Graphical Performance Readme

[l-b]

I have just read the interesting last page of this thread and, of course, the first.

 

I wonder: are there tweaks for extremely low-spec machines? Can you generalize the experiences some of you had about higher framerates when using higher settings?

I currently get 10 fps at the lowest possible settings, indoors or outdoors on a 2 GHz dualcore, 2 GB of RAM and 256 of RAM on the graphics board which could be a bottleneck...

 

Edit: I just tried "medium" textures and it actually felt somewhat smoother in my hideout than before!

Edited December 10, 2008 by l-b

[JaK.pt]

What do you guys recommend in the vehicle density for a better game experience?

 

Im seeing that the most common value people is playing is 37.

[Jodo]

What do you guys recommend in the vehicle density for a better game experience?

 

Im seeing that the most common value people is playing is 37.

hey i just got done playing with vehicle density at 100 and its is pretty annoying too many cars , i recommend 40-45 setting

it seems like im constantly waiting for other cars to get out of the way , but yeah anyhting below 60 ought to be fun , happy gaming

[Jodo]

I have just read the interesting last page of this thread and, of course, the first.

 

I wonder: are there tweaks for extremely low-spec machines? Can you generalize the experiences some of you had about higher framerates when using higher settings?

I currently get 10 fps at the lowest possible settings, indoors or outdoors on a 2 GHz dualcore, 2 GB of RAM and 256 of RAM on the graphics board which could be a bottleneck...

 

Edit: I just tried "medium" textures and it actually felt somewhat smoother in my hideout than before!

Hey bud not trying to be a jerk or nothing but you problem is your video ram , 256 isnt enough to play any new games , i ran a GPU bench the other day and Crysis alones uses 809MB of video memory. even with fixes , even with patches , you wont be able to go above medium qualtiy and see above 20-25fps. the problem is if you dont have enough video memory the Game wil place it on system ram , wich for Graphical information is way to slow , second problem this games runs my 2.25 alvailble ram up to 80% so if you pagefile on Ram thats going to put other Core Files on HDD pagefiling , greatly slowing down your preformance. now for the sake of conversation im not going to type out a complex equation on how that works , but the game will use up 320 megabytes of memory ( video or sys wich evr availble) on the lowest setting so , you get the picture? go for a cheap 9600gt 512mb , or i got a 8600gt 512 PNY im selling for $100, but really i recommend you get a high end card

prices on 8800gt 8800gtx or ultras are down cause there 2 gens old but still very fast so think bout it

 

***********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

 

 

 

[RabidHamster]

 

Here is an interesting README i found on R* website, looks like performance problems might be "intentional"

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE GRAPHIC SETTINGS OF GRAND THEFT AUTO IV PC

 

Most users using current PC hardware as of December 2008 are advised to use medium graphics settings. Higher settings are provided for future generations of PCs with higher specifications than are currently widely available.

 

Graphics settings are limited by system resources by default. 256MB video cards force minimum settings by default. If a user bypasses these safety measures using command line arguments and exceeds their system resources, the users gaming experience may be compromised. 

 

 

Video Mode

Resolution scaling effects water, reflections, shadows, mirrors and the visible viewable distance.  The resolution settings relate to the amount of available video memory.  At 2560*1600 the game will require 320MB of video memory in addition to all the memory required for content. At 800*600 the game will require 32MB of video memory in addition to the content. Medium resolution settings are recommended for most users as higher settings are only usable if there is available video memory.

 

Texture Quality

Texture quality affects the visual quality of the content of the game.  High setting for textures will require 600MB of video memory at a setting of 21 View Distance in addition to the memory taken by the Video Mode. A medium texture setting is recommended for most users.

 

Render Quality

Render quality is the texture filter quality used on most things in the world rendering.  Most people would know this as anisotropic filtering.  Medium settings are recommended for most users and will provide filtering beyond what the console versions can execute.

