Graphical Performance Readme

[mexell]

 

People are getting 15 fps on 1280 X 1024 res with Quads and GTX 260's, don't be so gullible. This is a BS excuse for a game that is terribly mis-usinfg PC resources.[...]

That looks like me - Q9300, ATi Radeon 4850 - 15fps on 1280x1024 with the recommended setting. Need workaround to start the game, can't exit the game, graphics look partly weird, performance decreases - R* really have to sit down and start to deliver now.

[Highwayman72]

This is very good information. Now people can stop complaining about why there top end computers cant even run gta4 max graphics... Read it and weep

Well he's the rub, you CAN max it on a mid-range rig like mine using the -norestrictions command line as posted in other threads... Console killing at its best mwhahaaaa

[Esaaap]

What you guys think how GTA IV will run on my computer? I know many people are asked the same question and people are getting angry in forums.

My biggest questionmark is how E6750 do the job, someone got experience with E6750?

 

My specs:

Intel Core 2 Duo E6750

GeForce 8800GTX 768MB

4Gb A-Data Extreme

Asus P5KC

T166 500Gb

XP

[Landie_Man_1990]

Im running a 256MB NIVDIA Geforce 6200. That doesnt take it too well at all.

[PacMaan]

"Higher settings are provided for future generations of PCs with higher specifications than are currently widely available."

 

I put this^ thru googles bullsh*t translator and it came back as this :

 

Higher settings are provided for space-age futuristic generations of PCs hundreds of years in the future with higher specifications than you could possibly even imagine with your primitive neanderthal brains.

 

liek omfg

[ihateeaandsony]

Its simple dominate the world kill everyone the world is a better place this is the ideal world for me YOU ALL DEAD EVERYONE MASACRED in an Instant oh how i wish every day at work you would all die everyone all those that compare and better all those so positive i wish you death for christmas and tradgedy for the new year die in your sleep if your lucky, I hate the entire world and the idiotic thoughts of those that put bigger idiots in power you are the ones i hope that suffer in a baron wasteland of despair living a Prolonged death watching only misery with torment knowing your unable to solve it

 

So dont die in your sleep people please die later

 

THIS MESSAGE IS FROM SOMEONE WHO HATES ROCKSTAR

 

 

 

I am running a 4870x2 etc etc Look its not cheap and should crap on XBOX 360 or PS3 But these Halfwitted Brain Dead Idiots claiming its Future Proof Get a Clue FFS ITS NOT FUTURE ITs now and to run slower than a ps3 or XBOX means a few things BAD CODING of the ENGINE FOR PC OR EVIL OVERTHE TOP COPYPROTECTION DOING TO MANY CHECKS OR even Complete lack of optimisations for the Graphics Compression ETC

 

STFU you Stupid Kids with your 5 mins of Gameplay So many Games over the Years have been under optimised and Complete wastes of time and they patch them for upto 2 years fix this and that so GAMES NEED TO BE FINNISHED they pay testers to do this WTF DO WE LOOK LIKE TESTERS Stupid get anyways HATE THE WORLD STILL YOUR ALL CRAP JUST DIe

Edited December 9, 2008 by ihateeaandsony

[babyalien]

for old hardware, there is nothing to say other than upgrade (every 14months the number of transistors on chips will double).

 

My system is several months old, and here are the results on full settings. I made a youtube of the test as i couldn't quiet believe it myself going from horror stories i've read.

 

Statistics

Average FPS: 62.50

Duration: 37.39 sec

CPU Usage: 76%

System memory usage: 37%

Video memory usage: 100%

 

Graphics Settings

Video Mode: 1680 x 1050 (60 Hz)

Texture Quality: High

Render Quality: High

View Distance: 100

Detail Distance: 100

 

Hardware

Microsoft® Windows Vista" Ultimate

Service Pack 1

Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GX2

Video Driver version: 180.84

Audio Adapter: Speakers (SoundMAX Integrated Digital HD Audio)

Intel® Core2 Quad CPU Q9450 @ 2.66GHz

 

File ID: benchmark.cli

[shmylamen]

G'day all...longtime reader, first time poster here. Am posting a comment in relation to graphics issues im getting.

 

I've found that if I have settings all on the lowest possible setting and then benchmark it...I get around 23fps.

However, If I go to the maximum R* will allow me to (1152 x 864) I actually get a slightly higher fps score on the benchmark...around 26fps.

