Terrible performance issues, help?

[Chevyboy]

does anyone actually have any proof the cpu is slowing the game down? anyone playing on a quad? comparisons to dual?

Well in another post ParoXum mentioned someone tried it at different clock speeds and it made big differences on their Quad.

I will try it at standard 3.0 then clock it to 4.0 and see the difference for myself when I get the game, although this helps with any game but I have a feeling the cores will count with this GTA.

People with 2.4GHz Quads, that is not fast enough. Even a q6600 can be clocked to over 3.2 to 3.4 on air cooling and be pretty stable, makes a massive difference too.

If i get my hands on the game tomorrow I will do some benches with clock speeds etc and see how it goes, I will be sure to post some results when I do. I can underclock to hit 2.4GHz as well just to try and get everyone in the picture.

People with faster processors than yours are struggling to hit 35fps with all medium / low settings. Wouldn't hold my breath.

 

Oh and the fact that a 2.4 quad "isn't fast enough" when paired with a high end card as you say is a sign of a poor port and very poor optimization, not a demanding game.

[pinky]

 

does anyone actually have any proof the cpu is slowing the game down? anyone playing on a quad? comparisons to dual?

Well in another post ParoXum mentioned someone tried it at different clock speeds and it made big differences on their Quad.

I will try it at standard 3.0 then clock it to 4.0 and see the difference for myself when I get the game, although this helps with any game but I have a feeling the cores will count with this GTA.

People with 2.4GHz Quads, that is not fast enough. Even a q6600 can be clocked to over 3.2 to 3.4 on air cooling and be pretty stable, makes a massive difference too.

If i get my hands on the game tomorrow I will do some benches with clock speeds etc and see how it goes, I will be sure to post some results when I do. I can underclock to hit 2.4GHz as well just to try and get everyone in the picture.

Not all of us are experienced OC'ers though...

Unfortunatly so, but I learned it fast enough myself just a few months ago.

At least I can give a comparison for CPU speeds for quad owners or potential quad buyers though.

 

Good source of overclocking info and general chip and GFX info too: http://www.extremeoverclocking.com/

 

 

EDIT: let me get this f*cking optomisation thing off my chest, the optomisation is down to the pC owners, eg the slider bar settings. They should be able to optomise it themselves, that is why they are there.

Everyone keeps bleating (like f*cking sheep) on about my machine eats Crysis this and that, STFU. It isnt crysis, it has miles more draw distance, individual building textures, godammed traffic, peds and sh*tloads more than Crysis has to deal with. Yes Crysis has tons of trees, they also use the same f*cking texture over and over and over and over again on them. Not really that demanding then.

IV also has to Normal map loads more larger surfaces than Crysis, you will find buildings are bigger than trees. The list goes on.

The main story is that IV will be demanding so dont expect to run on everything maxed, I sure as f*ck dont.

Edited December 2, 2008 by pinky

[Abel.]

does anyone actually have any proof the cpu is slowing the game down? anyone playing on a quad? comparisons to dual?

Well in another post ParoXum mentioned someone tried it at different clock speeds and it made big differences on their Quad.

I will try it at standard 3.0 then clock it to 4.0 and see the difference for myself when I get the game, although this helps with any game but I have a feeling the cores will count with this GTA.

People with 2.4GHz Quads, that is not fast enough. Even a q6600 can be clocked to over 3.2 to 3.4 on air cooling and be pretty stable, makes a massive difference too.

If i get my hands on the game tomorrow I will do some benches with clock speeds etc and see how it goes, I will be sure to post some results when I do. I can underclock to hit 2.4GHz as well just to try and get everyone in the picture.

Not all of us are experienced OC'ers though...

Unfortunatly so, but I learned it fast enough myself just a few months ago.

At least I can give a comparison for CPU speeds for quad owners or potential quad buyers though.

 

Good source of overclocking info and general chip and GFX info too: http://www.extremeoverclocking.com/

Thanks Pinky .

[flyer2359]

Has anyone successfully got this game running smoothly?

