Proof you dont need a Quad core to run this game

[divertiti]

NO ONE EVER said you "needed" Quad core to run the game, why the hell would you feel a need to make a thread and post a whole bunch of pointless screenshots to "prove" it again???

If anything, 19-25fps is proof that it's time to upgrade to a quad.

Um.. if i recall Rockstar said you "need" a quad to run the game at decent settings? or am i just lying? if you think the thread is so pointless, GTFO.

Nope, they weren't lying, 19-25 fps isn't running the game at "decent settings", so you only proved them right.

 

Neither Rockstar nor anyone else claimed you need a quad core just to "RUN this game", even a single core CPU can run this game, so you proved nothing beyond the fact that your setup can't run it at an acceptable framerate.

[El Dildo]

hey good for people who can run this without a Quad. I'm doing just that and it still runs and looks better than the console.

 

http://img372.imageshack.us/img372/9759/gtaiv03dg0.jpg

 

http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/2750/gtaiv02xc9.jpg

 

needs more AA but until they hack it, it's more than playable.

Edited December 12, 2008 by El_Diablo

[Zorgus]

i get between 15 and 30, but cant keep the f*cker stable so get pissed off after playing for 30 mins then turn off and keep checking for the patch...

 

8800 gtx 768 and the game fails... terrible..

Edited December 12, 2008 by Zorgus

[mkey82]

 

Some would argue that running with medium settings averaging 20FPS or less maxing out around 25FPS is hardly "decent"

I actually played and finished SA around 3 times on those framerates. It's all in our heads.

 

Of course, I like to crank everything up, apply the SRT3 textures, stream fix and car reflections plugin along with 10x draw distance @ over 90 FPS while cruising along the streets of LS .

[Zorgus]

Some would argue that running with medium settings averaging 20FPS or less maxing out around 25FPS is hardly "decent"

I actually played and finished SA around 3 times on those framerates. It's all in our heads.

 

Of course, I like to crank everything up, apply the SRT3 textures, stream fix and car reflections plugin along with 10x draw distance @ over 90 FPS while cruising along the streets of LS .

i might be doing this also if the patch fails to improve my fps....

 

but seriously running at 30 frames looks ok, but when your on a fast motorbike chasing some f*cker and it suddenly drops to 15 frames all hell breaks loose and soon im flying off my bike before i know it...

[ceedj]

I have a 3.4 ghz Pentium 4 and I'm running this game too. I get better FPS than I could have ever hoped for.

Hey Jason, looks like you have everything on min. Mind if I ask for your settings, and are you finding the bottleneck at the CPU or the Video Card? Thanks.

[dirty-dog]

to the topic started.....

 

wheres the FPS counter on those screens. ANYONE could run the game how you just did. doesnt mean its going to be anymore than a slideshow.

 

Show proof of your FPS and then that will be something worth boasting about.

Exactly.

 

Sorry to the OP but this thread is absolutely pointless. We all know you can RUN the game probably on a Pentium-3 If you want.

 

With his weak CPU there is NO WAY he is getting remotely decent fps at the settings he took those screenshots at. No way in the world.

[vabellabel]

I didn't say anything about the resolution.

I said they're ugly compressed JPEGs. It doesn't matter what resolution you used, they'd still be that.

you are the worst human being that consider yourself civilised, please get out of the forum or kill yourself!

[deathtoll]

core2duo e8400 AT STOCK SPEED

asus P5Q SE/r mobo

2x2gb of DDR2-800 STOCK SPEED

asus 8600GT 512mb

 

Statistics

Average FPS: 24.60

Duration: 37.04 sec

CPU Usage: 86%

System memory usage: 74%

Video memory usage: 96%

 

Graphics Settings

Video Mode: 1280 x 720 (60 Hz)

Texture Quality: Medium

Render Quality: High

View Distance: 25

Detail Distance: 37

 

Hardware

Microsoft® Windows Vista" Ultimate

Service Pack 1

Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT

Video Driver version: 180.84

Audio Adapter: Speakers (Realtek High Definition Audio)

Intel® Core2 Duo CPU E8400 @ 3.00GHz

 

no, you dont need a quad core. just a good dual will do, it is definately playable.

[SuperAlekZ]

I have a 3.4 ghz Pentium 4 and I'm running this game too. I get better FPS than I could have ever hoped for.

 

LOL! This is the ugliest screenshot of any game I have ever seen!

 

[JasonThummel]

Yeah sorry, Im running it at 800x600.

