Judazzz Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 Statistics Average FPS: 44.94 Duration: 37.23 sec CPU Usage: 78% System memory usage: 55% Video memory usage: 66% Graphics Settings Video Mode: 1680 x 1050 (60 Hz) Texture Quality: High Render Quality: Very High View Distance: 100 Detail Distance: 100 Hardware Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 Video Driver version: 191.07 Audio Adapter: Speakers (2- Realtek High Definition Audio) Intel® Core2 Quad CPU Q9550 @ 2.83GHz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Phidias Posted November 29, 2009 Share Posted November 29, 2009 Statistics Average FPS: 31.49 Duration: 37.16 sec CPU Usage: 98% System memory usage: 56% Video memory usage: 85% Graphics Settings Video Mode: 1280 x 720 (60 Hz) Texture Quality: Medium Texture Filter Quality: High View Distance: 21 Detail Distance: 10 Hardware Microsoft Windows 7 Professional Microsoft Windows 7 Professional Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce 9600M GT Video Driver version: 185.75 Audio Adapter: Lautsprecher (Cirrus Logic CS4206A (AB75)) Intel® Core2 Duo CPU P8800 @ 2.66GHz File ID: Benchmark.cli Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie351 Posted December 24, 2009 Share Posted December 24, 2009 StatisticsAverage FPS: 60.96Duration: 37.12 secCPU Usage: 63%System memory usage: 65%Video memory usage: 94%Graphics SettingsVideo Mode: 1920 x 1200 (59 Hz)Texture Quality: HighTexture Filter Quality: HighestView Distance: 12Detail Distance: 10HardwareMicrosoft Windows 7 Ultimate Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Video Adapter: ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series Video Driver version: 8.14.10.716Audio Adapter: Speakers (High Definition Audio Device)AMD Phenom II X4 955 ProcessorFile ID: Benchmark.cli StatisticsAverage FPS: 54.93Duration: 37.12 secCPU Usage: 65%System memory usage: 65%Video memory usage: 97%Graphics SettingsVideo Mode: 1920 x 1200 (59 Hz)Texture Quality: HighTexture Filter Quality: HighestView Distance: 29Detail Distance: 33HardwareMicrosoft Windows 7 Ultimate Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Video Adapter: ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series Video Driver version: 8.14.10.716Audio Adapter: Speakers (High Definition Audio Device)AMD Phenom II X4 955 ProcessorFile ID: Benchmark.cli Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p0ppa Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 (edited) My System: CPU: Core i7 860 M/B: Asus Maximus III Formula RAM: Corsair Dominator 4GB DDR3 1600C8 GFX: EVGA Geforce GTX 275 Overclocked Edition (896MB GDDR3) HDD: 2x1TB Western Digital Caviar Black Sound: X-FI Titanium Fatal1ty Pro All settings are highest except textures on are middle @ 1920x1080 Benchmark around 60-90PFS gameplay around 50 PFS edit: Original version of the game no patches applied Edited December 31, 2009 by p0ppa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
13-37 Posted December 31, 2009 Share Posted December 31, 2009 StatisticsAverage FPS: 42.46Duration: 37.29 secCPU Usage: 82%System memory usage: 58%Video memory usage: 67%Graphics SettingsVideo Mode: 1680 x 1050 (60 Hz)Texture Quality: HighTexture Filter Quality: HighView Distance: 56Detail Distance: 100HardwareMicrosoft Windows 7 Ultimate Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250 (Microsoft Corporation - WDDM v1.1)Video Driver version: 0.00Audio Adapter: Speakers (High Definition Audio Device)Intel® Core2 Quad CPU Q8400 @ 2.66GHzFile ID: benchmark.cli Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dreddpool Posted January 1, 2010 Share Posted January 1, 2010 Ok here is my latest test I did a few week ago is pretty sweet consiodering what I use to get which this first one is with me old CPU with patch 1.0.0.4. I know the below benchmarks show that i had about 1fps better when I had me q6600 cpu but the draw distanvce in each one is different. StatisticsAverage FPS: 61.19Duration: 37.21 secCPU Usage: 74%System memory usage: 61%Video memory usage: 24%Graphics SettingsVideo Mode: 1680 x 1050 (60 Hz)Texture