 

My pc specs 2.1 dual core, 3.5gb ram, GTX260

 

The game runs terrible for me and my bro (slightly better specs) even on low settings! The visuals look amazing but the frame rate is a killer. To say this game has req specs of a geforce 7900 is a complete joke. Unless the GTX260 is a dud card, which im sure it isnt after i spent a good 2 weeks researching what card I could upgrade to specifically for this game.

 

I dont know what else I can try, unless there's word of a patch coming out to fix this, ill be refunding it within the week.

is that a Dual Core Processor or a Core 2 Duo processor if it's dual core that is the problem

[JBFord4x4]

EXACTLY. All these people are whining about poor performance and settings. 1: what do you expect? It's IV. 2: Use your graphics card's control panel to tweak settings. You get much more performance and better visuals tweaking through there.

[zepman79]

The people saying that the NVIDIA CP is going to fix the problem make me laugh.

 

There is barely any tweaks available there. You are better off tweaking with RivaTuner instead of NVIDIA CP.

[Drag_Drift]

The people saying that the NVIDIA CP is going to fix the problem make me laugh.

 

There is barely any tweaks available there. You are better off tweaking with RivaTuner instead of NVIDIA CP.

That's easy, either you get the latest drivers, which offer a lot of tweaks to the 3d performance of the game, or use custom drivers. I'm using custom drivers right now, and It sure does give me a lot of choices.

[gamerzworld]

It seems the game doesn't turn off Glass on Vista. You may want to turn it off. I just got bit of a performance increase just by turning it off.

[MrKlorox]

I bet Euphoria has something to do with it. All those physics animation procedures are probably bottlenecking the CPU.

 

I wonder if R* licensing/implementing AGEIA technology from NVIDIA would be possible, so people with an extra NVIDIA GPU can offload some of that stress. Even the makers of Euphoria are using AGEIA in their own game, BackBreaker.

Edited December 2, 2008 by MrKlorox

[disposeablehero]

Are you guys forgetting that this game was based around multi-core CPUs?

 

The X360 has 3 CPU Cores. (Running at 3.2Ghz each)

 

The PS3 has 7 Cell CPU Cores. (No idea what the CPU clock speed is)

 

So yeah, if your running on a single or dual core, you are throwing less CPU cycles at it than even the consoles are. (Unless your running a beefy dual-core. (C2D @ 3.0Ghz or higher.)

 

Does anyone who has this game have an i7 setup? How does it run?

 

Rather than bitch back and forth with each other, let's work together to narrow down the causes of the game's issues, and see if we cannot find solutions that will work until R* can optimize the game further with patches.

WOW, what a load of crap, the CPU's in the consoles are slower then lower priced Dual Cores from 2 years ago, it is a lot more then just Speed, the 3 cores on the 360 are very slow in archietecture, the Cell is actually even worse. Educate yourself. Even lower prices PC's and CPU's are much more powerful then anything in the consoles.

 

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2453

 

Notice a Core 2 Duo @ 2.2 is much faster then a pentium D at 3.2? GHZ speed does nothing to gauge how good a CPU is especially in the scaled down consoles. The limited memory bandwidth, slow cores make their processore fairly slow.

 

This is a game issue, not hardware.

[Chevyboy]

Are you guys forgetting that this game was based around multi-core CPUs?

 

The X360 has 3 CPU Cores. (Running at 3.2Ghz each)

 

The PS3 has 7 Cell CPU Cores. (No idea what the CPU clock speed is)

 

So yeah, if your running on a single or dual core, you are throwing less CPU cycles at it than even the consoles are. (Unless your running a beefy dual-core. (C2D @ 3.0Ghz or higher.)

 

Does anyone who has this game have an i7 setup? How does it run?

 

Rather than bitch back and forth with each other, let's work together to narrow down the causes of the game's issues, and see if we cannot find solutions that will work until R* can optimize the game further with patches.

WOW, what a load of crap, the CPU's in the consoles are slower then lower priced Dual Cores from 2 years ago, it is a lot more then just Speed, the 3 cores on the 360 are very slow in archietecture, the Cell is actually even worse. Educate yourself. Even lower prices PC's and CPU's are much more powerful then anything in the consoles.

