wasnt this card stopped from being sold because it wouldnt accept the new drivers for some reason....? saying that id still get one if i had the chance nice benchmark
The i7 Extreme and Phenom II x4 are CISC with L3, SS4 and advance threading models.
The x360 and PS3 are RISC with many threading and cache improvements, and most importantly an embedded kernel that doesn't have near the garbage NT or 2.6 has(drivers and dynamic instruction branches).
Also GTA IV uses mostly CPU. RAGE isn't fully accelerated by GPU API because it isn't direct rendering, and the A.I. and animation engine also.
u can put it at red ,gtx295 its too extreme ,and i found solving to run out of vid memory (aka Resc10) error,with Vista make sure u have "maximum pre-rendered frames" at 0. u find this at nvidia control panel,nvidia psyhx properties-at Manage 3D Settings, i never had that error since then :)
Most montiors at that resolution and above will be 60hz which is waht it is usually set at not sure why it was 59 in thi vid. You can now buy 120mhz monitors at 1680x1050 but they are 22inch only.
bullshit man....gta 4 on pc has a standard damn 875 graphics memory...you know that the gtx 295 has 1790(or so) of graphics memory dedicated....you can pass to 1200 mb usage even if appears the red warning
i actually contacted rockstar for an answer to this. as all the forums have mixed views. they told me sli is enabled and has been since the first patch. people running in higher resolutions then 1920 x 1080 will benefit....
utter crap when you think about it! anyone playing at that res will probably be getting around 10fps anyway.
Best results i have found is to increase the frames pre rendered by cpu to "7" and then set sli to "single gpu"
The 295 has 896mb memory on each card and sli doesnt add the memory together, as each card takes it in turns in rendering frames not both cards working together to produce the same frame. So advertising it as havin 1792mb is a bs
6H6R6 you are the idiot and clearly havent a clue abnout how sli works, the 295 has 896mb of memory available on each card, sli doesnt add the cards memory and power togther to rebnder a single frame each card uses its owen memory to render althernate frames.
If you were correct then it would also add the gpu core clocks together which it doesnt. So go learn about something next time before making stupid comments.
Johnie1996 you are also wrong it shouldnt show 1792mb
When will it be good for gaming then? The Sony fanboys have said every year since the release of the console that, that special year is the year of the PS3. Uhm, those years were pretty much won by the 360 and even the Wii. I have had a PS3 since release, all games except MGS4 and uncharted sucks, and no, I doubt any new games will pop up more superior than any PC game. Cell doesnt do much, look at LBP, lags as hell with 50 physics balls rolling around. yet the game plays at 30fps with 0 AA.
acctuly i care, i have Q9550 1TB 4 GB DDR2 but i have 9800GTX+ and im acctuly about to buy 2 GTX 285 so i wonder what avrage fps you get in GTA IV on highese settings 1440x900 ???
@ 1440x900 not alot of difference between the 9800GTX and the 280.
i contacted R* support, because of the amount of shite threads on the net about SLI
They told me it IS supported, but only effective at high resolutions. (they told me higher then 1900 x1200!)
the difference between my 8800GTX and the GTX 295 wasnt alot. and to be honest, setting View distance and detail distance past 38 doesn't really give you a better experience.
The game uses mainly a Quad core cpu, the only thing youd get an improvement of by getting a new card would be smoother reflections and shadows and higher view distances ofc. but you wouldnt get that much more fps. And theres barely any fps differences between 1920x1200 and 1280x720 for me. :p
I didnt notice any "smoother reflections" from my jump in cards, and you wouldn't. they were set to V high anyway. and again viewing distance past around 38 doesn't make a damn difference.
oh, it does like multicore, but as it doesn't need the horsepower from my gtx295, it doesn't really require the overclock to feed my card. i had fuck all of an improvement going from 2.8 to 3.8.