 

View Distance

View distance scales the distance in which different objects in the world such as building and cars are seen.  Raising this option increases the distance in which high quality objects must be loaded and will increase the memory it requires.  Restrictions are established to ensure the game runs optimally for most users.  A setting of 22 or more will provide PC users an enhanced experience over the console versions.

 

Detail Distance

Detail distance scales aspects of the environment that the View Distance setting does not including vegetation, trash and other moveable objects. A setting of 10 would be the equivalent to the performance on a console. This setting has little effect on memory.

 

Vehicle Density

Vehicle density scales the traffic density of the traffic in the game.  It has no effect on the mission vehicles or difficultly of the game, but can have a significant impact on CPU performance

 

Shadow Density

Shadow Density controls the number of shadows generated for positional lights in exterior environments.  These shadows are exclusive to the PC version and can have a major impact on CPU and GPU performance.

 

Crossfire/SLI

With the latest ATI driver (8-11 series) the game supports crossfire modes (ie. 4870x2)

SLI is currently unsupported.  Support will be added through a future game patch as well as an updated Nvidia driver.

 

 

NOTE: Background Processes

Certain background processes can have a detrimental effect on system performance when playing GTA IV, especially on systems with minimum required system memory.  Users should ensure they disable their Virus scans when running the game to maximize performance.

What a Crock of sh** so I buy the game now and put it on the shelf so i can play it in 1 to 2 years time why not release it in 5 years time and do us all a favour or will i have to put that on the shelf and wate again by witch time ill be wanting to play GTA 5.

Your telling me they could not find a Game engine out there that could not put out 60fps witch is not much these days even with oldder cards after all GTA has some of the world’s worst low polygon models I have ever seen.

GTA has never been high quality graphics its probably the only game that can get away with crap modelling because of the playability and its unique style of the game this has always been one game that shows us you don’t need to push 100000 million polygons on to the screen to impress us.

Edited December 11, 2008 by RabidHamster

[Splattel]

I just read an interesting thing over at Anandtech. The 360's gpu is just slightly more powerful than a Radeon X800, meaning that todays graphic cards are about 4x more powerful than what was used to render the game on the 360. Yeah, GTA4 is reeeeaally optimized...

 

 

[JaK.pt]

What do you guys recommend in the vehicle density for a better game experience?

 

Im seeing that the most common value people is playing is 37.

hey i just got done playing with vehicle density at 100 and its is pretty annoying too many cars , i recommend 40-45 setting

it seems like im constantly waiting for other cars to get out of the way , but yeah anyhting below 60 ought to be fun , happy gaming

Im playing at 50 , just in the middle

[l-b]

Hey bud not trying to be a jerk or nothing but you problem is your video ram , 256 isnt enough to play any new games , i ran a GPU bench the other day and Crysis alones uses 809MB of video memory. even with fixes , even with patches , you wont be able to go above medium qualtiy and see above 20-25fps. the problem is if you dont have enough video memory the Game wil place it on system ram , wich for Graphical information is way to slow , second problem this games runs my 2.25 alvailble ram up to 80% so if you pagefile on Ram thats going to put other Core Files on HDD pagefiling , greatly slowing down your preformance. now for the sake of conversation im not going to type out a complex equation on how that works , but the game will use up 320 megabytes of memory ( video or sys wich evr availble) on the lowest setting so , you get the picture? go for a cheap 9600gt 512mb , or i got a 8600gt 512 PNY im selling for $100, but really i recommend you get a high end card

prices on 8800gt 8800gtx or ultras are down cause there 2 gens old but still very fast so think bout it

 

<snip>

No offense taken.

I am on a laptop, so a whole new system would be a good idea anyway... or getting R* to do some serious optimization on the game.

[Lurf]

 

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?

Rofl no ofc that's not next gen. For the most part (except ur GPU) thats sort of the top of the current gen. I agree that they could have gotten more out of this game performance wise, but on the other hand it is in fact a rather sophisticated game. And btw u can't max Crysis out, at least not on a high resolution with decent FPS, ur GPU is not good enough for that. And if ur barely able to run this u are one of the unfortunate 1% of the players. Depending on what ur CPU is running @ u should see somewhere around 35-40 FPS.

