Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

So you thought YOUR gta was slow...

28 replies to this topic
aragond
  • aragond

    We are the Aragond. We will bury you.

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Aug 2007

#1

Posted 08 May 2009 - 05:36 AM

Just thought I'd share . . .






PS; I am running at 2-4 frames per second. That is a LITERAL SLIDESHOW. Absurd!

mkey82
  • mkey82

    Keep riding hard, son

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2008

#2

Posted 08 May 2009 - 06:32 AM

Seems like a pretty fast slideshow, to me tounge2.gif

Anyway, you can't possibly expect for an older machine to run a game like this much better then that.

McLovin2404
  • McLovin2404

    Homeboy

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Mar 2009

#3

Posted 08 May 2009 - 06:35 AM

I was gonna try and run GTAIV on my AMD 1.6 with 256MB inbuilt graphics card. But thought otherwise.

YoungGun
  • YoungGun

    Thug

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Jun 2007

#4

Posted 08 May 2009 - 07:02 AM

FRAPS takes like half your frame rate away

aragond
  • aragond

    We are the Aragond. We will bury you.

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Aug 2007

#5

Posted 08 May 2009 - 07:13 AM

QUOTE (YoungGun @ May 8 2009, 17:02)
FRAPS takes like half your frame rate away

Yes, I noticed it slow substantially, but still, I was talking about 2-4fps without fraps.

QUOTE (mkey82 @ May 8 2009, 16:32)
Anyway, you can't possibly expect for an older machine to run a game like this much better then that.

Yeah, but I don't consider a 2.16GHz lappy with 2GB o ram, a 512MB gpu to be all THAT "old". And for the amount of money I spent on the focker, I would have expected it to run GTA without issue. (And, most of the time it does run a little better than this.) I can only assume people replace their gaming machines annually or more frequently.

But, this aint a complaint: I just thought it was funny to see an actual slideshow. I mean, it's been slow before, but this...?!


High
  • High

    Peon

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Nov 2008

#6

Posted 08 May 2009 - 07:21 AM

Cool story bro icon14.gif

mkey82
  • mkey82

    Keep riding hard, son

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2008

#7

Posted 08 May 2009 - 08:03 AM

QUOTE (aragond @ May 8 2009, 09:13)
I can only assume people replace their gaming machines annually or more frequently.

This is not correct. My last machine lasted for 6 years, with two upgrades one of which was free. What's important thing is what hardware you buy when you upgrade.

luceberg
  • luceberg

    Homeboy

  • Members
  • Joined: 27 Dec 2008

#8

Posted 08 May 2009 - 10:05 AM

"M - VH - H - VH - VH - 10 - 100 - 100 - 16 - OFF- OFF --> 1280 X 720"

Those settings are ridiculous for your rig!

vivo
  • vivo

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2008

#9

Posted 08 May 2009 - 10:54 AM

QUOTE (aragond @ May 8 2009, 07:13)

Yeah, but I don't consider a 2.16GHz lappy with 2GB o ram, a 512MB gpu to be all THAT "old".

Single core?

NiSsAn_BoY
  • NiSsAn_BoY

    Hustler

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 May 2008

#10

Posted 08 May 2009 - 11:04 AM

QUOTE
M - VH - H - VH - VH - 10 - 100 - 100 - 16 - OFF- OFF --> 1280 X 720


lmao no wonder u run so slow I bet if u lower some things I bet u could run a good 20fps

Also I couldnt take the slide show if mine was like that lol

Warlord.
  • Warlord.

    :O

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 03 Apr 2004

#11

Posted 08 May 2009 - 11:17 AM

You should've spent the money on a desktop and you'd be playing the game with those settings at 30FPS or more.

Like others have said, those settings are way too high for your specs. Either reduce them and play at a decent FPS or keep it like it is as play it as a slideshow. Your call.

The res is also too high, max would be 1024x768 for those specs.

GM965_X3100
  • GM965_X3100

    GEFORCE_8200IGP

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Jan 2009

#12

Posted 08 May 2009 - 03:12 PM

lol even my x3100 card ran it at 8-12 fps!!!

Slave Boy
  • Slave Boy

    Big Homie

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 03 May 2008
  • Finland

#13

Posted 08 May 2009 - 04:30 PM

Too static FPS, itīs a slideshow. But funny.
OMG it was real? Well, at least You can make bad-ass slo-mo movies!

aragond
  • aragond

    We are the Aragond. We will bury you.

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Aug 2007

#14

Posted 08 May 2009 - 05:12 PM Edited by aragond, 08 May 2009 - 05:19 PM.