 

I, like a great deal of my fellow PC gamers are having multiple headaches with this game. I recently spent enough money to buy a PS3 on upgrading my PC JUST so I would be ready for this great game when it came out.

Now it is looking like I have to spend a further $300 on a new video card (it seems my 256mb 8600gts just isnt powerful enough! Yet it is listed as recommended!)

Also, does anyone know how to get it to save the graphics settings?...everytime I load the game I have to change the settings again

 

My video card works great for Farcry 2, Fallout 3, Deadspace, Grid....these are all titles available on PS3 and Xbox along with GTA IV....yet GTA IV is the only game in my comp that runs like a granny with parkinsons!

Strange that I meet the system requirements, yet I cant even get a decent framerate!

 

I am more than annoyed at the fact I have invested a lot of time and money into playing this particular game yet R* tell us that it runs best on hardware not even available yet! (At least make it run like the standard console version so we can enjoy it NOW) And to those of us that believed that our upgraded PC's would handle this game from the specs R* released, well we're all gonna have to spend more cash on our PC's just to get a decent framerate!. By then, I could of bought 2 Xbox's and 1 PS3 with the money I will have spent. Yes, and it would also be stable and free of that evil DRM software!

 

So far I have spent over $1000AUD (including game purchase) just for this one title alone

 

R* U really have dissapointed your legions of PC devotees.

 

 

*****************************************************

 

Current PC Specs:

 

- Intel Dual Core 8400 3.0ghz

- 4gb DDR2 G.Skill 1066 Performance Memory

- 256mb 8600GTS Video Card

- 2 x 320gb WD hard drives

- Creative Audigy 2 ZS Platinum Soundcard

- 20x Pioneer SATA DVD RW

- Windows Vista Ultimate SP1

[ihateeaandsony]

So it seems that ROCHSTA Cant make Games good anymore i am wondering where their focus was didn't go into the overall performance of the Engine,

or should i believe we would be better off using 64 bit xp or Vista i stopped using Vista due

to ITS COMPLETE GARBAGE, I would not feed Vista to a Vat of Acid due to the Taint it would leave then the acid would no longer burn people, And XP 64 it was updated like a Nuns Vag, Were say ford to make a Car that only performed well on Fuel that does not exist yet oh and you can only Drive the Car if your in a Ford club house you have to join a club

THIS IS COMPLETE BS STUPID MORON BASTARDS MS LIVE IS CRAP THAT RETARDED FECIALPHILIAC CLUB CAN SUCK ITS SELF OFF THE WHOLE ROCKSTAR TEAM SHOULD GET STRAPONS AND SODIMISE EACH OTHER IN TAINTED VISTA ACID

BTW i got a Refund on the Game i Chucked a Comlpete Spaz in the Store you people may wish to try this Before taking it back Copy the Key and the Discs Screw em if they wana pull BS on paying customers

RANT RANT RANT RANT RANT!!!!!!!!

[infinity04]

GROW up.... they are trying to fix this mistake they made.. overall, i like the gameplay.. it's genious... a little graphical problem is not the worst thing! it will be fixed.! Now calm DOWN! and enjoy the game!

 

The "worst" thing about it, i guess is the movement controls... makes me dizzy sometimes But, just another thing to get used to. reminds me of controls in Scarface / The Godfather game.

Edited December 9, 2008 by infinity04

[Marcin6]

For me game run`s the same in low as high detail settings No better or lower fps , the same !!

 

Damn you !

[techbeam]

For me game run`s the same in low as high detail settings No better or lower fps , the same !!

 

Damn you !

absolutely the same thing here...

all i think about it is that the game is really badly ported. i thought R* wouldn't dissapoint! but they actually did.

what could be one of the best pc games ever is now just a buggy sh*t.

 

ps. how long we all have to wait 4 the patch to release???!!! shame on u, Rock*.

[rnd2k]

i think the problem becomes from the inssuficent memory on multicore CPU's i'll test tonight my Q6600 with 4GB RAM to see what will hapend

[spuy767]

b) Its next-next gen *rolls eyes*

No, it's a next-gen port. We're currently in a Generation which allows medium settings. The next gen will allow high settings. Pretty clever if you ask me.