Edited December 12, 2008 by Lurf

[Hardbastard]

GTA4 unlock textures and resolutions:

http://forum.computergames.ro/attachment.p...74&d=1228992109

 

 

[Angry001]

 

 

Statistics

Average FPS: 52.46

Duration: 37.21 sec

CPU Usage: 76%

System memory usage: 63%

Video memory usage: 63%

 

Graphics Settings

Video Mode: 1920 x 1080 (60 Hz)

Texture Quality: Medium

Render Quality: High

View Distance: 30

Detail Distance: 50

 

Hardware

Microsoft® Windows Vista" Home Premium

Service Pack 1

Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280

Video Driver version: 180.84

Audio Adapter: Speakers (C-Media USB Headphone Set )

Intel® Core2 Quad CPU Q9550 @ 2.83GHz

 

File ID: benchmark.cli

 

this is what im forced too , some of u guys would be wondering why im complaining but look at how much video memory im using , if im using high textures i get constant RESC10 errors and only every 1 in like 10 benchmarks finishes but the results are only like 2 frames less

[vass]

I can't understand how this game works LOL

This is my settings now

 

I put "-norestriction -nomemrestrict -texturequality 2 -detailquality 27 -viewdistance 27 -shadowdensity 1 -novblank" in the target field of the shortcut

and had to put these in a commandline.txt file i made with notepad in the main directory for it to work, i ididn't need this with 180.48 drivers before i switched to 180.84

 

This was what i put in the commandline.txt file:

-texturequality 2

-nomemrestrict

-norestriction

-shadowdensity 1

-viewdistance 27

-detailquality 27

-novblank

 

 

Now look at these results, WTF i get higher frames with textures set high than medium, with medium i was getting 39ish, all other details the same

 

Average FPS: 40.51

Duration: 36.98 sec

CPU Usage: 90%

System memory usage: 92%

Video memory usage: 100%

 

Graphics Settings

Video Mode: 1680 x 1050 (59 Hz)

Texture Quality: High

Render Quality: High

View Distance: 28

Detail Distance: 28

 

Hardware

Microsoft Windows XP Professional

Service Pack 3

Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT

Video Driver version: 180.84

Audio Adapter: Realtek HD Audio output

Intel Pentium III Xeon processor

 

My system is 8400 Duo core @3ghz (bench says pentium 3 Xeon lol)

Leadtek 8800GT with 512mb DDR3

2 X 1gb DDR2 1066mhz ram

 

Now seiously what the hell is going on with this game, why the hell do they limit textures to medium when it looks way better at high and runs ok "just look at the number plates of ur car and graffiti on walls etc

 

Oh and with Fraps i get 25-42fps, also pretty much the same in medium textures and all other settings the same

Edited December 12, 2008 by vass

[Highwayman72]

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.

Next Gen? you mean PS4 or Xbox720 then? lol

[Yanush]

 

Statistics

Average FPS: 52.46

Duration: 37.21 sec

CPU Usage: 76%

System memory usage: 63%

Video memory usage: 63%

 

Graphics Settings

Video Mode: 1920 x 1080 (60 Hz)

Texture Quality: Medium

Render Quality: High

View Distance: 30

Detail Distance: 50

 

Hardware

Microsoft® Windows Vista" Home Premium

Service Pack 1

Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280

Video Driver version: 180.84

Audio Adapter: Speakers (C-Media USB Headphone Set  )

Intel® Core2 Quad  CPU  Q9550  @ 2.83GHz

 

File ID: benchmark.cli

 

this is what im forced too , some of u guys would be wondering why im complaining but look at how much video memory im using , if im using high textures i get constant RESC10 errors and only every 1 in like 10 benchmarks finishes but the results are only like 2 frames less

Hmm, listen, go to the options, choose "Game" and turn of "Clip Capturing" Its help a lot.