as everyone says, it's a badly coded game. but who cares! i can run it smooth! and it's hellafun
They arent smoother, your frames are, and view distance dont make a damn thing? Eh. It sure DO actually, you just wont notice it if you're in tight places. Youll see cars popin up farther away, buildings farther away are in higher detail. Lampposts traschans, shitloads of stuff. Its just that people havent realised the differences between LOD distance and View distance, ask rockstar. There are differences. Also console versions had only 15 view distance, 25 detail distance, 15 vehicle, 0 shadows
well actually, the difference between 100 and say... 30 is marginal. you might think theirs loads. but for me, it's nothing to get excited about. setting it to 100, giving me the ability to see a more detailed window in a far away building is not as important as say system stability and a good frame rate. and my experience with asking rockstar? it's just not worth it. no denying it looks better on pc. just maxing it out doesn't make it that much better!
i have the same PC like on the video exept lower RAM frequency and i should tell im really really disapointed, i got like average 30 fps in single-player and 20fps in multiplayer, the game'sbenchmark is something completly different, im really really disapointed, only the video card cost 1/3 of the price of a car and runs like somebody shited in it, the processor is retarded for its time. (They used to give the things that they are the best for ther time, u call 20-30fps the best? comonbullsht!
Bazz - you might have got it working smoother since you posted, but if you've got an nvidia card, using the driver profiles, try setting the amount pre-rendered frames renderd by the cpu to around "7". as everyone keeps going on about, this game barely uses SLI, but relies on the power of your CPU. doing this really helped me out anyway, i'm a fellow GTX295 user.
if overclocking your cpu increases fps at all but is less than 100% doesnt that mean that the bottleneck is the ram? (because I presume you would be upping the fsb and working with the cpu ratio to give it's overclock?)
it runs on a ps3 at very low settings and this game is hard on gfx cards at those settings. This video was a request from some of my subscribers so they could see how it runs on the 295 this was for them not you, so jog on ding
Still High or Low far above the hardware specs for game... 8800's can run this maxed. Anyone should know a 295 will crush a game like this regaudless of settings. Now I will jog on, kiddie!
8800 ultras in 3 way sli run terrible with this game, the hardware specs are also way off in this game pretty much like most. 1 gig of ram, or 1.5 on vista when vista recommends 2 gigs for it to run so 1.5 would be a joke, 3 gigs gets 86 percent used after about 15mins gameplay,
256mb 7900, lol if you wanna play at 800x600 with everything as low as possible and core 2 duo at 1.8ghz, yea right get real im sure anyone with that setup will have the worst time running this game.
If three 8800 Ultras don't run this then that computer is fucked. Next 7900 is old school so I don't even know why you said that. And yes most game specs are off but to play this game and have a enjoyable time killer hardware is not needed. Most PC exclusive games are what I want to see benchmarks not consoled games, because I like benchmark and not even try consoled games. With 1048MB graphics RAM and the clock speeds and a healthy HDD the game is going to run playable+
Its not the ultras that are fucked its the guys who ported this to pc they did a bad job thats it, the rockstar forum has pages of complaints about how there 2000 dollar systems werent able to run this game at max settings when it runs on a console, the reason i mentioned the above specs 1 g ram 256mb 7900 and core 2 duo 1.8ghz is because they are the system requirments for gta 4 on pc. Now like you said the game will run playable on a decent system just not at the settings they may like to run.
Well PS3 putting out 3.8GHz on 8 cores. So 7900 on 1GB RAM with 1.8 and like a 800MHz fsb the game is not going to run all out. Anyone gaming a 7900 just is not setup for gaming now a days, that many cards back. Even most higher end laptop would have no problems playing this even better then a PS3. I sim (FSX) witch is more demaning the Crysis and theres a few laptops that run in playable. I do like my settings maxed.
The game has no SLI support, so if you run it with a 295 you are only using half of the card ... and the port is horrible. Im running it myself, and I'm not impressed at all with GTA 4
GTA in benchmarking anit shit and GTA needs no benchmarking. FUCKING DIP SHIT. I want to see games benched that are hard to run not something a PS3 or Xbox can play.
Thats not entirely true. The software is just very well adapted to run on the static console hardware as it's all the same in all consoles. The GTA 4 port to PC is anything but :) It's god awful
no dumb ass console are for smart people..pcs have more memory and graphics cards...but the console has better cpus..the cell in the ps3 is the mosrt powerful chip in the world...
rofl the ps3 has an 8 core IBM cell. it's a complete power house.
the early ps3 games were unoptimised as they found it a hard programming platform.