The problem is, PCs are a Generation above Consoles at the moment, but because of crappy coding (I guess), IV won't run to the full usability of PCs today, Minimum should be consoles, Medium should be above consoles and high should be Crysis-like if they Optimised it correctly.

False. I have a way last gen GPU, an 8800GTS 640, that doesn't have the G92 chip, and very cheap parts and this game runs at a brisk pace with graphics turned up to the high range of medium.

 

Specs: E7200 OC @ 3.18GHz, 2GB DDR26400, 8800GTS 640, Asus P5GC-MX 1333 Mobo. Windows XP SP3.

[k1k5]

Guys, what you think how GTA IV will run on my computer?

 

My specs:

 

Intel Core 2 Duo E6550 @ 2.33 (2 CPUs)

ATI Radeon HD 4670 1GB PCS (1GB DDR3, Core 750MHz, Memory 1746MHz, 128bit, DirectX 10.1)

2Gb ddr

 

pleaseee help!

 

[commanderz]

hi...i having this werid problem.....my game run prefect and not a single crash when starting the game.........but after 5-1X min...the game starting lag + stuttering like sh*t......especially when driving around....it really super unplayable at all.....any advice??tryed every setting......and getting the same result....btw here my Benchmark Results

Statistics

Average FPS: 34.65

Duration: 37.28 sec

CPU Usage: 82%

System memory usage: 95%

Video memory usage: 62%

 

Graphics Settings

Video Mode: 1280 x 1024 (60 Hz)

Texture Quality: Medium

Render Quality: Very High

View Distance: 20

Detail Distance: 70

 

Hardware

Microsoft?Windows Vista" Ultimate

Service Pack 1

Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTX

Video Driver version: 180.84

Audio Adapter: Speakers (Realtek High Definition Audio)

Intel® Core™2 Quad CPU Q6600 @ 2.40GHz

 

 

JUST FXXKING TELL ME HOW TO FIX THE MEMORY LEAK PROBLEM ORDY!!!i LAZY OF POST N POST N POST ...and no 1 give a danm about it!!!

[Mjhieu]

GTA4's graphic cannot compare with crysic. There is a big problem when my system can skill crysic at ultral high and 4x AA, but cannot have high setting with GTA4!

 

Statistics

Average FPS: 39.59

Duration: 37.58 sec

CPU Usage: 73%

System memory usage: 44%

Video memory usage: 71%

 

Graphics Settings

Video Mode: 1440 x 900 (75 Hz)

Texture Quality: Medium

Render Quality: Highest

View Distance: 43

Detail Distance: 100

 

Hardware

Microsoft® Windows Vista" Ultimate

Service Pack 1

Video Adapter: ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series

Video Driver version: 7.14.10.621

Audio Adapter: Speakers (Realtek High Definition Audio)

Intel® Core2 Quad CPU Q6600 @ 2.40GHz

 

File ID: benchmark.cli

Edited December 9, 2008 by Mjhieu

[Rylin]

My settings on my new pc I recently put together last month.

 

Statistics

Average FPS: 54.95

Duration: 37.09 sec

CPU Usage: 68%

System memory usage: 61%

Video memory usage: 98%

 

Graphics Settings

Video Mode: 1680 x 1050 (60 Hz)

Texture Quality: Medium

Render Quality: Highest

View Distance: 28

Detail Distance: 100

 

Hardware

Microsoft® Windows Vista" Ultimate

Service Pack 1

Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS 512

Video Driver version: 180.84

Audio Adapter: Speakers (2- Creative SB Audigy 2 ZS (WDM))

Intel® Core2 Quad CPU Q9550 @ 3.41GHz

 

File ID: benchmark.cli

[Zenzuke]

"Resolution scaling affects water, reflections, shadows, mirrors and the visible viewable distance."

 

Chaining together settins like this is what makes this game so difficult to get to run well.

 

I have a decent system, and I get pretty decent FPS (20-30) but I have a 256 MB gfx card... the resolution sould NOT be tied to other settings.

 

Currently I can only run the game withouth gfx memory crashes in 800x600... that's ridiculous. If I could have different settings for water, reflections, shadows and screen res I should be able to play using almost the same amount of VRAM but in my native LCD res of 1280x1024 or even 1024x768.

 

NO OTHER game links together settings like this, and for a good reason.

 

I think rockstar should make possible to extensively tweak graphic settings at will, and many performance problems would be solved instantaneously by the players themselves. Many have already been solved by command line hacks and so on, but even in command line there are very little things to tweak.