 

I know what i say. I have almost exacly comp spec like you, Quad 2.83 GHz, 4 GB RAM 1066, GTX 280, and i was testing at:

Video Mode: 1920 x 1080 (60 Hz)

Texture Quality: Highest

Render Quality: High

View Distance: 33

Detail Distance: 100

And Shadow on max.

 

And i have 45-55 FPS!

 

Oh, and i am using still the not beta drivers from nvidia (but if you have newest, its OK)

Edited December 12, 2008 by Yanush

[UKJack]

So that explains perfectly why I have to lower the FSB of my "future generation" PC from it's normal 1333MHz to 1066MHz to get the game to run!

 

Exactly which generation are we talking about?

 

EVGA 790i ULTRA mobo

Q6600 OC 3.0 GHz @1333MHz (when not playing GTA)

4Gb Reaper HPC 10666 DDR3 @ 1333MHz (when not in GTA)

BFG GTX260 OC

 

Benchmarking tells me I'm using less than 50% of the available card memory, but any higher settings and I get the errors!

 

[Hardbastard]

Statistics

Average FPS: 27.23

Duration: 37.24 sec

CPU Usage: 92%

System memory usage: 47%

Video memory usage: 100%

 

Graphics Settings

Video Mode: 1440 x 900 (60 Hz)

Texture Quality: High

Render Quality: Highest

View Distance: 15

Detail Distance: 47

 

Hardware

Microsoft Windows XP Professional

Service Pack 3

Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT 256MB DDR3

Audio Adapter: Realtek HD Audio output

AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 5000+ @ 3GHz

 

File ID: Benchmark.cli

[hazeyo]

me and a friend of mine have identical machines, the only diffent between them would be the processer mine being a athlon x2 4400+ and his being a phenom 9800 both of us are running ATI HD 3650's, with this being said we have been doing some testing to see what was affecting the FPS of the game and we have came up with it having to do with the L2 cache per core since most quad cores out there are only running 512kb of L2 cache which would explain the horrible performance on them, as we found with my friend's rig that his game would run on average 10-15 FPS slower on the quad core with 512KB L2 cache percore verses my athlon x2 with 1MB of L2 cache per core (using a dual core with 1MB of L2 cache per core im getting about 30-40FPS on average verses 15-30FPS using a quad core with 512kb L2 cache per core) , again we are both using the same motherboard with 2 gig's of ram each with ATI HD 3650's only difference between the two machines would be the processors of the two computers, large L2 cache seems to be the key for smooth game play. i hope my information is able to help some one out there

[bukkit]

my specs :

 

C2D E6850 {overclocked to 3.4GTHz}

8800GTX

4 GB DDR2

______________

nvidia 180.84 beta 3 drivers

 

1440 x 1050

 

Textures: High

Rendering: High

 

Draw distance: 20 {like consoles}

Detail distance: 40

Traffic: 100

Shadows: 16

 

Avarage FPS : in becnch 44 / in actual gameplay 35-40

 

it runs very smoothly, no bugs , no crashes, nothing!

 

what did i do ?

_________________

 

- for nvidia users , u need those 180.84 drivers

- turn off all processes in task manager {firefox, explorer, icq, deamon, ...}

- set the priority of GTAIV.exe to HIGH

- in options turn off the clip capture feature

- try to overclock your cpu a bit , cause gta4 depends a lot on spu speed

 

- in game, pres [P] to turn on the 'gta filter' it adds deapth of field, motion blur , fixes the grainy shadows , and adds a kind of AA feeling to the game, the game will be a bit blury , but nothing dramatic on high resolution. i personaly like it a lot.

 

__________________

so R* just proved they r a bunch of morons with their 'only next gen pcs can run it on high'

my pc is year and something old , and it runs it absolutlely smooth , no problems , no bugs or crashes. after the patch im hoping for more 5+ fps , maybe AA. will see

 

__________________

for comparasion

 

these r console options

1280-720 (XBOX360) 1180-620 (PS3)

Textures : Medium (only cars have them on high i think)

Rendering : Low

draw distance : 21

detail distance : 10

traffic : 33

shadows : not included in console version.