 

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2453

 

Notice a Core 2 Duo @ 2.2 is much faster then a pentium D at 3.2? GHZ speed does nothing to gauge how good a CPU is especially in the scaled down consoles. The limited memory bandwidth, slow cores make their processore fairly slow.

 

This is a game issue, not hardware.

Very well written and accurate, hopefully the few people still ranting about hardware see this and come to there senses.

[Knyte]

does anyone actually have any proof the cpu is slowing the game down? anyone playing on a quad? comparisons to dual?

Well in another post ParoXum mentioned someone tried it at different clock speeds and it made big differences on their Quad.

I will try it at standard 3.0 then clock it to 4.0 and see the difference for myself when I get the game, although this helps with any game but I have a feeling the cores will count with this GTA.

People with 2.4GHz Quads, that is not fast enough. Even a q6600 can be clocked to over 3.2 to 3.4 on air cooling and be pretty stable, makes a massive difference too.

If i get my hands on the game tomorrow I will do some benches with clock speeds etc and see how it goes, I will be sure to post some results when I do. I can underclock to hit 2.4GHz as well just to try and get everyone in the picture.

Not all of us are experienced OC'ers though...

Unfortunatly so, but I learned it fast enough myself just a few months ago.

At least I can give a comparison for CPU speeds for quad owners or potential quad buyers though.

 

Good source of overclocking info and general chip and GFX info too: http://www.extremeoverclocking.com/

Thanks Pinky .

For the Q6600 users out there. It is dead easy to overclock your CPU to 3.2Ghz.

 

(I am not responsible for your system and what happens to it when you do this, and if you don't feel comfortable doing it, then don't.)

 

1. Go into your BIOS. (Read the manual that came with your motherboard if you don't know how to do this.)

2. Set your CPU multiplier to 8x (Default is 9x)

3. Make sure your RAM is "linked" and/or "synced" to the CPU.

4. Set your FSB to 800, (QDR 1600) (Make sure you have DDR2 800Mhz RAM before doing this.)

5. Done.

 

Since it is Double Data Rate RAM, the FSB is really set at 400Mhz.

 

So, if you follow the math:

 

800 (DDR speed) / 2 = 400 (True FSB). 400(FSB) x 8 (CPU multiplier) = 3200 (Mhz)

 

[Lutra78]

Hi,

 

is there ANY way to play GTA IV with Antialiasing activated?

 

I tried to force it with the nvidia controlpanel, but it doesnt work...!

 

With Aliasing the game looks really bad.

[dr.whiz]

Hi,

 

is there ANY way to play GTA IV with Antialiasing activated?

 

I tried to force it with the nvidia controlpanel, but it doesnt work...!

 

With Aliasing the game looks really bad.

as far as i know, the game does not have any anti aliasing features. its meant to be played without it so im guessing if you do somehow tweak it its not gonna get any better.

[zepman79]

AA can easily be turned on in NVIDIA control panel.

[Drag_Drift]

 

Hi,

 

is there ANY way to play GTA IV with Antialiasing activated?

 

I tried to force it with the nvidia controlpanel, but it doesnt work...! 

 

With Aliasing the game looks really bad.

Don't force AA through the Control Panel. The GPU will still continue to calculate AA, but the game will cancel it out and class it as useless code.

 

To have better results, force Supersampling.

[Lutra78]

Like i wrote - it does no help to turn it on in the control panel. The game just doesnt care and runs without AA.

 

Even the tool nhancer can't solve the aa-problem. Using it results in a crash.

 

I will try supersampling.

[Lutra78]

sry

[Bluesman]

 

let me get this f*cking optomisation thing off my chest, the optomisation is down to the pC owners, eg the slider bar settings. They should be able to optomise it themselves, that is why they are there.

Everyone keeps bleating (like f*cking sheep) on about my machine eats Crysis this and that, STFU. It isnt crysis, it has miles more draw distance, individual building textures, godammed traffic, peds and sh*tloads more than Crysis has to deal with. Yes Crysis has tons of trees, they also use the same f*cking texture over and over and over and over again on them. Not really that demanding then.