Edited December 10, 2008 by Zenzuke

[Uxot]

for old hardware, there is nothing to say other than upgrade (every 14months the number of transistors on chips will double).

 

My system is several months old, and here are the results on full settings. I made a youtube of the test as i couldn't quiet believe it myself going from horror stories i've read.

 

Statistics

Average FPS: 62.50

Duration: 37.39 sec

CPU Usage: 76%

System memory usage: 37%

Video memory usage: 100%

 

Graphics Settings

Video Mode: 1680 x 1050 (60 Hz)

Texture Quality: High

Render Quality: High

View Distance: 100

Detail Distance: 100

 

Hardware

Microsoft® Windows Vista" Ultimate

Service Pack 1

Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GX2

Video Driver version: 180.84

Audio Adapter: Speakers (SoundMAX Integrated Digital HD Audio)

Intel® Core2 Quad CPU Q9450 @ 2.66GHz

 

File ID: benchmark.cli

System memory usage: 37%, what is ur memory ?

[shmylamen]

Hi all.

 

Just thought i'd share with you my benchmark scores, as I found that if everything was min...I would actually get less FPS!...Crazy stuff I know!

 

Average FPS: 37.30

Duration: 36.97 sec

CPU Usage: 95%

System memory usage: 75%

Video memory usage: 100%

 

Graphics Settings

Video Mode: 1024 x 768 (75 Hz)

Texture Quality: Low

Render Quality: Highest

View Distance: 8

Detail Distance: 70

 

Hardware

Microsoft® Windows Vista" Ultimate

Service Pack 1

Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GTS

Video Driver version: 180.84

Audio Adapter: Speakers (Creative SB Audigy 2 ZS (WDM))

Intel® Core2 Duo CPU E8400 @ 3.00GHz

 

Now heres the benchmark results of a pathetic 848 x 480 res...Note: FPS of 24.41!

 

Average FPS: 24.41

Duration: 37.28 sec

CPU Usage: 98%

System memory usage: 62%

Video memory usage: 99%

 

Graphics Settings

[B]Video Mode: 848 x 480 (70 Hz)[/b]

Texture Quality: Low

Render Quality: Medium

View Distance: 6

Detail Distance: 60

 

Hardware

Microsoft® Windows Vista" Ultimate

Service Pack 1

Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GTS

Video Driver version: 180.84

Audio Adapter: Speakers (Creative SB Audigy 2 ZS (WDM))

Intel® Core2 Duo CPU E8400 @ 3.00GHz

[notsofrisk]

Hi all.

 

Just thought i'd share with you my benchmark scores, as I found that if everything was min...I would actually get less FPS!...Crazy stuff I know!

 

 

Not strange at all really.

 

Atleast not if you think about resolution.

 

Less resolution will make the graphics rely more on the CPU rather than the GFX.

Higher res will go more into the GFX.

This game being hard on the CPU to begin with, I do not find that funny at all.

 

I simplyfied this very much now, but still.

[kikiNL]

Posted on 10th Dec

 

 

Just in case anyone has forgotten or not seen the page that says it (conected with ati stream)

 

The 8.12 will be officially released tomorrow

 

they include the ATI stream function which is GPGPU as in general purpose computing on a gpu basically acting as a CPU but many times faster, this is restricted to some things at the moment but will gain momentum

 

not sure but all those crossfire woes maybe fixed

 

AND!!! GTA4 has been significantly boosted with this release : http://www.gta4.net/news/4163/...in-the-next-few-days/

just read the top bit

 

R* is also releasing there on game patch today, tommorow or thursday

 

Should be a gooden enjoy!

[shmylamen]

Hi all.

 

Just thought i'd share with you my benchmark scores, as I found that if everything was min...I would actually get less FPS!...Crazy stuff I know!

 

 

Not strange at all really.

 

Atleast not if you think about resolution.

 

Less resolution will make the graphics rely more on the CPU rather than the GFX.

Higher res will go more into the GFX.

This game being hard on the CPU to begin with, I do not find that funny at all.

 

I simplyfied this very much now, but still.