Quality: MediumTexture Filter Quality: MediumView Distance: 64Detail Distance: 48HardwareMicrosoft Windows 7 Ultimate Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 275Video Driver version: 195.62Audio Adapter: Headphones (High Definition Audio Device)Intel® Core2 Quad CPU Q6600 @ 2.40GHz StatisticsAverage FPS: 59.29Duration: 37.29 secCPU Usage: 80%System memory usage: 64%Video memory usage: 24%Graphics SettingsVideo Mode: 1680 x 1050 (60 Hz)Texture Quality: MediumTexture Filter Quality: MediumView Distance: 32Detail Distance: 70HardwareMicrosoft Windows 7 Ultimate Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 275Video Driver version: 195.62Audio Adapter: Speakers (Realtek High Definition Audio)Intel® Core2 Quad CPU Q9505 @ 2.83GHz File ID: Benchmark.cli Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurphiX_101001 Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 StatisticsAverage FPS: 28.84 Duration: 37.24 sec CPU Usage: 94% System memory usage: 75% Video memory usage: 100% Graphics Settings Video Mode: 1440 x 900 (60 Hz) Texture Quality: Medium Texture Filter Quality: Medium View Distance: 6 Detail Distance: 3 Hardware Microsoft Windows XP Professional Dodatek Service Pack 3 Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GS Video Driver version: 190.62 Audio Adapter: Realtek HD Audio output Intel® Pentium® Dual CPU E2160 @ 1.80GHz File ID: Benchmark.cli Graphics looks good for me, I don't need very good gfx. Of course I couldn't play on Low texture details, it's just strange. I could O/c my CPU but I'm scared ;D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d0mm2k8 Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 StatisticsAverage FPS: 51.22 Duration: 37.00 sec CPU Usage: 43% System memory usage: 49% Video memory usage: 100% Graphics Settings Video Mode: 1768 x 992 (60 Hz) Texture Quality: High Texture Filter Quality: Highest View Distance: 100 Detail Distance: 100 Hardware Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295 Video Driver version: 195.62 Audio Adapter: Realtek Digital Output (Realtek High Definition Audio) Intel® Core i7 CPU 920 @ 2.67GHz Game runs fine and looks great on all settings maxed out but there's a lot of lighting flicker because of view distance. Is there any way to fix this or is it just how things are? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MonedoMief Posted January 6, 2010 Share Posted January 6, 2010 (edited) StatisticsAverage FPS: 38.82 Duration: 37.07 Sek CPU Usage: 66% System memory usage: 42% Video memory usage: 56% Graphics Settings Video Mode: 1600 x 900 (60 Hz) Texture Quality: Hoch Texture Filter Quality: Hoch View Distance: 20 Detail Distance: 30 Hardware Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce GT 230 Video-Driver Version: 195.62 Audio Adapter: Lautsprecher (Realtek High Definition Audio) Intel® Core i5 CPU 750 @ 2.67GHz My system has 6 gb ram Greetz Monedo Edited January 6, 2010 by MonedoMief Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngusMacGyver Posted January 6, 2010 Share Posted January 6, 2010 (edited) If the 8800GTX really got 21.86 FPS, and the 8600GT got similar results but is a much slower card, is it possible that there is some sort of frame limiter installed (like in the previous GTAs) and can be turned off somewhere? Just a thought. Nope. This game is all about your processor not so much your graphics card! Those of us who have quad cores and a decent card are seeing 65+ FPS. I personaly have a Quad core Q6600 3 gigs of ram and 2x 8800gt's OC'ed and I get a quite consistant 83fps. Plus I dont think the game even supports SLI at the moment so thats from running just 1 card. You must have a smaller monitor with low resolutuion and/or settings to low I have a Q9550 quad at stock 2.83 2 EVGA GTX 280's SLI All of my settings are on upper end, high/highest Distance is at default Resolution is 1900x1200 FPS: 32.1x ---------------------------- Based off of the above results of others.......CPU is clearly the bottleneck here. Time for me to upgrade (yet again). I7/I5's look like they are worth the money based on GTA IV