 

and avarage fps is about 29-30 on xbox / 26-28 on ps3 (eurogamer had measured it)

 

i run it on 45-50 fps on those graphic options

_________________

 

so dont listen to R* pathetic exuses about next gen pc's ...its bullsh*t

 

[KillaXxX]

my specs :

 

C2D E6850 {overclocked to 3.4GTHz}

8800GTX

4 GB DDR2

______________

nvidia 180.84 beta 3 drivers

 

1440 x 1050

 

Textures: High

Rendering: High

 

Draw distance: 20 {like consoles}

Detail distance: 40

Traffic: 100

Shadows: 16

 

Avarage FPS : in becnch 44 / in actual gameplay 35-40

 

it runs very smoothly, no bugs , no crashes, nothing!

 

what did i do ?

_________________

 

- for nvidia users , u need those 180.84 drivers

- turn off all processes in task manager {firefox, explorer, icq, deamon, ...}

- set the priority of GTAIV.exe to HIGH

- in options turn off the clip capture feature

- try to overclock your cpu a bit , cause gta4 depends a lot on spu speed

 

- in game, pres [P] to turn on the 'gta filter' it adds deapth of field, motion blur , fixes the grainy shadows , and adds a kind of AA feeling to the game, the game will be a bit blury , but nothing dramatic on high resolution. i personaly like it a lot.

 

__________________

so R* just proved they r a bunch of morons with their 'only next gen pcs can run it on high'

my pc is year and something old , and it runs it absolutlely smooth , no problems , no bugs or crashes. after the patch im hoping for more 5+ fps , maybe AA. will see

 

__________________

for comparasion

 

these r console options

1280-720 (XBOX360) 1180-620 (PS3)

Textures : Medium (only cars have them on high i think)

Rendering : Low

draw distance : 21

detail distance : 10

traffic : 33

shadows : not included in console version.

 

and avarage fps is about 29-30 on xbox / 26-28 on ps3 (eurogamer had measured it)

 

i run it on 45-50 fps on those graphic options

_________________

 

so dont listen to R* pathetic exuses about next gen pc's ...its bullsh*t

hey i followed your instructions here and basically i can run this game on high textures, highest renderer, 1024x768 omg this game looks beutifull now i can't believe that we have to enable this with commands lol well my specs are not that great there are as follow i have a toshiba x205-SLI5 :

T8300 core duo at 2.40 Ghz

2 Gforce 8600m gt with 256mb each [ddr 3]

3 gig ram on windows vista 32bit

i use the following programs to keep my system running nicely Tuneup Utilities 2009 great program and systweak cacheboost

plus registry mechanic <------this one here i only run it when i do lots of installs and uninstalls my FPS range from 25-38 i have SLI enabled but i know that this game is not optimized for that yet wich means that i should see further improvements i'm using 180.48 keep in mind that i use modded drivers since toshiba dont have any good drivers for my laptop, most of the time i can see the textures when i drive along the highway thats when sometimes the textures disapear for a bit maybe a split sec on Multiplayer thats another story the fps drop below 20, using fraps to ID my performance .

[christinme7890]

me and a friend of mine have identical machines, the only diffent between them would be the processer mine being a athlon x2 4400+ and his being a phenom 9800 both of us are running ATI HD 3650's, with this being said we have been doing some testing to see what was affecting the FPS of the game and we have came up with it having to do with the L2 cache per core since most quad cores out there are only running 512kb of L2 cache which would explain the horrible performance on them, as we found with my friend's rig that his game would run on average 10-15 FPS slower on the quad core with 512KB L2 cache percore verses my athlon x2 with 1MB of L2 cache per core (using a dual core with 1MB of L2 cache per core im getting about 30-40FPS on average verses 15-30FPS using a quad core with 512kb L2 cache per core) , again we are both using the same motherboard with 2 gig's of ram each with ATI HD 3650's only difference between the two machines would be the processors of the two computers, large L2 cache seems to be the key for smooth game play. i hope my information is able to help some one out there

that is interesting. So much for the game working better on future generation pcs seems like the better the machine the worse the fps.

