Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Abnormally low FPS

18 replies to this topic
Boooster
  • Boooster

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 Aug 2006

#1

Posted 01 October 2010 - 03:06 PM

Hi,,

I recently purchased a decent laptop for my purposes which should be able to play GTA IV at a respectable framerate, but it is running absolutely horribly. The first time I ran it I got 25-30 FPS at the recommended settings for my system (everything set to high). Now when I run it I get 15 fps at max which is ridiculous. I used to play GTA IV on a really outdated machine and get 30fps with everything set to low; now even on low I get 15fps. Attached are my last two benchmarks - first is set to low settings, second is with the recommended auto-configure.

Statistics
Average FPS: 15.06
Duration: 37.39 sec
CPU Usage: 19%
System memory usage: 61%
Video memory usage: 34%

Graphics Settings
Video Mode: 1366 x 768 (60 Hz)
Texture Quality: Low
Shadow Quality: Off
Reflection Resolution: Off
Water Quality: Low
Texture Filter Quality: Anisotropic x2
Night Shadows: Off
View Distance: 25
Detail Distance: 12

Hardware
Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium

Video Adapter: ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5730
Video Driver version: 8.17.10.1036
Audio Adapter: Speakers (Realtek High Definition Audio)
Intel® Core™ i7 CPU Q 720 @ 1.60GHz
Statistics
Average FPS: 15.10
Duration: 37.35 sec
CPU Usage: 19%
System memory usage: 63%
Video memory usage: 36%

Graphics Settings
Video Mode: 1366 x 768 (60 Hz)
Texture Quality: Low
Shadow Quality: Off
Reflection Resolution: Off
Water Quality: Low
Texture Filter Quality: Anisotropic x2
Night Shadows: Off
View Distance: 25
Detail Distance: 12

(Same Hardware, so not included).



I tried using the -memrestrict setting to no avail... Can anyone help me understand what the reason for this is? I have the latest drivers for my card.. My system isn't even being taxed - there should be no reason for this abnormally low framerate.

Thanks for reading.


OverTheBelow
  • OverTheBelow

    OTB "Oaty-Bee"

  • Zaibatsu
  • Joined: 30 Oct 2008

#2

Posted 01 October 2010 - 03:51 PM

How much RAM does your laptop have?

Boooster
  • Boooster

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 Aug 2006

#3

Posted 01 October 2010 - 03:55 PM

Sorry, thought that would be in the benchmark. 4GB.

I realize the card isn't the best, btu I used to play this on a desktop with a 4850 512MB and would manage with 25-30 frames on low settings. At this point, I don't care to put it on lowest settings for this machine, as long as I can play it at good FPS

mkey82
  • mkey82

    Keep riding hard, son

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2008

#4

Posted 01 October 2010 - 04:39 PM

The game runs like crap on low, let's deal with that.

The first time you ran the game, what patch version was it? How long was that ago?

Boooster
  • Boooster

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 Aug 2006

#5

Posted 01 October 2010 - 06:23 PM Edited by Boooster, 01 October 2010 - 06:25 PM.

It must have been either 1.0 or 1.01. I bought the game when it first came out and installed it from the disks. The thing is, I can't remember if it forced me to update GTA IV to the latest version before I played it for the first time. I've seen a few threads about 1.03 being the most stable - should I try uninstalling and going back to that? Won't it force me to update to the latest patch when I try to play? The last time I played this 1.04 was the last patch out (on my old machine), and I have 1.07 installed right now.

Also, I would ideally like to play this online as well, so I assume I would need the latest patch.

mkey82
  • mkey82

    Keep riding hard, son

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2008

#6

Posted 01 October 2010 - 06:35 PM

Yes, for online you need the latest patch.

For performance, you'll probably want to try some older version, something below 1.0.0.6. You can use xliveless to bypass GFWL.

Boooster
  • Boooster

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 Aug 2006

#7

Posted 01 October 2010 - 06:39 PM Edited by Boooster, 01 October 2010 - 06:47 PM.

