GTA IV - Quad or Core i7 needed!

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

12-11-2008, 02:49 PM
WaxCactus

My Q6600 @ 3.2Ghz + 4GB Ram + 8800GT are doing 45fps on medium at resolution of 1680x1050 so i guess its fine only thing troubles me about this game is that i cant even put high so i could play on high
[if its not below 30fps that is]
12-11-2008, 02:55 PM
RPGWiZaRD

I got suprised when a friend's new comp (he's not the overclocking kind of type so no OC) with a Q9550 @ stock 2.83GHz, GTX 280 @ stock and 2x2GB ram and he's doing 50~60 avg FPS (~35 fps minimum) @ 1920x1200 high quality. :confused:

Seems like Intel Yorkfield or i7 + Nvidia is doing best job at running this game currently.
12-11-2008, 03:23 PM
kiwi

yep, i7 + gtx 2x0 + 4GB ram is doing pretty good :up:
12-11-2008, 03:26 PM
BababooeyHTJ

Quote:

Originally Posted by RPGWiZaRD

I got suprised when a friend's new comp (he's not the overclocking kind of type so no OC) with a Q9550 @ stock 2.83GHz, GTX 280 @ stock and 2x2GB ram and he's doing 50~60 avg FPS (~35 fps minimum) @ 1920x1200 high quality. :confused:

Seems like Intel Yorkfield or i7 + Nvidia is doing best job at running this game currently.

A q9550 and GTx280 running stock! Such a waste. :shakes:
12-11-2008, 11:56 PM
railer

does anyone play MP? how is it. Allot of people playing?
12-12-2008, 12:14 AM
rockfella

Because the console versions are somewhat stripped down of graphics that are demanding, hence FPS are constant in consoles :up:

Quote:

Originally Posted by 003

So how is it the consoles run it so well then if it is so demanding even on Core i7?
12-12-2008, 03:53 AM
BenchZowner

Quote:

Originally Posted by gosh

Maybe they are letting multiple threads access same memory and also writes to that memory. This is a situation that C2Q isn't able to handle well. When games are optimized for PC's I think it mostly is optimized to scale well on C2Q and also do the main work on two threads for C2D. C2Q don't like threads that talks to each other and shares resources, each thread should handle be as "single threaded" as possible.

If threads shares resources, then there will be a lot more FSB traffic.

You just can't get enough of it ? Can you ?
Drop your BS for a minute.
The game is optimized for d*ckheads that go out and buy the buggiest game ever without thinking about it or trying it on their system before purchasing it.

Do you think that after your 20+ pages of carefully worded BS people still take you seriously ?
12-12-2008, 04:28 AM
VOID WARRANTY

looks like they should of spent a little less on advertising and a little more on finishing the game...:cool:
http://www.gamecheats.eu/images/gta/...billboard1.jpg
12-12-2008, 07:20 AM
Mad1723

Quote:

Originally Posted by railer

does anyone play MP? how is it. Allot of people playing?

Quite a few people playing in player matches, where you gain no level.Of course, a lot of racing and classic deathmatch are the main modes people are playing. Coop is kinda quickly forgotten by players :(

Let's say it needs a tiny bit more players online and it will be fine! :D
12-12-2008, 07:24 AM
Biker

Quote:

Originally Posted by VOID WARRANTY

looks like they should of spent a little less on advertising and a little more on finishing the game...:cool:
http://www.gamecheats.eu/images/gta/...billboard1.jpg

LOL

That pic is Canal St, NY :D

Oh, and as for ..."The game is optimized for d*ckheads that go out and buy the buggiest game ever without thinking about it or trying it on their system before purchasing it.."

All I can say is .... bwahahahahahaahh!!!
12-12-2008, 07:42 AM
Slay0r

I'm only at the beginning, but I'm about liking the game so far. System is a q6600 w/ 4gb ram and 8800gts512. The graphics at 19x12 @ high/very high are not very bad, but the lack of proper AA is the party pooper. No framerate issues though. The cars are fun to drive, and the story is followable.

It uses three threads, so dual core users might want to grab a cheap quad if they REALLY want to play the game without complaining. It sounds abit dull.. yeah. But it was about time my gaming machine had its cpu put to decent use.

There's room for improvement within this game, and i mean a huge room. Probably a hall of improvement. I just wish Rockstar had the patience to fill it. I wish they (not rockstar specifically, game manufacturers in general) would stop porting games, or if they were still to port...for gods sake, optimize your piece of code you lazy kunts.
12-12-2008, 02:23 PM
gosh

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenchZowner

The game is optimized for d*ckheads that go out and buy the buggiest game ever without thinking about it or trying it on their system before purchasing it.

If you are a programmer I think it more easy to understand how they think. It isn't fun to optimize code for Core 2, and that could mean that they need to do a rewrite of the game engine. Maybe they have designed one game engine that should work how processors are done in the future (i7, phenom etc)
12-12-2008, 03:32 PM
RaZz!