IV also has to Normal map loads more larger surfaces than Crysis, you will find buildings are bigger than trees. The list goes on.

The main story is that IV will be demanding so dont expect to run on everything maxed, I sure as f*ck dont.

 

Yea, my thoughts exactly.

[Lutra78]

Tried it: GTAI V ignores the AA-supersampling just like AA-mulitsampling....

[Boostaa]

All you people that are saying it's a hardware issue and not a game issue need to shut the f*ck up until you have actually played the game and see how terrible it runs regardless of settings.

 

Also how f*cking sh*tty it actually looks.

[disposeablehero]

 

let me get this f*cking optomisation thing off my chest, the optomisation is down to the pC owners, eg the slider bar settings. They should be able to optomise it themselves, that is why they are there.

Everyone keeps bleating (like f*cking sheep) on about my machine eats Crysis this and that, STFU. It isnt crysis, it has miles more draw distance, individual building textures, godammed traffic, peds and sh*tloads more than Crysis has to deal with. Yes Crysis has tons of trees, they also use the same f*cking texture over and over and over and over again on them. Not really that demanding then.

IV also has to Normal map loads more larger surfaces than Crysis, you will find buildings are bigger than trees. The list goes on.

The main story is that IV will be demanding so dont expect to run on everything maxed, I sure as f*ck dont.

 

Yea, my thoughts exactly.

Too bad he is full of crap

Crysis renders more then any other game on the market, the textures are 3-4 times more detailed, the trees and very resource demanding, and the draw distance is NOT better in GTA 4, as everything in the distance has a hazzy blur, Crysis does not. Crysis also has way more advanced techniques, textures on buildings are not near as demanding as lush jungles with tress flowing in the wind, with a destructable world and detail way pass what GTA 4 does. GTA 4 is poorly coded, and as time goes on people are starting to see how well optimized crysis was.

 

This is purely a software issue, crysis matches GTA in scale, and surpasses it by a large margin in detail and advanced rendering techniques. GTA 4 does not even look that great, and oputside traffic doesn't have to render much, buildings are not constantly moving in the wind, nor have advanced lighting filtering through them like every leaf in Crysis.

 

People who don't know what they are talking about should not talk about things they have no clue about.

 

The issue is Crysis was made from the ground up on PC, GTA 4 is not, and it show, hell, it does not even have AA whoch alone is a major drag on the visuals.

Edited December 3, 2008 by disposeablehero

[Drag_Drift]

Tried it: GTAI V ignores the AA-supersampling just like AA-mulitsampling....

What is your GPU?

[Wezz6400]

EDIT: let me get this f*cking optomisation thing off my chest, the optomisation is down to the pC owners, eg the slider bar settings. They should be able to optomise it themselves, that is why they are there.

Everyone keeps bleating (like f*cking sheep) on about my machine eats Crysis this and that, STFU. It isnt crysis, it has miles more draw distance, individual building textures, godammed traffic, peds and sh*tloads more than Crysis has to deal with. Yes Crysis has tons of trees, they also use the same f*cking texture over and over and over and over again on them. Not really that demanding then.

IV also has to Normal map loads more larger surfaces than Crysis, you will find buildings are bigger than trees. The list goes on.

The main story is that IV will be demanding so dont expect to run on everything maxed, I sure as f*ck dont.

Here here, finally someone commenting on this who actually knows what the f*ck he's talking about. Hell, I never expected someone who knows more than my limited knowledge to post something like that. It's nice to be proven wrong there.

[disposeablehero]

 

EDIT: let me get this f*cking optomisation thing off my chest, the optomisation is down to the pC owners, eg the slider bar settings. They should be able to optomise it themselves, that is why they are there.

Everyone keeps bleating (like f*cking sheep) on about my machine eats Crysis this and that, STFU. It isnt crysis, it has miles more draw distance, individual building textures, godammed traffic, peds and sh*tloads more than Crysis has to deal with. Yes Crysis has tons of trees, they also use the same f*cking texture over and over and over and over again on them. Not really that demanding then.