results! Edited January 6, 2010 by AngusMacGyver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d0mm2k8 Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 I7s and I5s are great. Worth getting in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellknightdemon Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 If the 8800GTX really got 21.86 FPS, and the 8600GT got similar results but is a much slower card, is it possible that there is some sort of frame limiter installed (like in the previous GTAs) and can be turned off somewhere? Just a thought. Nope. This game is all about your processor not so much your graphics card! Those of us who have quad cores and a decent card are seeing 65+ FPS. I personaly have a Quad core Q6600 3 gigs of ram and 2x 8800gt's OC'ed and I get a quite consistant 83fps. Plus I dont think the game even supports SLI at the moment so thats from running just 1 card. You must have a smaller monitor with low resolutuion and/or settings to low I have a Q9550 quad at stock 2.83 2 EVGA GTX 280's SLI All of my settings are on upper end, high/highest Distance is at default Resolution is 1900x1200 FPS: 32.1x ---------------------------- Based off of the above results of others.......CPU is clearly the bottleneck here. Time for me to upgrade (yet again). I7/I5's look like they are worth the money based on GTA IV results! its not your cpu its your sli, sli needs a really fast cpu to actually use it right, i get better frames than you using a 250, that processor is still really fast for these days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dreddpool Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 If the 8800GTX really got 21.86 FPS, and the 8600GT got similar results but is a much slower card, is it possible that there is some sort of frame limiter installed (like in the previous GTAs) and can be turned off somewhere? Just a thought. Nope. This game is all about your processor not so much your graphics card! Those of us who have quad cores and a decent card are seeing 65+ FPS. I personaly have a Quad core Q6600 3 gigs of ram and 2x 8800gt's OC'ed and I get a quite consistant 83fps. Plus I dont think the game even supports SLI at the moment so thats from running just 1 card. You must have a smaller monitor with low resolutuion and/or settings to low I have a Q9550 quad at stock 2.83 2 EVGA GTX 280's SLI All of my settings are on upper end, high/highest Distance is at default Resolution is 1900x1200 FPS: 32.1x ---------------------------- Based off of the above results of others.......CPU is clearly the bottleneck here. Time for me to upgrade (yet again). I7/I5's look like they are worth the money based on GTA IV results! Why Upgrade I have the same CPU and a GTX275 1792mb and I get 59fps on all medium settings, StatisticsAverage FPS: 59.29Duration: 37.29 secCPU Usage: 80%System memory usage: 64%Video memory usage: 24%Graphics SettingsVideo Mode: 1680 x 1050 (60 Hz)Texture Quality: MediumTexture Filter Quality: MediumView Distance: 32Detail Distance: 70HardwareMicrosoft Windows 7 Ultimate Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 275Video Driver version: 195.62Audio Adapter: Speakers (Realtek High Definition Audio)Intel® Core2 Quad CPU Q9505 @ 2.83GHz So I think you must be doing some thing wrong to be getting the fps your getting. Also GTAIV dosen't support SLI. so take one card out and see what happens. this is my med/highest settings StatisticsAverage FPS: 56.87Duration: 37.31 secCPU Usage: 77%System memory usage: 63%Video memory usage: 23%Graphics SettingsVideo Mode: 1680 x 1050 (60 Hz)Texture Quality: MediumTexture Filter Quality: HighestView Distance: 64Detail Distance: 48HardwareMicrosoft Windows 7 Ultimate Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 275Video Driver version: 195.62Audio Adapter: Speakers (Realtek High Definition Audio)Intel® Core2 Quad CPU Q9505 @ 2.83GHz and here my setting on High/highest StatisticsAverage FPS: 37.50Duration: 37.39 secCPU Usage: 75%System memory usage: 77%Video memory usage: 56%Graphics SettingsVideo Mode: 1680 x 1050 (59 Hz)Texture Quality: HighTexture Filter Quality: HighView Distance: 64Detail Distance: 48HardwareMicrosoft Windows 7 Ultimate Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 275Video Driver version: 195.62Audio Adapter: Speakers (Realtek High Definition Audio)Intel® Core2 Quad CPU Q9505 @ 2.83GHz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garfield 2 Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 (edited) Statistics Average FPS: 57.39 Duration: 37.34 sec CPU Usage: 91% System memory usage: 79% Video memory usage: 53% Graphics Settings Video Mode: 1920 x 1080 (60 Hz) Texture Quality: High Texture Filter Quality: High View Distance: 31 Detail Distance: 65 Hardware Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Video Adapter: ATI Radeon HD5970 Video Driver version: 8.14.10.647 Audio Adapter: Realtek HD Audio Output Intel® Core™ i7 CPU 920 @ 3.06GHz ---------- Statistics Average FPS: 30.28 Duration: 37.43 sec CPU Usage: 93% System memory usage: 64% Video memory usage: 93% Graphics Settings Video Mode: 1024 x 768 (60 Hz) Texture Quality: Medium Texture Filter Quality: Medium View Distance: 25 Detail Distance: 30 Hardware Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Video Adapter: ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series Video Driver version: 8.14.10.716 Audio Adapter: Speakers (High Definition Audio Device) Intel® Celeron™ Dual Core E1500 CPU @ 2.80GHz File ID: Benchmark.cli Edited January 8, 2010 by Garfield 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blade43v3r Posted January 8, 2010 Share Posted January 8, 2010 Statistics Average FPS: 21.48 Duration: 37.37 sec CPU Usage: 98% System memory usage: 63% Video memory usage: 59% Graphics Settings Video Mode: 1920 x 1080 (60 Hz) Texture Quality: Medium Texture Filter Quality: Highest View Distance: 1 Detail Distance: 100 Hardware Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce 9500 GT Video Driver version: 195.62 Audio Adapter: Altavoces (Realtek High Definition Audio) AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 5200+ File ID: benchmark.cli Gtx280 coming soon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dafour Posted January 10, 2010 Share Posted January 10, 2010 Statistics Average FPS: 41.60 Duration: 37.07 sec CPU Usage: 96% System memory usage: 55% Video memory usage: 95% Graphics Settings Video Mode: 1920 x 1080 (60 Hz) Texture Quality: Medium Texture Filter Quality: Highest View Distance: 26 Detail Distance: 51 Hardware Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GTX/9800 GTX+ Video Driver version: 195.62 Audio Adapter: Speakers (Creative SB Audigy 2 (WDM)) Intel® Core2 Duo CPU E6550 @ 2.33GHz @ 3.50Ghz File ID: Benchmark.cli No too bad eh for my 2y/o core2duo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicko821 Posted January 11, 2010 Share Posted January 11, 2010 Statistics Average FPS: 63.52 Duration: 37.17 sec CPU Usage: 60% System memory usage: 73% Video memory usage: 94% Graphics Settings Video Mode: 1600 x 900 (60 Hz) Texture Quality: High Texture Filter Quality: Very High View Distance: 30 Detail Distance: 100 Hardware Microsoft Windows 7 Professional Microsoft Windows 7 Professional Video Adapter: ATI Radeon HD 5800 Series Video Driver version: 8.14.10.716 Audio Adapter: Speakers (VIA High Definition Audio) Intel® Core i5 CPU 750 @ 2.67GHz (OC'd to 3.2) File ID: Benchmark.cli Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjMiikkii Posted January 11, 2010 Share Posted January 11, 2010 StatisticsAverage FPS: 55.17Duration: 37.29 secCPU Usage: 37%System memory usage: 78%Video memory usage: 98%Graphics SettingsVideo Mode: 1680 x 1050 (60 Hz)Texture Quality: HighTexture Filter Quality: Very HighView Distance: 6Detail Distance: 100HardwareMicrosoft Windows 7 Ultimate Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260Video Driver version: 195.62Audio Adapter: Speakers (Sound Blaster X-Fi Xtreme Audio)Intel® Core i7 CPU 920 @ 2.67GHz (OVERCLOCKED TO 3.6Ghz)File ID: benchmark.cli Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McDodge34 Posted January 12, 2010 Share Posted January 12, 2010 Here is what I