I do understand your point about resolution in relation to CPU and GPU loads (thankyou oh so much for simplifying it for me)

 

However, if you look a little harder at my benchmark results, you will see that the resolution was increased and a higher fps was acheived, but also, render quality (increased from medium to highest), view distance(from 6 to 8), detail distance (60 to 70)

 

I commented about this earlier and received replies that people had no such increase in FPS when increasing resolution and/or options

 

So, yes I do find it strange that after increasing these options as well as the resolution that I acheived an extra 12.89FPS

 

 

[DJPwnage]

what ticks me off is the fact i can run Crysis at max but i cant even run this without having to wait for the map to load or game finish a call or mission, on high. Next Gen? BS thats their way of saying...oh yea...we have supercomutpers....so ours are best money can buy....and we made it barley able to run on it.. So next Gen? 9800 GTS 1gb Superclocked X2 SLi 8gb Ram and Quad is not Next get? What they waiting on?

[noid449]

btw thats not next gen that just todays best next gen would be a unknown chip an unknown gpu an uknown..well you get the message and its still bs yes i agree with you but its like a sponge sucks all the power and then splurts it out not caring where it goes

 

[RufusThorne]

My PC is one month old... One *MONTH* and I can't increase draw distance beyond 35. I have *8GB* RAM and 1Gb of Graphics card memory. What is going on?

 

[noid449]

is it one month old from you buying it or one month old from it being made as in the tech it uses .. but still i agree it should be able to push a few more limits unless you bought a zx81 last month

[(r)Evolution]

Howdy, first time poster here... be gentle

 

I have the weirdest problem, first of all here's my specs:

 

Athlon64 x2 5000+

3gb mem 667mhz

Audigy 2 ZS

Asus HD4850 512mb - catalyst 8.12

 

Ok so it's a low-to-medium-end puter

 

Now here's the weird part I can't play this game with medium settings (slideshow ¨10fps), gets weirder that it's exactly the same with lowest possible settings (everything to low and and all sliders all the way to the left)...

 

But it just keeps getting weirder - I just thought what the f* I'll try high settings and I got like 20-25 fps constant outdoors and 50 indoors... WTF?... so it's playable (barely), but I'd rather play with medium or low to GAIN actually playable framerate (I'd be happy with 30)

 

So WTF is wrong with the textures srsly? Or is the problem in the shaders, don't they use same shaders with different texture setting?

 

So anyway now I'm playing with:

Texture Quality: High

Render Quality: Highest

View Distance: 33

Detail Distance: 100

Car Density: 30

At 1280*1024 60HZ

 

Oh gawd, why would Refractions... I mean R* mess up so bad... Tanner you suck! (no offense to any Tanners around)

[Jodo]

 

b) Its next-next gen *rolls eyes*

No, it's a next-gen port. We're currently in a Generation which allows medium settings. The next gen will allow high settings. Pretty clever if you ask me.

The problem is, PCs are a Generation above Consoles at the moment, but because of crappy coding (I guess), IV won't run to the full usability of PCs today, Minimum should be consoles, Medium should be above consoles and high should be Crysis-like if they Optimised it correctly.

Thank you guy for posting this im tried of seeing this f-ing idiots think our computers are not up to par to play this game ,

 

***********Self~Built**************

EVGA NFORCE 780i 1333FSB [email protected]

EVGA 9800GX2 [email protected] 1687MHZ(Streams)x2 1050x2(Memory)

INTEL QX8200 2333MHZ [email protected] 1600MHX FSB

OCZ OC 2x2GB OC^@960MHZ(Beat that ram )

NFORCE MCP 533 [email protected] 600Mhz

X-FI X-TREME GAMER 32MB S-RAM

ANTEC 64A 850W

LCD 24" 1920x1200

 

thats my machine far faster than the Xbox 360

It lies with the code, us pc geeks with god like machines have no problem running high end games the differnce between

crysis on xbox n on pc are monumental. first of all the res. is astronomically higher on pc machines and let us not forget Anti-Aliasing requires so much more video ram and processing power from the GPU that the xbox cannot provide , needless to say computers are so much faster than consoles , but theres a price to pay for that power , i spent $5,000 on my machine to be sure i would not have any preformance problems , i have been a professional pc preformance analysis for 5 years now starting just b4 the big doom3-6800ultra craze , so i think us computergeeks/proformance professionals might know a bit more than you console kids , you get your opinion bye the fact that u get faster frames , but plz dont post idiotiv comments about our machines being slow, sit n spin.

Edited December 10, 2008 by Jodo