QUOTE (Warlord. @ May 8 2009, 21:17)
You should've spent the money on a desktop and you'd be playing the game with those settings at 30FPS or more.

Amen. A desktop last week. When I have some dineros, we'll fix that.

QUOTE (Warlord. @ May 8 2009, 21:17)
The res is also too high, max would be 1024x768 for those specs.

Eh, the res' only seemed to affect the gfx-memory thingy, not the cpu.

QUOTE (NiSsAn_BoY @ May 8 2009, 21:04)
QUOTE
M - VH - H - VH - VH - 10 - 100 - 100 - 16 - OFF- OFF --> 1280 X 720

lmao no wonder u run so slow I bet if u lower some things I bet u could run a good 20fps

Yeah, you can always lower things. I mean, the game auto-config-ed me to 800x600. But without AA, that's intolerably ugly. Imagine this on a 1920x1200 monitor:

user posted image

Plus, changing a lot of those features, like the water reflection settings et al, seems to make little difference to the cpu load. I did, however, have to drop textures to medium AFAIR.

As the Architect said, it's all a matter of what level of survival you're prepared to accept.

BTW, I'm planning on (eventually) getting YOUR rig, Nissan -- wtf is with the 1024x768?! Pls tell me you've got a 1024x monitor holding you back!

QUOTE (vivo @ May 8 2009, 20:54)
QUOTE (aragond @ May 8 2009, 07:13)

Yeah, but I don't consider a 2.16GHz lappy with 2GB o ram, a 512MB gpu to be all THAT "old".

Single core?

Ah, yeah, sorry... dual core.

QUOTE (Graven @ May 9 2009, 02:30)
Too static FPS, itīs a slideshow. But funny.
OMG it was real? Well, at least You can make bad-ass slo-mo movies!

lol.gif Yeah, it's totally f'real.
But, as I said, NORMALLY I can get better fps. Sometimes not. Depends on how Windows is feeling, me thinks.

Slave Boy
  • Slave Boy

    Big Homie

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 03 May 2008
  • Finland

#15

Posted 08 May 2009 - 07:39 PM

I fixed it for You. Now itīs 800x600

user posted image

Warlord.
  • Warlord.

    :O

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 03 Apr 2004

#16

Posted 08 May 2009 - 07:42 PM

Try lowering your res and you'll really see an improvement.

NiSsAn_BoY
  • NiSsAn_BoY

    Hustler

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 May 2008

#17

Posted 08 May 2009 - 10:56 PM Edited by NiSsAn_BoY, 08 May 2009 - 10:59 PM.

QUOTE (aragond @ May 8 2009, 12:12)
BTW, I'm planning on (eventually) getting YOUR rig, Nissan -- wtf is with the 1024x768?! Pls tell me you've got a 1024x monitor holding you back!


I use a SD tv lol tounge.gif got to build up more money to get that nice 42" Samsung LCD HDTV.....this big ass rig ate my money I spent around 2.5 grand on that rig so I have to wait for new TV sly.gif

Samul
  • Samul

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2009

#18

Posted 08 May 2009 - 11:12 PM

QUOTE (aragond @ May 8 2009, 05:36)
Just thought I'd share . . .






PS; I am running at 2-4 frames per second. That is a LITERAL SLIDESHOW. Absurd!

Get a new PC and stop whining... Im sure your PC is absurd!

67257990206098020947
  • 67257990206098020947

    GTA 4 Experte

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 07 Dec 2008

#19

Posted 08 May 2009 - 11:17 PM

Buy a new system and finish my friend

IronFixXxeR
  • IronFixXxeR

    Texan

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2009

#20

Posted 09 May 2009 - 12:38 AM

Looks perfectly playable to me.

influx0
  • influx0

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Dec 2008

#21

Posted 09 May 2009 - 01:51 AM

QUOTE (YoungGun @ May 8 2009, 20:02)
FRAPS takes like half your frame rate away

Proof?

NiSsAn_BoY
  • NiSsAn_BoY

    Hustler

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 May 2008

#22

Posted 09 May 2009 - 02:48 AM

QUOTE (influx0 @ May 8 2009, 20:51)
QUOTE (YoungGun @ May 8 2009, 20:02)
FRAPS takes like half your frame rate away

Proof?

it takes 2-7 fps away thats why I hate FRAPS sometimes

aragond
  • aragond

    We are the Aragond. We will bury you.