[StingRhea]

E4500 Core 2 @ 2.2Ghz (2MB L2 Cache)

MSI P4M900M3-L

2gB 667 Ram

nVidia GF8400GS 256MB (180.84 beta 3 drivers)

XP SP3 32bit

Patched GTA4

 

Resolution: 1024x768 (Though I can run Fallout 3 smoothly with 1280x1024)

Textures : Low

Rendering : Low

Draw distance : 5

Detail distance : 5

Traffic : 33 (As per console settings)

Shadows : Off

 

Rather pathetic settings if you ask me, as I am able to run FO3 smoothly at the highest settings. Just pray the next patch will improve that.

 

Might be the problem with my system - MSI CMOS unable to adjust CPU Ratios so overclocking is not for me. The MSI Dual Core Utility just makes the system unstable. I already free up memory using CachemanXP, defragged, download .NET framework 3.5, update all my drivers, closed all unnecessary application.

 

What should I do? Wait for patch or upgrade my chipset with motherboard, better gfx card and an extra 2gb ram?

 

Video for you all to enjoy: (quality so poor I can only save it in the web format)

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=CUmHbiWeHy8

 

[slugbucket]

has anybody ran this on a phenom X3 ?

 

I know that most of you probably cringed when I said that but

I just want to know the performance of this game on a phenom X3 with the 512mb ati 3870

as to what says is recommended

Edited December 14, 2008 by slugbucket

[shmylamen]

Statistics

Average FPS: 27.23

Duration: 37.24 sec

CPU Usage: 92%

System memory usage: 47%

Video memory usage: 100%

 

Graphics Settings

Video Mode: 1440 x 900 (60 Hz)

Texture Quality: High

Render Quality: Highest

View Distance: 15

Detail Distance: 47

 

Hardware

Microsoft Windows XP Professional

Service Pack 3

Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT 256MB DDR3

Audio Adapter: Realtek HD Audio output

AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 5000+ @ 3GHz

 

File ID: Benchmark.cli

Hey, how did you get your screen res up to 1440 x 900? I have a similar comp to you and R* wont let me set my res any higher than 1152 x 864 (after setting the view distance detail to 8) Also, it wont let me up the texture quality...sitting on low.

 

Ive got an intel C2D 8400 3ghz, 4gb ram, and 256mb geforce 8600gts vid card....hmmmm I am running Vista ultimate....that might make a difference. But I still cant adjust my res or texture quality.....

[KillaXxX]

Statistics

Average FPS: 27.23

Duration: 37.24 sec

CPU Usage: 92%

System memory usage: 47%

Video memory usage: 100%

 

Graphics Settings

Video Mode: 1440 x 900 (60 Hz)

Texture Quality: High

Render Quality: Highest

View Distance: 15

Detail Distance: 47

 

Hardware

Microsoft Windows XP Professional

Service Pack 3

Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT 256MB DDR3

Audio Adapter: Realtek HD Audio output

AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 5000+ @ 3GHz

 

File ID: Benchmark.cli

Hey, how did you get your screen res up to 1440 x 900? I have a similar comp to you and R* wont let me set my res any higher than 1152 x 864 (after setting the view distance detail to 8) Also, it wont let me up the texture quality...sitting on low.

 

Ive got an intel C2D 8400 3ghz, 4gb ram, and 256mb geforce 8600gts vid card....hmmmm I am running Vista ultimate....that might make a difference. But I still cant adjust my res or texture quality.....

you can't adjust anything because thats the way that rockstar made this game it limits what you can configure depending on how much vram you have , you have 256mb so it stops you from playing it nicely i have 2 gforce 8600m gt in SLI and with command line i can max the game nicely i know you want to know how to, just do some searching trough this forums and you will find find your answers. Look below:

 

 

QUOTE (bukkit @ Dec 13 2008, 00:32)

my specs :

 

C2D E6850 {overclocked to 3.4GTHz}

8800GTX

4 GB DDR2

______________

nvidia 180.84 beta 3 drivers

 

1440 x 1050

 

Textures: High

Rendering: High

 

Draw distance: 20 {like consoles}

Detail distance: 40

Traffic: 100

Shadows: 16

 

Avarage FPS : in becnch 44 / in actual gameplay 35-40

 

it runs very smoothly, no bugs , no crashes, nothing!