Quote:

Originally Posted by gosh

If you are a programmer I think it more easy to understand how they think. It isn't fun to optimize code for Core 2, and that could mean that they need to do a rewrite of the game engine. Maybe they have designed one game engine that should work how processors are done in the future (i7, phenom etc)

you're talking about "optimize for core 2" all the time. wtf do you mean with THAT?!
12-12-2008, 04:31 PM
gosh

Quote:

Originally Posted by RaZz!

you're talking about "optimize for core 2" all the time. wtf do you mean with THAT?!

This: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cache_coherency

http://www.realworldtech.com/page.cf...0208182719&p=2
Nehalem is a fully integrated quad-core device, with an inclusive and shared last level cache. A central queue acts as a crossbar and arbiter between the four cores and the ‘uncore’ region of Nehalem, which includes the L3 cache, integrated memory controller and QPI links. From a performance perspective, the inclusive L3 cache is the ideal configuration since it keeps the most cache coherency transactions on-die. On-die communication has the benefit of both lower latency and lower power. Additionally, a shared last level cache can reduce replication. AMD made this transition with Barcelona at 65nm, leading to a massive 283mm2 die size as a result. Intel’s 45nm Harpertown was actually two dual-core devices in a package, which is advantageous due to the smaller die size and more flexible binning options. Depending on the workload, there was probably a fair bit of data replicated between the two caches in Harpertown (certainly the working set for the instruction caches at least). By eliminating this duplication, a unified cache can actually be smaller yet cache the same amount of data.
12-12-2008, 04:32 PM
Chad Boga

Quote:

Originally Posted by RaZz!

you're talking about "optimize for core 2" all the time. wtf do you mean with THAT?!

It is just his silly talk to make a fanboy excuse why AMD cpu's don't do as well as Intel cpu's on games or other software where that is the case.
12-12-2008, 04:34 PM
VOID WARRANTY

lmao
12-12-2008, 04:42 PM
gosh

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chad Boga

It is just his silly talk to make a fanboy excuse why AMD cpu's don't do as well as Intel cpu's on games or other software where that is the case.

it's one explanation why GTA have bad performance and why some have noticed that it isn't a Core Hz problem but rather a FSB problem
12-12-2008, 04:53 PM
Chad Boga

Quote:

Originally Posted by gosh

it's one explanation why GTA have bad performance and why some have noticed that it isn't a Core Hz problem but rather a FSB problem

:ROTF::clap::ROTF::clap::ROTF::clap::ROTF: Your old favourite bullshat line.
12-12-2008, 04:55 PM
ownage

GTA4 must be badly ported, because it runs fine without any problems on the xbox360.
12-12-2008, 04:56 PM
cheezeit

Whoa, it looks like games are beginning to take use of 4 cores sooner than i thought
12-12-2008, 05:09 PM
Cooper

Quote:

Originally Posted by ownage

GTA4 must be badly ported, because it runs fine without any problems on the xbox360.

i had it on xbox. Graphics lot worse, 30fps limit and plenty of pop-ups.
PC version looks alot better and renders lot more objects at a time period.
12-12-2008, 05:13 PM
BenchZowner

Quote:

Originally Posted by gosh

it's one explanation why GTA have bad performance and why some have noticed that it isn't a Core Hz problem but rather a FSB problem

Cut the craaaaaap man.
For God's sake...
You just can't get it... think about it... what will you do if some people ( and I know some that can and will do it just for fun ) play with the benchmark on two platforms, and also bench the C2Q's on various FSBs... all the way up and down and find no performance gain or loss ?

A real programmer can simply prevent such thing from happening, and wait... we haven't seen any game affected by that "limitation"... damn :(
12-12-2008, 05:19 PM
Chad Boga

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenchZowner

Cut the craaaaaap man.
For God's sake...
You just can't get it... think about it... what will you do if some people ( and I know some that can and will do it just for fun ) play with the benchmark on two platforms, and also bench the C2Q's on various FSBs... all the way up and down and find no performance gain or loss ?

That has already happened, so as before, Gosh will just continue on his merry way, ignoring that he was schooled and speaking the same garbage.
12-12-2008, 05:23 PM
Hornet331

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenchZowner

Cut the craaaaaap man.
For God's sake...
You just can't get it... think about it... what will you do if some people ( and I know some that can and will do it just for fun ) play with the benchmark on two platforms, and also bench the C2Q's on various FSBs... all the way up and down and find no performance gain or loss ?

A real programmer can simply prevent such thing from happening, and wait... we haven't seen any game affected by that "limitation"... damn :(

... he should be renamed to C2Hater. :ROTF:
12-12-2008, 05:23 PM
gosh

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenchZowner

You just can't get it... think about it... what will you do if some people ( and I know some that can and will do it just for fun ) play with the benchmark on two platforms, and also bench the C2Q's on various FSBs... all the way up and down and find no performance gain or loss ?

That's because when you optimize for PC or porting if you like that name better (which is the same as optimize for Core 2) you need to avoid bottlenecks. Maybe they need to have a margin for the FSB also because they want the game to run smooth. of course there are other things to think of also. If the processor doesn't have bottlenecks it would be much more simple to port the game.

I have trouble to understand how sensitive some people are to criticism for the core 2, all things about that processor isn't super

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page