 

Textures: low

Render: highest

View distance: 1

Detail: 50

Traffic: 80

shadow: 0

 

Im not sure whats going on but my computer isnt even working hard when I'm playing this game. It just sort of runs the game at a relatively low fps. It is playable for my standards, but most of you f*ckers would be bitching your asses off. I'm just happy that it works. I get alot of pop in, with the roads and buildings which is why the building in the background looks dithered.

[BullsEyeBob]

 

btw your pictures are ugly compressed JPEG's.  They look terrible.

well duh, im not going to post 1680x1050 screenshots here :rollseyes: i shrunk the pics to 1024x768 if u didnt notice.

And used the ingame blur option.

[hussam1988]

there is a difference

can go back to windows Explorer and back to game like using a browser???

my Q9550 can .lol

[Fitzz]

Yeah sorry, Im running it at 800x600.

 

Textures: low

Render: highest

View distance: 1

Detail: 50

Traffic: 80

shadow: 0

 

Im not sure whats going on but my computer isnt even working hard when I'm playing this game. It just sort of runs the game at a relatively low fps. It is playable for my standards, but most of you f*ckers would be bitching your asses off. I'm just happy that it works. I get alot of pop in, with the roads and buildings which is why the building in the background looks dithered.

I have the same processor.

 

P4 3.4ghz Single core.

 

I have 2 GB RAM and an 8800 GTS 640 MB

 

HELP ME. I'm playing on 640x480 all low and it's extremely choppy.

[weedking]

You definitely don't need a quad to run the game but it does help significantly. My old X2 3800+ handled things relatively fine but I found the slowdowns to be a pain at times during intense action lol. On my new quad-core I don't have the slowdowns I did with the dual core.

[ikt]

Yeah sorry, Im running it at 800x600.

 

Textures: low

Render: highest

View distance: 1

Detail: 50

Traffic: 80

shadow: 0

 

Im not sure whats going on but my computer isnt even working hard when I'm playing this game.  It just sort of runs the game at a relatively low fps.  It is playable for my standards, but most of you f*ckers would be bitching your asses off.  I'm just happy that it works.  I get alot of pop in, with the roads and buildings which is why the building in the background looks dithered.

I have the same processor.

 

P4 3.4ghz Single core.

 

I have 2 GB RAM and an 8800 GTS 640 MB

 

HELP ME. I'm playing on 640x480 all low and it's extremely choppy.

Get another CPU. And i don't get it, i have a Pentium 4 W 3.2GHz, 2GB RAM and a 8600GT and i can play with 13 FPS.

[christinme7890]

jpeg is the only good way to post without using up a lot of space. PNG would have been nice but PNG and images with lots of color are huge. You posted correctly and don't listen to the nah sayers.

[Vicetopia]

jpeg is the only good way to post without using up a lot of space. PNG would have been nice but PNG and images with lots of color are huge. You posted correctly and don't listen to the nah sayers.

Ignorant.

[christinme7890]

i'm a graphic designer, i think i know the difference between jpg and png and all the other image formats. JPG may be compressed and maybe the quality of compression on his images is low but you do it so the images aren't 3-5mbs a piece while still maintaining good enough quality to know what you are looking at. Thanks but try again. The quality of the images are fine and sure you can see small compression tears around the edges but for the most part the quality is still there.

[Vicetopia]

 

i'm a graphic designer, i think i know the difference between jpg and png and all the other image formats.  JPG may be compressed and maybe the quality of compression on his images is low but you do it so the images aren't 3-5mbs a piece while still maintaining good enough quality to know what you are looking at.  Thanks but try again.  The quality of the images are fine and sure you can see small compression tears around the edges but for the most part the quality is still there.

The image quality is terrible, and we're talking about in-game screenshots where we are specifically looking at the graphics. Sometimes JPEG looks so bad you can't even tell what graphics settings are being used.

I looked at them and knew they were ugly JPEG's before I even checked the extension.

 

I don't know if that gives me Superman eyes or makes you a bad graphics designer, but if I can look at them and think "Eww, ugly JPEGs" then so can other people.

Use PNG.

 

If you use JPEG then your pictures are worthless for being judged.

 

Specifically, examine this one:

http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/3831/car7yt2.jpg

 

Now tell me JPG isn't ruining that picture.

It looks horrendous. Absolutely disgusting.

Edited December 13, 2008 by Vicetopia

[bekhan]

I have a 3.4 ghz Pentium 4 and I'm running this game too. I get better FPS than I could have ever hoped for.

 

Omg man ! You sucks !

Destroy this PC, Pentium 4 f*ck, it's a medieval age CPU !

