screen shots @ 100 view distance

[Dreddpool]

Statistics

Average FPS: 26.38

Duration: 37.38 sec

CPU Usage: 50%

System memory usage: 57%

Video memory usage: 62%

 

Graphics Settings

Video Mode: 1680 x 1050 (60 Hz)

Texture Quality: Medium

Render Quality: Highest

View Distance: 100

Detail Distance: 100

 

Hardware

Microsoft Windows XP Professional

Service Pack 3

Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GT

Video Driver version: 185.20

Audio Adapter: Microsoft LifeChat LX-3000

Intel® Core2 Quad CPU Q6600 @ 2.40GHz

File ID: Benchmark.cli

 

And No i won't reduce my view distance as it has no effect on my FPS what so ever, so don't bother suggesting it.

PS I'm using the -avaliablemem 2.0 multiplier in the command line.

 

 

 

 

 

The one below my look fuzzy, but its just the in game clouds/fog/mist, also it the view form the top of the empire state looking building.

 

Edited January 8, 2009 by Cmdr_Data

[Chevyboy]

The visual distance for me at least offers next to no change in what I am able to see be it from the street or in a copter. However turning it up past 50 causes very very minor popins and about a 3-4 FPS drop if it goes to 100.

 

Seems to fit well with the in game graphics options that do almost nothing.

[vivecs]

That cant be right, in the first screenshot the building look ugly

[Ron Taboga]

That cant be right, in the first screenshot the building look ugly

It is right i guess. The graphics of GTA IV are not THAT Amazingly Detailed and the

difference between the View Distance set at 20 (Console) or set at 100 is not that much.

[diom]

That cant be right, in the first screenshot the building look ugly

 

 

it's about texture quality..on high it looks much better

[vivecs]

Wow, i dont know texture can affect lod so much. Anyway i took some screenshot at all high to compare.

 

In this screenshot i use minimun settings (high,high,1,1,1,0)

 

And in here i use maximun settings (high,high,100,100,100,16)

 

Its like in high view distance, the building is using completely different texture

[andydam]

Thats awesome!

[chngdman]

edit: its not so negligible a diff between medium and high as I said, but it is not a big difference, nowhere near the jump from low to medium.

 

I see absolutely no difference in those two latest rooftop shots, and here is why:

 

You took them at the EXACT same place both places (try to find any hint that niko, the camera, or any other aspect of the game is different besides his pose- you cant - this means you never re loaded the game, which means you never even changed your texture settings between screenshots, because regardless your settings, those dont take effect until loading the game again after a full exit...)

 

Now, the difference? Hardly worth it between medium and high, however high performs better if you have a high speed ram.

 

Here is my medium high low textures, I will link high quality PNGs and embed this lower quality animation - low textures look back in some places (some textures REALLY low), medium is good all around, and high is the best it seems if you can set it that high and lower your resolution to 1280x720:

 

 

and these are the source images for tab-to-tab comparisons Low-MEd - noticeable, med-to-high? only some places noticeable, but negligible, I think this settings is for the next game in the series (vc) really Again, some PC (fast FSB and 1:1 ram) run better with high than medium, same as higher resolution screen is better than scaled down for this game:

 

High: http://www.isarapix.org/pix6/1231477401.png

Med: http://www.isarapix.org/pix92/1231477202.png

Low: http://www.isarapix.org/pix50/1231477194.png

 

Note that the only thing it REALLY changed there for med and high was the shadows, and slight changes to the normals, shadows which look TOO sharp on High, imo, and too lowres on low. Goldylocks ^^ Note also that I did indeed restart the game between every screen shot, Blur turned off for all of them (which really makes texture quality - at least whats available - not even matter at all imo).

Edited January 9, 2009 by chngdman