get with my new computer, with my old rig (Pentium 4 HT 3.2GHZ) I wasn't able to get more than 9-13fps in all Low setting in 800*600 now with the new rig in my signature : One note here I didn't change anything in the options yet, I'm pretty happy with what I get, maybe I should try to change some values but I'm affraid of getting bad results. Statistics Average FPS: 38.95 Duration: 37.10 sec CPU Usage: 84% System memory usage: 66% Video memory usage: 98% Graphics Settings Video Mode: 1680 x 1050 (60 Hz) Texture Quality: Medium Texture Filter Quality: High View Distance: 25 Detail Distance: 37 Hardware Microsoft Windows 7 Édition Intégrale Microsoft Windows 7 Édition Intégrale Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GT Video Driver version: 195.62 Audio Adapter: Haut-parleurs (Périphérique High Definition Audio) Intel® Core2 Quad CPU Q9400 @ 2.66GHz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flat Face Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 lowest of low settings and i get 13.63fps.... >_>_>_>_>_>_>_>_> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabbyj Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 My Benchmark on a Core 2 Duo 2.66ghz proccy Statistics Average FPS: 37.85 Duration: 37.10 sec CPU Usage: 97% System memory usage: 63% Video memory usage: 99% Graphics Settings Video Mode: 1600 x 1200 (60 Hz) Texture Quality: High Texture Filter Quality: Highest View Distance: 24 Detail Distance: 64 Hardware Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 Video Driver version: 195.62 Audio Adapter: Speakers (VIA High Definition Audio) Intel® Core2 Duo CPU E7300 @ 2.66GHz File ID: Benchmark.cli My fps actually increased when i moved from 1280X1024 to 1600 x 1200 . wierd My benchmark on d same config at 1280X1024 Statistics Average FPS: 33.71 Duration: 37.54 sec CPU Usage: 96% System memory usage: 65% Video memory usage: 98% Graphics Settings Video Mode: 1280 x 1024 (60 Hz) Texture Quality: High Texture Filter Quality: Highest View Distance: 27 Detail Distance: 64 Hardware Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 Video Driver version: 195.62 Audio Adapter: Speakers (VIA High Definition Audio) Intel® Core2 Duo CPU E7300 @ 2.66GHz File ID: Benchmark.cli lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramvid01 Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 Statistics Average FPS: 55.67 Duration: 37.25 sec CPU Usage: 68% System memory usage: 70% Video memory usage: 77% Graphics Settings Video Mode: 1920 x 1080 (59 Hz) Texture Quality: High Texture Filter Quality: High View Distance: 32 Detail Distance: 70 Hardware Microsoft Windows 7 Professional Microsoft Windows 7 Professional Video Adapter: ATI Radeon HD 5800 Series Video Driver version: 8.14.10.716 Audio Adapter: Speakers (VIA High Definition Audio) AMD Phenom II X4 955 Processor File ID: Benchmark.cli I have 4 gigs of ddr3 1600 (but likely running at 1333) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flat Face Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 Any thoughts? also no laughter needed, i know.. <_< Statistics Average FPS: 14.00 Duration: 36.92 sec CPU Usage: 76% System memory usage: 52% Video memory usage: 49% Graphics Settings Video Mode: 800 x 600 (60 Hz) Texture Quality: Low Texture Filter Quality: Low View Distance: 1 Detail Distance: 1 Hardware Microsoft Windows XP Professional Service Pack 2 Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce 7600 GS Video Driver version: 190.62 Audio Adapter: Realtek HD Audio output Intel® Core2 CPU 6300 @ 1.86GHz File ID: Benchmark.cli Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McDodge34 Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 Replace the CPU and video card, you have a ()&(%&$%?$ video card and a CPU that doesn't meet the requirements for the game. I guess you can find something for around 300$ and you should be alright. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WIGILOCO Posted January 18, 2010 Share Posted January 18, 2010 (edited) Statistics Average FPS: 59.46 Duration: 37.20 sec CPU Usage: 67% System memory usage: 63% Video memory usage: 77% Graphics Settings Video Mode: 1440 x 900 (75 Hz) Texture Quality: High Texture Filter Quality: High View Distance: 32 Detail Distance: 70 Hardware Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium Video Adapter: ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series Video Driver version: 8.14.10.716 Audio Adapter: Kaiuttimet (2Z-10 USB Speaker) AMD Phenom II X4 965 Processor File ID: Benchmark.cli Is this normal/good with: 965BE C3 3,4ghz hd4890 SUPER OC 950mhz 4200mhz 4gb 1600mhz g.skill ?? In game i get 30-75 fps, mostly ~55. Edited January 18, 2010 by WIGILOCO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ersel54 Posted January 20, 2010 Share Posted January 20, 2010 (edited) I dont know why but my GTA IV is to slow, when I install the game first it was around 62 FPS and now 35 FPS why? here is benchmark: Statistics Average FPS: 39.76 Duration: 37.30 sec CPU Usage: 70% System memory usage: 74% Video memory usage: 82% Graphics Settings Video Mode: 1440 x 900 (75 Hz) Texture Quality: High Texture Filter Quality: Very High View Distance: 35 Detail Distance: 70 Hardware Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium Video Adapter: ATI Radeon HD 5700 Series Video Driver version: 8.14.10.716 Intel® Core2 Quad CPU Q9300 @ 2.50GHz File ID: Benchmark.cli Edited January 20, 2010 by ersel54 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maximumdave Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 Statistics Average FPS: 54.26 Duration: 36.88 sec CPU Usage: 19% System memory usage: 25% Video memory usage: 84% Graphics Settings Video Mode: 1920 x 1080 (60 Hz) Texture Quality: High Texture Filter Quality: Very High View Distance: 35 Detail Distance: 100 Hardware Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate Video Adapter: ATI Radeon HD 5800 Series Video Driver version: 8.14.10.716 Audio Adapter: Headphones (High Definition Audio Device) Headphones (High Definition Audio Device) Genuine Intel® CPU @ 0000 @ 2.40GHz File ID: Benchmark.cli It seems as though having a pair of quad core Xeons helps this game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalderThePirate Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 Alright well I had some questions for everybody. Here's what I need to know. I am building a rig and I need to know if I can get an average of 30+ FPS with the setup that I am about to present. I also would like to know if Crossfire is used in GTA4, I know that SLI isn't but answers are appreciated. Processor : Phenom II x4 3.2Ghz, quad core. GPU: XFX Radeon HD 4850 1GB 256-Bit GDDR3, Core clock is at 625Mhz. Memory clock is at 1990 Mhz. 3GB of DDR3 Ram 1066 Also is their a mid-high range video card that could be a step up from the 4850 that may cost equal to or $30 - $50. Thank you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WIGILOCO Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 What does detail distance mean? Should It be the same as view distance? I'm having view @ 34 and detail @ 76 in 1440x900 monitor. In night fps might drop to 25 sometimes. I have Phenom II 965BE 3,4ghz, hd4890 950mhz/1050mhz, 4gb DDR 1600mhz. All high/very high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mortalhuman Posted January 25, 2010 Share Posted January 25, 2010 It is best set in regard to your resolution. For your settings, you can't really "see" anything past 25 view and 35 or 45 detail. You may see view farther, but you will notice it switches and pops better at about 23-28 compared to much higher settings, and detail is different - as you tweak the settings in-game, you can see the effects they have and discern what each is effecting. The catch is that a prop might be controlled by detail in one place, and view in another, like the definitions are mixed up somewhere for what is what @1680x1050, i find that 23 view and 45 detail is awesome and runs best for me, where higher view actually makes some things switch out too soon etc. Too low, and it will create problems for me as well (under 20 view = headaches) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now