IV also has to Normal map loads more larger surfaces than Crysis, you will find buildings are bigger than trees. The list goes on.

The main story is that IV will be demanding so dont expect to run on everything maxed, I sure as f*ck dont.

Here here, finally someone commenting on this who actually knows what the f*ck he's talking about. Hell, I never expected someone who knows more than my limited knowledge to post something like that. It's nice to be proven wrong there.

He has no clue, hate to break it to you. The later levels in Crysis have bombs going off, planes flying overhead, 3 times the detail and large gun fights everywhere, all while maintaining a level of detail no other game comes close not, that includes GTA 4.

Edited December 3, 2008 by disposeablehero

[Lutra78]

@Drag-Drift

 

9600GT with 512.

 

 

The game either crashes with supersampling or just ignores it. I turned it on in the nvidia control panel.

[Turdist]

crysis sucks. f*cking get over it you nap

[Turdist]

oh and btw, dont feel too bad about it. coz by the end of today, ill probably be saying the same for gta iv

[Wezz6400]

 

EDIT: let me get this f*cking optomisation thing off my chest, the optomisation is down to the pC owners, eg the slider bar settings. They should be able to optomise it themselves, that is why they are there.

Everyone keeps bleating (like f*cking sheep) on about my machine eats Crysis this and that, STFU. It isnt crysis, it has miles more draw distance, individual building textures, godammed traffic, peds and sh*tloads more than Crysis has to deal with. Yes Crysis has tons of trees, they also use the same f*cking texture over and over and over and over again on them. Not really that demanding then.

IV also has to Normal map loads more larger surfaces than Crysis, you will find buildings are bigger than trees. The list goes on.

The main story is that IV will be demanding so dont expect to run on everything maxed, I sure as f*ck dont.

Here here, finally someone commenting on this who actually knows what the f*ck he's talking about. Hell, I never expected someone who knows more than my limited knowledge to post something like that. It's nice to be proven wrong there.

He has no clue, hate to break it to you. The later levels in Crysis have bombs going off, planes flying overhead, 3 times the detail and large gun fights everywhere, all while maintaining a level of detail no other game comes close not, that includes GTA 4.

Neither do you. Anyone who thinks one can judge code quality based on performance doesn't know what he's talking about. One can only judge code quality by looking at the code itselve, which is kind of hard with a closed-source game. So why don't you stop acting like you know sh*t and get your stuff together.

 

Crysis is very different from GTA. Crysis doesn't have the huge city full of stuff GTA has. Crysis doesn't have all the peds and vehicles moving around, with an actual destination instead of just random popping up. Just those three things are huge resource hogs, however there is much more. Crysis might have a few gizmos here and there, but none of that really shows up until you set it to very high, which needs todays hardware to run properly. They designed it for the future at the time of release, though most people were too stupid to get that so they complained they couldn't run at the highest setting with their high-end rig at the time.

 

I cannot even begin to imagine where you get that the Crysis engine was well optimised. We all know it wasn't bad, yet it wasn't as good as it could have been, which is what Crytek themselves are proving by improving the graphics on Warhead without upping the requirements.

 

I'm not saying GTA IV is perfect here, but it's getting way too many trashing right now. GTA IV is very resourceinstensive, which is exactly why Rockstar North had so much trouble getting it to run decent on the consoles. The PC's superior power has been put to use, part to get it to run better, part to make it more beautiful. The result is that it is demanding on the system requirements, but anyone who knows what he's talking about expected that from the beginning. We've known for years that the kind of game GTA is makes it demanding. That is why it never had the best graphics of the industry, while still demanding high requirements. That hasn't changed for IV, yet everyone is complaining.

Edited December 3, 2008 by Wezz6400

[MrKlorox]

 

Crysis doesn't have all the peds and vehicles moving around, with an actual destination instead of just random popping up.

Peds don't have destinations and they most certainly do just randomly pop up. Have you even played GTA4 yet?