I'm a pc gamer, and i don't enjoy the ps3 to anywhere near the extend of my rig. but as far as CPU power goes, it's defenetly got it. and has had it for years in advance of the pc market.
The PS3 processor wasnt made for gaming, and its only using 4 cores, 2 dedicated to system, 1 is defect/dead and the other one I dont know about that one.
Kutaragi said they wanted to replace the PC with the PS3, but that failed. (I have a ps3+pc anyway)
I completely agree with you - the cell cpu isnt designed for gaming, it was designed for multi tasking. i'm pretty sure it is a 8 core cpu, i thought only one of the cores was used as a backup or something.
I will have ti wiki it!
I've got the lot, but my ps3 and xbox360 sit there gathering dust. while my pc gets use every day.
well to be honest, i've read alot of developer interviews, despite how much we have been spending on the latest hardware, consoles have had a step up from our quad cores for quite some time. it's only since the i7 has come out we've had the upper hand.xbox 360 uses a tri core cpu, but it also uses hyper threading, giving the developer 6 cores to work with, and we all know the ps3 has 8. they get all the good shit first, and it's generally provided by IBM.
The 360 chip is slow, it is made by PowerPC and any game made on the 360 u take it on the PC and it loads so much quicker, depending on your chip, e6750 was even faster than the 360 chip when I had it. 2nd the PS3 chip, i don't know about so I have no opinion. 3-5 year old technology for a, console.. is not going to be better than present day technology for computers or companies wouldn't be wasting their time trying to research and develop what we have if something better already exists.
it might be slow, but as we are beginning to understand, the more threads the better! and the 360 had 6 to play with from the start.
don't get me wrong, you say "it's not going to be better then present day technology" we get better graphics cards, they generally get the better cpu's. plus, porting it over to the PC generally makes it worse.
we only get a good deal if a developer is keen on bringing it to the pc in all its glory. or only developing for the pc. e.g. crysis.
The advantages for consoles however are that ALL the available system resources are being used on running the game (except for 2% of the CPUs on the Xbox 360 and 1 SPU on the PS3 for the system software & security functions).
On the 360 load times are good and games use less data than they would on a PC because they can be compressed as the 360 has a dedicated decompression chip.
Also dev kits, game engines, and graphics drivers are constantly being improved and optimized for consoles, far more optimized than PC games because PC game devs have less time to optimize for the large amount of GPUs and processor types.
Since the PS3 and Xbox 360 now use mainstream processors, you can expect their graphics to improve much more over time than previous consoles too, especially with drivers
Everyone who bitches about this game just shut the fuck up and upgrade your pc. I have a gtx 295 with an i7 and 6 gigs ddr3 I remove the restrictions and maxout everything played for several hours and had no stutters or problems whatsoever.
i have an intel core 2 duo E4500 @ 2.20GHz 3GB of RAM it was 2GB , then i upgraded it to 3GB. XFX Nvidia Geforce 8500GT 512MB DDR2 XP SP3 32bit GTA iv BENCHMARK: FPS 9.88 or 10 CPU use.. 92% sys memo use.. 52% video memo use.. 81% btw after upgrading the RAM nothing actualy changed... what should i upgrade or install to make GTA iv runs well or smoother with no hiccups?????
Let's face it guys. This is a crap port of a crappy console game. I can run Crysis maxed out with smooth framerate but this runs like a crock of shit. Rockstar should be ashamed to bring out a broke game. Even the patches don't fix it. Out of video memory errors are rampant on this game.
Agreed ive actually lost a shit load of performance with the latest patch and ive never had somany out of memory crashes even thoiugh i have 1024mb of mem and have it set in the green at around 820ish the game is a joke at the moment ive not even finished it yet because of the constant restarts every half an hour.
It also ahuge memory leak with 3 g ram it would use over 84 percent of sys mem now with 6 g ram it still manages to get in to the 80 percent area after about 25mins of play.