 

what did i do ?

_________________

 

- for nvidia users , u need those 180.84 drivers

- turn off all processes in task manager {firefox, explorer, icq, deamon, ...}

- set the priority of GTAIV.exe to HIGH

- in options turn off the clip capture feature

- try to overclock your cpu a bit , cause gta4 depends a lot on spu speed

 

- in game, pres [P] to turn on the 'gta filter' it adds deapth of field, motion blur , fixes the grainy shadows , and adds a kind of AA feeling to the game, the game will be a bit blury , but nothing dramatic on high resolution. i personaly like it a lot.

 

__________________

so R* just proved they r a bunch of morons with their 'only next gen pcs can run it on high'

my pc is year and something old , and it runs it absolutlely smooth , no problems , no bugs or crashes. after the patch im hoping for more 5+ fps , maybe AA. will see

 

__________________

for comparasion

 

these r console options

1280-720 (XBOX360) 1180-620 (PS3)

Textures : Medium (only cars have them on high i think)

Rendering : Low

draw distance : 21

detail distance : 10

traffic : 33

shadows : not included in console version.

 

and avarage fps is about 29-30 on xbox / 26-28 on ps3 (eurogamer had measured it)

 

i run it on 45-50 fps on those graphic options

_________________

 

so dont listen to R* pathetic exuses about next gen pc's ...its bullsh*t

 

hey i followed your instructions here and basically i can run this game on high textures, highest renderer, 1024x768 omg this game looks beutifull now i can't believe that we have to enable this with commands lol well my specs are not that great there are as follow i have a toshiba x205-SLI5 :

T8300 core duo at 2.40 Ghz

2 Gforce 8600m gt with 256mb each [ddr 3]

3 gig ram on windows vista 32bit

i use the following programs to keep my system running nicely Tuneup Utilities 2009 great program and systweak cacheboost

plus registry mechanic <------this one here i only run it when i do lots of installs and uninstalls my FPS range from 25-38 i have SLI enabled but i know that this game is not optimized for that yet wich means that i should see further improvements i'm using 180.48 keep in mind that i use modded drivers since toshiba dont have any good drivers for my laptop, most of the time i can see the textures when i drive along the highway thats when sometimes the textures disapear for a bit maybe a split sec on Multiplayer thats another story the fps drop below 20, using fraps to ID my performance .

[sonofhendrix]

Just dont forget the game is purpuslfully crippled. The game is far far far away from OPTIMIZEd for todays high end PC rigs.

 

I do however now see room for competition in the PC market for GTA IV like games, which impliment DX10/shader model 4.0, CUDA 1GB texture memory and Anti Alasing.

Would be great to see GTA IV run on the crysis warhead engine for example.

 

 

 

[sonofhendrix]

On that note, i actually installing good old COD4 again. I have since upgraded from a x1950xt 1.8Ghz C2D to a HD4870 3.6Ghz wolfdale, and it should run like a dream on maximum settings, i aint played it for a year. Should be great. just think, amazing textures, SMOOOTH framrates, fully patched no glitches or errors at all. wooohooooo

[sonofhendrix]

me and a friend of mine have identical machines, the only diffent between them would be the processer mine being a athlon x2 4400+ and his being a phenom 9800 both of us are running ATI HD 3650's, with this being said we have been doing some testing to see what was affecting the FPS of the game and we have came up with it having to do with the L2 cache per core since most quad cores out there are only running 512kb of L2 cache which would explain the horrible performance on them, as we found with my friend's rig that his game would run on average 10-15 FPS slower on the quad core with 512KB L2 cache percore verses my athlon x2 with 1MB of L2 cache per core (using a dual core with 1MB of L2 cache per core im getting about 30-40FPS on average verses 15-30FPS using a quad core with 512kb L2 cache per core) , again we are both using the same motherboard with 2 gig's of ram each with ATI HD 3650's only difference between the two machines would be the processors of the two computers, large L2 cache seems to be the key for smooth game play. i hope my information is able to help some one out there

THis could be somthing to do with the fact that the GTA IV code is specifically designed for optimal performance on a Custom triple core IBM Power 5 CPU.

