Subversion1337 Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 (edited) dumb post Well 1 GB is definitely not enough to max GTA4 without using the commandline trick. im sorry it was a dumb post on my part. didn't look/think properly. link to the context of your find please? its very nice. Edited March 20, 2009 by Subversion1337 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicetopia Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 link to the context of your find please? its very nice. It's here: http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews.php?reviewid=737 I only posted that picture because it's the first "real" ingame 2 GB screenshot I suppose. You could emulate the same effect by using availablevidmem, I guess... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subversion1337 Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 link to the context of your find please? its very nice. It's here: http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews.php?reviewid=737 I only posted that picture because it's the first "real" ingame 2 GB screenshot I suppose. You could emulate the same effect by using availablevidmem, I guess... thanks. yep, Its awesome. I wish i had that card and his monitor I wonder if he still gets jaggies at that res? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicetopia Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 I wonder if he still gets jaggies at that res? I don't know, let's check. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/Bil...hots/gta4-3.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/Bil...hots/gta4-7.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subversion1337 Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 I wonder if he still gets jaggies at that res? I don't know, let's check. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/Bil...hots/gta4-3.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/Bil...hots/gta4-7.jpg hmm looks like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkey82 Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 I wonder if he still gets jaggies at that res? I don't know, let's check. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/Bil...hots/gta4-3.jpg http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v349/Bil...hots/gta4-7.jpg hmm looks like it. IMO it looks a lot better then on my settings... duh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonFTL Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 (edited) http://www.gtaforums.com/index.php?showtop...st&p=1059052445 seems like the machine had already been around... Well 1 GB is definitely not enough to max GTA4 without using the commandline trick. You know. What funny about all this graphics card BS is that I dont think any of it is true. You saw my thread. I have a single gtx 260 with 896mb of vRam. With Higher setting then that benchmark I get better fps. The game is not about the gfx card. Its ALL about the processor. http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/4658/gt...32200593759.jpg http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/559/gtabench.jpg I think any graphics card with more then 512mb or ram can come close to maxing out the game @ 1680x1050 (with -availablemem, or -norestrictions command) Edited March 23, 2009 by RonFTL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicetopia Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 (edited) I have a single gtx 260 with 896mb of vRam.With Higher setting then that benchmark I get better fps. The game is not about the gfx card. Its ALL about the processor. (with -availablemem, or -norestrictions) Not really, you're offloading half of your game textures to system memory (assuming GTA4 uses it when you run out of graphics memory). I suppose under those circumstances it might be more important for memory (or hdd) access times. I especially wouldn't rely on benchmark scores when using the vram overrides. If you're turning up graphics settings (using commandline) and your fps goes up, there's definitely a red flag there. By the way, I've noticed the same thing. Which is why I've tweaked my settings so I don't need any vram overrides anymore. Edited March 23, 2009 by Vicetopia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noid449 Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 i havent had an issue with the 285 gtx ... but to be honest havent had much of an issue with gta, im not trying to be smart either. anyway my point of posting was , at what point does the settings unlock ? the view distance etc ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonFTL Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 (edited) I have a single gtx 260 with 896mb of vRam.With Higher setting then that benchmark I get better fps. The game is not about the gfx card. Its ALL about the processor. (with -availablemem, or -norestrictions) Not really, you're offloading half of your game textures to system memory (assuming GTA4 uses it when you run out of graphics memory). I suppose under those circumstances it might be more important for memory (or hdd) access times. I especially wouldn't rely on benchmark scores when using the vram overrides. If you're turning up graphics settings (using commandline) and your fps goes up, there's definitely a red flag there. By the way, I've noticed the same thing. Which is why I've tweaked my settings so I don't need any vram overrides anymore. Yea no doubt. I just dont want anyone on here running out and buying a $300-$400 video card, then start crying because they are getting the same performance as their 8800, 9800. This game resource usage is like nothing I have ever seen. And you have to be smart to thing about what component to upgrade. Resolution, ram speed & capacity, processor, and gtx card need to all be considered when building a PC to play this game at its best ability. (as the title states) There comes to a point where pixel and shader power will push the game. But even at >1gb of texture and graphic memory I still see the game scaling to the CPU. I do not get it. 1gb vRam @ 1440x600 (game about 80% max settings) = 54fps .9gb vRam @ 1680x1050 (game 100% max setting) = 56fps That is a significant difference to me. I know benchmarks are not 100% accurate, but at this time it is all we have. 2 things pop in my head. 1.CPU scaling. 