  • Members
  • Joined: 26 Aug 2007

#23

Posted 09 May 2009 - 09:00 AM

QUOTE (NiSsAn_BoY @ May 9 2009, 12:48)
QUOTE (influx0 @ May 8 2009, 20:51)
QUOTE (YoungGun @ May 8 2009, 20:02)
FRAPS takes like half your frame rate away

Proof?

it takes 2-7 fps away thats why I hate FRAPS sometimes

...WHEN you're video recording, not when you're just casually monitoring fps.

QUOTE (IronFixXxeR @ May 8 2009, 10:38)
Looks perfectly playable to me.

Thnx Fixxer, I thought so, too. lol.gif
Dunno what the fruck Samul is on about.

QUOTE (Samul @ May 9 2009, 09:12)
Get a new PC and stop whining... Im sure your PC is absurd!

Troll.

QUOTE (NiSsAn_BoY @ May 9 2009, 08:56)
QUOTE (aragond @ May 8 2009, 12:12)
BTW, I'm planning on (eventually) getting YOUR rig, Nissan -- wtf is with the 1024x768?! Pls tell me you've got a 1024x monitor holding you back!

I use a SD tv lol tounge.gif got to build up more money to get that nice 42" Samsung LCD HDTV.....this big ass rig ate my money I spent around 2.5 grand on that rig so I have to wait for new TV sly.gif

PHEW! Has me seriously worried there for a minute, buddy!! cry.gif lol.gif

NiSsAn_BoY
  • NiSsAn_BoY

    Hustler

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 May 2008

#24

Posted 09 May 2009 - 11:02 AM

QUOTE (aragond @ May 9 2009, 04:00)
QUOTE (NiSsAn_BoY @ May 9 2009, 08:56)
QUOTE (aragond @ May 8 2009, 12:12)
BTW, I'm planning on (eventually) getting YOUR rig, Nissan -- wtf is with the 1024x768?! Pls tell me you've got a 1024x monitor holding you back!

I use a SD tv lol tounge.gif got to build up more money to get that nice 42" Samsung LCD HDTV.....this big ass rig ate my money I spent around 2.5 grand on that rig so I have to wait for new TV sly.gif

PHEW! Has me seriously worried there for a minute, buddy!! cry.gif lol.gif [/color]
lol no I would not be using a monitor if that was its higest res

lol no I would not be using a monitor if that was its higest res lol.gif moto_whistle.gif

TheRealPcGamer
  • TheRealPcGamer

    The Master of PC Games

  • Members
  • Joined: 22 Aug 2008
  • United-States

#25

Posted 09 May 2009 - 05:03 PM

Try using L- L - L - L - L - 1 - 1 - 1 - 0 - OFF- OFF --> 1024 X 768

And if you still get an unplayable FPS, that means you have to say goodbye to GTAIV biggrin.gif

Jmenaru
  • Jmenaru

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Sep 2008

#26

Posted 09 May 2009 - 08:26 PM

I think your settings are to big try lowering them...laptops aren't gaming machines you now

Yateszi
  • Yateszi

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 09 May 2009

#27

Posted 09 May 2009 - 09:16 PM

QUOTE (Jmenaru @ May 9 2009, 20:26)
I think your settings are to big try lowering them...laptops aren't gaming machines you now

Laptops can be used for games! sly.gif

As for the video, woa my laptop plays it faster than that!

Maximillian
  • Maximillian

    Player Hater

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Jan 2009

#28

Posted 11 May 2009 - 05:21 AM

I get 10.01 Fps in benchmark mode here are the results:
Statistics
Average FPS: 10.01
Duration: 37.35 sec
CPU Usage: 100%
System memory usage: 88%
Video memory usage: 85%

Graphics Settings
Video Mode: 800 x 600 (56 Hz)
Texture Quality: Low
Texture Filter Quality: Low
View Distance: 1
Detail Distance: 1

Hardware
MicrosoftŪ Windows Vista" Home Basic
Service Pack 1
Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce 9400 GT
Video Driver version: 182.50
Audio Adapter: Speakers (Realtek High Definition Audio)
Intel® Celeron® CPU 440 @ 2.00GHz
I get rid of all excess processes Any suggestions?

Jmenaru
  • Jmenaru

    Rat

  • Members
  • Joined: 15 Sep 2008

#29

Posted 11 May 2009 - 05:29 AM

QUOTE (Yateszi @ May 9 2009, 21:16)
QUOTE (Jmenaru @ May 9 2009, 20:26)
I think your settings are to big try lowering them...laptops aren't gaming machines you now

Laptops can be used for games! sly.gif

As for the video, woa my laptop plays it faster than that!

They can but a gaming laptop will cost as much as your house lol...Its better to get a good desktop wich can have better performance and be cheaper in the same time




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users