Who knows maybe a triple core AMD will rock with this game, but its doubtfull.

 

 

[Yanush]

Statistics

Average FPS: 51.98

Duration: 37.27 sec

CPU Usage: 62%

System memory usage: 65%

Video memory usage: 86%

 

Graphics Settings

Video Mode: 1680 x 1050 (60 Hz)

Texture Quality: High

Render Quality: Very High

View Distance: 63

Detail Distance: 100

 

Hardware

Microsoft® Windows Vista" Ultimate

Service Pack 1

Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280

Video Driver version: 180.48

Audio Adapter: Realtek HD Audio 2nd output (Realtek High Definition Audio)

Intel® Core2 Quad CPU Q9550 @ 2.83GHz

 

File ID: benchmark.cli

 

--------------------------------------------------

 

I think quad core is doing well. I dont know why others have problems. For me this is not a problem that game is using 62% of CPU.

But myby there is something in hardware spec that makes people problems to run this game smooth.

After reading so meny posts that the game is a PC killer, i dont really feel this ( oh, and i know that i have a quite new hardwre, but other people with similar specs are having problems with running this game)

Besides, I dont have eny errors, missing textures etc, the game looks...beautyfull. Its just amazing. The best game i have ever played (not only because of graphic)

[Tartu]

With Game self settings:

 

Statistics

Average FPS: 16.11

Duration: 37.30 sec

CPU Usage: 95%

System memory usage: 62%

Video memory usage: 75%

 

Graphics Settings

Video Mode: 1680 x 1050 (60 Hz)

Texture Quality: Medium

Render Quality: High

View Distance: 25

Detail Distance: 37

 

Hardware

Microsoft® Windows Vista" Ultimate

Service Pack 1

Video Adapter: ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series

Video Driver version: 7.14.10.630

Audio Adapter: Speakers (Realtek High Definition Audio)

AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4400+

 

And then all LOW; LOW; 1; 1; 1; 0;

Statistics

Average FPS: 21.39

Duration: 37.41 sec

CPU Usage: 95%

System memory usage: 50%

Video memory usage: 69%

 

Graphics Settings

Video Mode: 1680 x 1050 (60 Hz)

Texture Quality: Low

Render Quality: Low

View Distance: 1

Detail Distance: 1

 

Hardware

Microsoft® Windows Vista" Ultimate

Service Pack 1

Video Adapter: ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series

Video Driver version: 7.14.10.630

Audio Adapter: Speakers (Realtek High Definition Audio)

AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4400+

 

 

When i uninstalled FRAPS i got "with game settings" bench fps 20...

 

What should i do to get in game 25-35 fps?

 

ON the beach , i get really good fps,,, there its smooth

 

I have 4GB ram ...

 

Can anyone give me any pointers? Im not using anything (commandlines ect), i have patch installed and latest ATI drivers.

[Fludboy]

Statistics

Average FPS: 28.50

Duration: 37.47 sec

CPU Usage: 87%

System memory usage: 71%

Video memory usage: 73%

 

Graphics Settings

Video Mode: 1440 x 900 (60 Hz)

Texture Quality: Medium

Render Quality: High

View Distance: 25

Detail Distance: 37

 

Hardware

Microsoft Windows XP Professional

Service Pack 3

Video Adapter: ATI Radeon HD 4800 Series

Video Driver version: 6.14.10.6891

Audio Adapter: Realtek HD Audio output

AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 6000+