Thanks for your help I'll try that out.

That's pretty crazy though, if that is the problem. It would really suck to to not be able to play online because a patch would eff up performance. Would I still be able to play LAN (if everyone else had the same version), or would I be forced to play in offline mode?

Also, any idea what kindof FPS I can expect on this kind of CPU?

Edit: I just read up on Xliveless and it won't allow LAN play which is the main reason why I installed this again - to play with a few friends. It can't only be because of the patch (at least I hope not, otherwise rockstar really messed up), so maybe there is something else I can try.

crackdawg
  • crackdawg

    supreme ruler

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

#8

Posted 01 October 2010 - 09:52 PM Edited by crackdawg, 01 October 2010 - 10:04 PM.

CPU is x4 with HT and card has 13 TFR. Its not hardware. Try lower resolution some for starters with other setting higher, then lower others to get better FPS. Those command line switches are pointless except the one that takes throttling off.

You are actually lucky, you didnt get some budget laptop for the price of something decent like most people who shop used and new markets do. If its got ATI or Nvidia inside thats at least a 300 dollar price boost even if its legacy garbage, especially on ebay.

The only laptops that will break 25FPS on medium to high settings out of the box cost at least a grand...used..on ebay and through google hacking. If you dont mind 15FPS at 800x600 a 400-800 laptop will do it, anything with TFR 5.5 or better and at least dual core. The IV engine performance formula is a simple but expensive one. The game makes new i7 and Phenom processors act like a 486DX(doesnt speak well for the programmers who wrote it). Itll take the new HT and PCIe 3.0 just to play it normal..hopefully...

Lodis
  • Lodis

    Thug

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jul 2008

#9

Posted 01 October 2010 - 10:01 PM

Try patch 1.0.04 (not to be confused with 1.040). The latest patches can reduce performance over 10 fps.

lowridincrew
  • lowridincrew

    The WerkHeads Vice President

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Oct 2005
  • United-States

#10

Posted 02 October 2010 - 06:41 AM

Did you cut clip capture off and set your catalyst control center settings?

Boooster
  • Boooster

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 Aug 2006

#11

Posted 02 October 2010 - 07:09 AM

I got this laptop from Newegg for around $1k - for the price it really is a nice piece of hardware. I started playing around with the Catalyst Control Center and set the overall graphics level from balanced to performance. Playing now with the higher settings I get around 30 FPS, and lowering everything (including resolution to 800x600) bumps it up to 35FPS, so not a major difference. I turned off Clip Capture and the game is quite playable. I still feel like something is off though - I should be able to get higher FPS with this machine, but downgrading to 1.04 is not an option as the main reason I re-installed this is to play online/LAN games. How can the have ported this game so poorly? Blows my mind.

Thanks for everyone's help - 30 FPS is quite playable for now smile.gif

crackdawg
  • crackdawg

    supreme ruler

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

#12

Posted 02 October 2010 - 07:57 AM Edited by crackdawg, 02 October 2010 - 08:00 AM.

I just turn AA off and set most of the stuff to application controlled and play at 1024x768 in EFLC on my two laptops. Only one runs it decent though because of hardware limitations. I dont use any switches or mods.

For less than half what you payed for that laptop you could of built a ITX system that would get 48 plus on maxxed settings. Also you can find hex core phenom HD 5xxx 1GB notebook systems online for like 600-900. They play pretty good on high settings. That is a lot of cash to people on typical incomes.

I could probably get 10 more FPS on your machine just with OS and game configurations. There are people getting far better with less..

Boooster
  • Boooster

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 Aug 2006

#13

Posted 02 October 2010 - 08:13 AM

Coulda shoulda woulda smile.gif . Overall I'm pretty happy with my rig - I used to build my desktops but never built a laptop before, so not a big deal for me. What kind of settings would you change to get more FPS from my machine? Should I check triple buffering and disable AI in the Catalyst Control Center? I tried a bunch of the customization options to no avail, and ended up setting it on the overall"performance" setting which must have done something right.