[christinme7890]

 

i'm a graphic designer, i think i know the difference between jpg and png and all the other image formats.  JPG may be compressed and maybe the quality of compression on his images is low but you do it so the images aren't 3-5mbs a piece while still maintaining good enough quality to know what you are looking at.  Thanks but try again.  The quality of the images are fine and sure you can see small compression tears around the edges but for the most part the quality is still there.

The image quality is terrible, and we're talking about in-game screenshots where we are specifically looking at the graphics. Sometimes JPEG looks so bad you can't even tell what graphics settings are being used.

I looked at them and knew they were ugly JPEG's before I even checked the extension.

 

I don't know if that gives me Superman eyes or makes you a bad graphics designer, but if I can look at them and think "Eww, ugly JPEGs" then so can other people.

Use PNG.

 

If you use JPEG then your pictures are worthless for being judged.

not true at all. I have compared 10mp images in png and jpeg format. If done right the images look exactly the same except the png takes up 2x+ more space. Looking over the jpegs again, they look just like the in game quality. I think you might want to complain about the game graphics more so than the jpeg compression. Compression looks to be at 6-8 (in photoshop, 12 being best quality). They look fine and there isn't any pixelation around edges like low quality jpgs have.

 

If you see problems fine. No one wants to hear your complaints about the problems. The thread is about proof you don't need quad core and the images look just like in the game so he proved his point. They look good, the end.

[Vicetopia]

 

not true at all.  I have compared 10mp images in png and jpeg format.  If done right the images look exactly the same except the png takes up 2x+ more space.

I agree with you, but if they are done right.

The pictures in the OP are not done correctly.

[Death_Blade]

The game runs fine on both Dual core and Quad core. Theres no real significant boost for quad core as it only uses 3 threads, like a previous poster said. You're GPU and video memory are the only things that really matter at this point, thats whats going to hold your system back. Unless you have a single core processor, you wont notice much difference between dual and quad core.

[christinme7890]

not true at all.  I have compared 10mp images in png and jpeg format.  If done right the images look exactly the same except the png takes up 2x+ more space.

I agree with you, but if they are done right.

The pictures in the OP are not done correctly.

i think he was confined to a space limit when posting the pics, hence the low quality jpg. Oh well. Maybe he didn't know what he was doing or didn't have good photo editing software like photoshop.

[JBFord4x4]

I don't get why people think JPGs are low quality pictures. Save it in photoshop at 12 image quality. Looks as good as a bmp with less file size.

[Vicetopia]

i think he was confined to a space limit when posting the pics, hence the low quality jpg. Oh well. Maybe he didn't know what he was doing or didn't have good photo editing software like photoshop.

So you spent a few posts going back and forth with me, only to end up agreeing that the pictures look like sh*t.

Thanks for wasting my time and your's, it was quite enjoyable.

[ceedj]

The game runs fine on both Dual core and Quad core. Theres no real significant boost for quad core as it only uses 3 threads, like a previous poster said. You're GPU and video memory are the only things that really matter at this point, thats whats going to hold your system back. Unless you have a single core processor, you wont notice much difference between dual and quad core.

For some of us, a CPU upgrade means also a motherboard, memory and graphics upgrade as well. I can only speak for myself, but paying for rent, utilities, health insurance and food kind of crimps my ability to upgrade ATM. I'm glad all you people with money coming out your ears can afford to, but some of us can't, so we do what we can.

[nicotin3]

The image quality is terrible, and we're talking about in-game screenshots where we are specifically looking at the graphics. Sometimes JPEG looks so bad you can't even tell what graphics settings are being used.

I looked at them and knew they were ugly JPEG's before I even checked the extension.

 

I don't know if that gives me Superman eyes or makes you a bad graphics designer, but if I can look at them and think "Eww, ugly JPEGs" then so can other people.

Use PNG.

 

If you use JPEG then your pictures are worthless for being judged.

 

Specifically, examine this one:

http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/3831/car7yt2.jpg

 

Now tell me JPG isn't ruining that picture.

It looks horrendous. Absolutely disgusting.

Stop it, the images look like that because he scaled them down. If he posted them in 1680x1050 he would be stretching the forum layout wich is a nono.

A high resolution JPEG will look more than fine and is the best compromise betwean size and quality, its the format to use on the web.

And i've seen some really horrible high resolution pics on the other threads and they suck ass anyway (jagged and grainy), scaling down hides the aliasing and crappy shadows atleast.

 

 

[bekhan]

It's not a f*cking gays designers forum.

Stfu all