2.ram speed & capacity (3. or maybe a combination of both) I would like to think about CPU power and ram speeds'/timing/capacities to show the most boost in performance with GTAIV. Edited March 23, 2009 by RonFTL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamzta09 Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 Man at these people who dont know sh*t about computers and act like they do and mention water cooling and sh*t and the future.. GTX280, any Quad, 4096mb of ddr2 800mhz ram, stock cooling. You can run the game at the maximum at 1680x1050 and above, if you lack the memory, use the commandline.txt commands. Now gtfo to all below 20-IQ people. Also remember, the game on console runs at less than 30fps, which means the game runs pretty smooth aswell if you would drop to 25, which i sure doubt you would if you had the above hardware. Im running it at 50% on everything, texture on high, vehicle density on 100, shadow density 8, and so forth. With a stable 40fps, can occasionaly drop below 30 but thats when its alot of sh*t goin on. And im on no future hardware, 8800gt 512 g92 (temp: 55 load) AMD Phenom X4 9750 2,4GHz (52c load temp) 4096mb of ram. 1920x1200 24" monitor (BENQ G2400W) but running at 1440x900 res ingame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicetopia Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 You can run the game at the maximum at 1680x1050 and above Well for some people 40fps is like torture. I'm one of those people. 60fps constant or I lose my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamzta09 Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 You can run the game at the maximum at 1680x1050 and above Well for some people 40fps is like torture. I'm one of those people. 60fps constant or I lose my mind. You dont notice any difference, unless you got fraps turned on and staring at the FPS meter instead of enjoying the game. 30 fps & 60 fps, barely any difference. Or if youre some kinda OCD/ADHD kinda guy that needs to be spazmic when it comes to turning etc! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicetopia Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 30 fps & 60 fps, barely any difference It's a real shame when people say this, it destroys all of their credibility. Anything you've said before this point or will say after this point is now shrouded by the dark cloud of "30fps and 60fps is the same" failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamzta09 Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 30 fps & 60 fps, barely any difference It's a real shame when people say this, it destroys all of their credibility. Anything you've said before this point or will say after this point is now shrouded by the dark cloud of "30fps and 60fps is the same" failure. Then what is the difference? The Eye cant see the difference, go to school and learn it. The only way you will notice is if you watch the Fraps meter OR is playing UT3. You know movies are played up at 24fps? Show me why I am wrong, if anything at all instead of saying im clouded by the dark side.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicetopia Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 The Eye cant see the difference, go to school and learn it. Oh man you're just digging yourself deeper into the hole. I've seen this happen dozens of times over the years, I used to laugh at this kind of thing, but now I just feel bad for you. For your own sake (and mine), please just stop. Talk about something else... Anything... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamzta09 Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 The Eye cant see the difference, go to school and learn it. Oh man you're just digging yourself deeper into the hole. I've seen this happen dozens of times over the years, I used to laugh at this kind of thing, but now I just feel bad for you. For your own sake (and mine), please just stop. Talk about something else... Anything... Sure, im digging my own hole, and yet youre afraid of answering. Funny. Go somewhere with your problematic eyes if you cannot play a game with less than 60fps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicetopia Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 Sure, im digging my own hole, and yet youre afraid of answering. Funny. I already said I feel bad for you, I'll let someone else who wants to prove you wrong to go ahead and do it. I won't be the one puts that wooden stake through your heart this time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamzta09 Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 Sure, im digging my own hole, and yet youre afraid of answering. Funny. I already said I feel bad for you, I'll let someone else who wants to prove you wrong to go ahead and do it. I won't be the one puts that wooden stake through your heart this time. So now im a vampire, ok. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicetopia Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 So now im a vampire, ok. Well it was a metaphor, but at least it changed the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CptPusheen Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 (edited) You know movies are played up at 24fps? Game at 24FPS and movie at 24FPS are whole different stories. Images from games are like taken with camera with infinite shutter speed so every frame is perfectly sharp and anything below 30 fps looks bad. In movie low fps is compensated by effect called motion blur, every moving object is blurred and while you think that everything is sharp and smooth just pause the movie and you will see something like this: Pause the game and you will have photo-like sharpness. Not to mention constancy of movie's framerate while game FPS fluctuates. It's hard to explain but I hope you get it Edited March 24, 2009 by bartekxyz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilthecellist Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 I have a single gtx 260 with 896mb of vRam.With Higher setting then that benchmark I get better fps. The game is not about the gfx card. Its ALL about the processor. (with -availablemem, or -norestrictions) Not really, you're offloading half of your game textures to system memory (assuming GTA4 uses it when you run out of graphics memory). I suppose under those circumstances it might be more important for memory (or hdd) access times. I especially wouldn't rely on benchmark scores when using the vram overrides. If you're turning up graphics settings (using commandline) and your fps goes up, there's definitely a red flag there. By the way, I've noticed the same thing. Which is why I've tweaked my settings so I don't need any vram overrides anymore. Yea no doubt. I just dont want anyone on here running out and buying a $300-$400 video card, then start crying because they are getting the same performance as their 8800, 9800. This game resource usage is like nothing I have ever seen. And you have to be smart to thing about what component to upgrade. Resolution, ram speed & capacity, processor, and gtx card need to all be considered when building a PC to play this game at its best ability. (as the title states) There comes to a point where pixel and shader power will push the game. But even at >1gb of texture and graphic memory I still see the game scaling to the CPU. I do not get it. 1gb vRam @ 1440x600 (game about 80% max settings) = 54fps .9gb vRam @ 1680x1050 (game 100% max setting) = 56fps That is a significant difference to me. I know benchmarks are not 100% accurate, but at this time it is all we have. 2 things pop in my head. 1.CPU scaling. 2.ram speed & capacity (3. or maybe a combination of both) I would like to think about CPU power and ram speeds'/timing/capacities to show the most boost in performance with GTAIV. I don't get it either, believe me. I have an AMD Phenom 9850 X4 Quad Core 2.5 ghz processor, I don't have it overclocked (why should I? It drains more power, and my electricity bill goes out the window, paying bills on your own is NOT easy) But on that note, I already tried overclocking my processor and got an FPS increase.... of TWO. YEAH. That's it. Overclocking gave me a SMALL TINY INSIGNIFICANT boost of 2 fps. Does GTA IV hate AMD or something? Or does it hate my GTX 285? Or both? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicetopia Posted March 23, 2009 Share Posted March 23, 2009 (edited) How much did you overclock it... edit; Didn't want to double post: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx...N82E16814102826 Edited March 24, 2009 by Vicetopia Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkey82 Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 Only 260$? Here the 1GB Gigabyte version goes for something like 400$. Goddamn those I'm-importing-and_I'm-never-ever-sick-of-abnormal-markups assholes. Also, lol at hamzta09. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimesTwo Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 (edited) My computer is Q9650 @ stock; GTX 285; and 6gb of ram @1600 ddr3............ I cant complain, game is workin EXTREMELY fine @ 1920x1080(60hz)/aspect ratio 16:9/ Texture Quality:High/ Reflection Resolution:Very High/ Water Quality:Very High/ Shadow Quality:High/ Texture Filter Quality:HIGHEST/ View Distance:32/ Detail Distance:70/ Vehicle Density:51/ Shadow Density:10/ Definition: ON/ VSYNC:ON/ Resource Usage:933/1002MB No Commandline........... what more if i overclock it?? but i absolutely have no plans of doin it. Edited April 1, 2009 by TimesTwo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkey82 Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 I don't know of any benchmarks that output "extremely fine" instead of an FPS figure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimesTwo Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 mine does Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinky Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 mine does Probably getting close to 60FPS in the benchmark with those settings right? Try using commandlines and really max everything and see where it drops too. Although maybe some overclock on your CPU would help gain a good deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Klamath Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 You can run the game at the maximum at 1680x1050 and above Well for some people 40fps is like torture. I'm one of those people. 60fps constant or I lose my mind. You dont notice any difference, unless you got fraps turned on and staring at the FPS meter instead of enjoying the game. 30 fps & 60 fps, barely any difference. Or if youre some kinda OCD/ADHD kinda guy that needs to be spazmic when it comes to turning etc! Back when I was really into first person shooters the difference between 72 fps and 100 fps was very apparent to me. Even just staring at a CRT white screen with 60 Hz flicker is very noticeable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heat84 Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 Back when I was really into first person shooters the difference between 72 fps and 100 fps was very apparent to me. You mean like 2 months ago. Even just staring at a CRT white screen with 60 Hz flicker is very noticeable. How can you possibly see the difference between 72 and 100 FPS? Are an alien or an android? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now