TopAz
  • TopAz

    Programmer

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Aug 2010

#14

Posted 02 October 2010 - 09:38 AM

try this http://www.gtaforums...howtopic=460247

crackdawg
  • crackdawg

    supreme ruler

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

#15

Posted 02 October 2010 - 11:48 AM

QUOTE (Boooster @ Oct 2 2010, 08:13)
Coulda shoulda woulda smile.gif . Overall I'm pretty happy with my rig - I used to build my desktops but never built a laptop before, so not a big deal for me. What kind of settings would you change to get more FPS from my machine? Should I check triple buffering and disable AI in the Catalyst Control Center? I tried a bunch of the customization options to no avail, and ended up setting it on the overall"performance" setting which must have done something right.

I think you might have one of the i7 chips with QPI, but Im not sure. In any case it should get better performance.

By the way that mod in last posts just strips rendering stuff. The goal is to get good FPS and quality under the default config. I do it on hardware way less powerful than most people do here with very little effort, no overclocking and engine mods..

config power setting, update drivers and config in catalyst or nvidia panel, use ASC and Gamebooster by iobit both free..that is mostly what I do along with service management.

gh3860
  • gh3860

    LIKE A SOM BOO DEEE

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Nov 2007

#16

Posted 02 October 2010 - 02:47 PM

Try defraging your gta location using programs such as contig.exe by Mark Russinovich Microsoft. http://technet.micro...s/bb897428.aspx

Boooster
  • Boooster

    Crackhead

  • Members
  • Joined: 01 Aug 2006

#17

Posted 02 October 2010 - 05:52 PM

I downloaded ASC and Gamebooster and ran them both - didn't notice any real changes in FPS. Benchmark still has it at 35 FPS. I've also defragged before and after uninstalling. Man, this is bizarre! Gamebooster seemed to free up RAM but my system isn't really taxed when playing so not sure what to make of that. Maybe it's just one of those things... oh well!


Lodis
  • Lodis

    Thug

  • Members
  • Joined: 10 Jul 2008

#18

Posted 02 October 2010 - 06:13 PM Edited by Lodis, 02 October 2010 - 06:46 PM.

QUOTE (Boooster @ Oct 2 2010, 07:09)
<--snip-->downgrading to 1.04 is not an option as the main reason I re-installed this is to play online/LAN games.  How can the have ported this game so poorly?  Blows my mind.

Thanks for everyone's help - 30 FPS is quite playable for now smile.gif

They did such a bad job on the port that you actually need an extra CPU Core(s) to make up for it. Regarding not wanting to use 1.0.04, bare in mind that you can use both, if you don't mind the extra HDD space taken up.

You can have one directory with patch 1.0.04 for offline use and the other one patched to the latest for online use.

crackdawg
  • crackdawg

    supreme ruler

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 28 Nov 2007

#19

Posted 02 October 2010 - 08:01 PM Edited by crackdawg, 02 October 2010 - 08:03 PM.

QUOTE (Boooster @ Oct 2 2010, 17:52)
I downloaded ASC and Gamebooster and ran them both - didn't notice any real changes in FPS.  Benchmark still has it at 35 FPS.  I've also defragged before and after uninstalling.  Man, this is bizarre!  Gamebooster seemed to free up RAM but my system isn't really taxed when playing so not sure what to make of that.  Maybe it's just one of those things... oh well!

The beta 2.0 lets you defrag the game files and folders, makes sure you have latest hardware drivers, and kills a lot of services with zero-config. If you get iobit toolbox it does stuff the pro version of ASC does.

I think playing with catalyst settings and game resolution and detail is your best hope, compromise on the resolution some. 1024x768 is barely different from what your highest is.

also make sure hdd indexing is off. You cant expect much. I seen this game suck on an Arrandale+Geforce 3xx setup with light optimizations. AVs also screw it up because of their file system hooking.

The TFR 18+ and dual core or more formula still works for both desktop and embedded here.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users