mar 2004

#80

Posted 01 December 2008 - 08:10 PM

Horribly unoptimized?


If a 8800 doesn't cut it, HOW THE HELL does it run on consoles? They're crappier than most PCs out right now. A f*cking shame, how porting can ruin a game.

GTA_XP
  • GTA_XP

    Homie

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 14 Jan 2008

#81

Posted 01 December 2008 - 08:12 PM

I have 9600M GT and C2D P8400 and 4GB RAM.
It sno problrm for me on medium/low settings, its all about the gameplay and the taste of GTA IV! biggrin.gif

S_G
  • S_G

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Jan 2006

#82

Posted 01 December 2008 - 08:20 PM

What a lame review.

"dual-core 2.4GHz, 2GB RAM, 640MB GeForce 8800"

Dual-core WHAT? 2GB of what RAM and how fast and at what timings? And there are a LOT of 8800s, luckily in this case there are only two 640MB cards. 8800 GTS and 8800 GTS 112. The first one is roughly equal to an 8800GT 512MB, the latter is considerably better.

I'm guessing he is more CPU-bound than GPU, probably running an Athlon 64 X2 2.4GHz.

Tomern11
  • Tomern11

    RIP forums.gamer.co.il

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Aug 2008
  • Israel

#83

Posted 01 December 2008 - 08:23 PM

Did the reviewer ment about a Pentium D CPU or a Core 2 Dual?

Cam
  • Cam

    Cam

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Dec 2003
  • United-States

#84

Posted 01 December 2008 - 08:32 PM

user posted image

I think this baby should max it, considering I run at a resolution of 1440x900.

Failure
  • Failure

    Gone for now.

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 11 Apr 2007
  • None

#85

Posted 01 December 2008 - 08:44 PM Edited by elanman, 01 December 2008 - 08:47 PM.

QUOTE (Frostshocker @ Dec 1 2008, 03:42)
I had to knock down the default graphic options quite a bit on my PC (dual-core 2.4GHz, 2GB RAM, 640MB GeForce 8800) until I got an acceptable rate, and even then there was the occasional really nasty drop.

i really dont like the idea of this im running a e8400 4Gb ram and a 9600GT and i was hoping to get most of the settings on high if not medium

Same, I'm worried due to the game's strong nVidia bias... Then again, my 19 inch LCD only goes up to 1440''900, so I may be safe maxed out.

SkapeGote : I feel f*cking horrible for you mate, bastard vandals.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users