8800mGTS512mb OCed to 650Core 900mem(powerful as a 8800GTX512mb DESKTOP)
T9300 2.5ghz6mb cache (#20 on the best CPU mobile list with the majority of the top 20 being C2X's)
Averages 35-45 with dips to high 20s at time but very rarely. I'm using a ton of user end optimization which accounts for my running the game mostly maxed at averag 34fps.
your quad core is 2.83 not good id reccomend 3.2 and 8gigs ram doesnt matter i dont think any game will take advantage of that ram maybe 6 definetly 4 but not 8
what resolution are you running at.... btw the 295 is a dual card gfx its like having 2 cards in sli togther they are very powerful but apart not so much.... as gta 4 doesnt allow for sli at the moment you are a little out of luck... look for a sli fix for gta4
i have the ati 4870 x2 and it cannot play crysis or farcry 2 on max with no lag if i get a gtx 295 will i be able to play all games on very high with no lag?
GTAIV is a horrendus port to PC. So i'd say don't try and compare a computers performance to a consoles using this game. PC or PS3 they do the same exact thing. play video games. The big bonus about PC gaming is the Vast amount of modifications for the video games themselves. I sure as hell dont see dual AK-47's on COD4 for PS3.
You know thats not even mentioning the Severe handicap on total player limit on playstations 16 people tops?!!? What in the hell where is my 64-128 im used to seeing
First of all, if you have a bullshit PC, then buy a ps3. But if you have or like extreme PCs, then a I7, 2 x 295GTX a 6GB of ram, will run GTA4 at 1900 x 1200, 16AA and 1000 better graphics than ps3, and you don't have to spend 70$ in game. Also a I7 can make videos, programming, compiling music, etc. PS3 is for kids or freaks that want to spend money without learn anything. PCs teach you a lot of things in hardware,software,bugs,etc. So... please shout up and cry with your toy called PS3 ;)
My answer is to freaks that thinks PS3 is better than PC GAMES at max settings ;). PC is cheaper with the time, and many people knows why xD. PS3? 50$ or 60$ every game, soooo... how many games you'll buy in 1 or 2 years???
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
You all are shit, if you buy gta4 for pc. Buy a Console like Ps3 or xbox360. Then you never have to buy a f*ckin Graphic card lol. And you can play all upcoming games. (WITHOUT CRASHES, LAGS or other things) Ps3 cost only 399€. It is like a great Computer, you can work on it. And you can play ALL Games. ;D Thing about it, Nvidia or Ati is the same shit. They steal your money! Because you have to buy a expensive card for playing the newest games......... A big market ! Buy a Console....
you really shoulnt come on a channel about high end pc's and then talk about how good your ps3 is. i havnt got the energy to tell you how wrong your statment is i will leave it to sombody else.
Firstly; "ALL" games? There are thousands of titles available for PC and that not including thousands more mods and custom content which would never surface on a console.
PC's are just on a completely differently level with games. The community and power the platform provides.
Don't get me wrong, I love my 360; but console gaming won't ever come close to PC gaming.
And without PC gaming, consoles would have never been there in the first place.
lol your an ati fanboy the gtx 295 got 57fps on highest and the 4870x2 got 54fps at highest too there both good cards but on gta4 4870x2 gets a greater advantage becuase of the ddr5 it has.
i got geforce 9800GTX+ and it says i got 486 MB memory available, but i got 1,7 gigs.. i can use everything on high and get 30+ fps due to my dual core processor, would get more with quad core
Could you get a benchmark of the NVIDIA GTX 295 on Oblivion with maxed out graphics? I just want to see the benchmarks before I buy the card. I'd be really grateful!
Yo R3aper wuz up, I got a I7 920 OC to 4 Ghz, still using my old 8800 GTX and when i run the benchmark it says its only using 15 % of the cpu, am I doing something wrong isnt it suppose to use alot more of my cpu.. ? i have ALL 4 cores enabled and the HT is enabled as well.... it seems its not using alot of my CPU
at 1st I thought GTA 4 is gonna be a cakewalk for my system with a 4870X2. But I got owned when I turned the texture quality to high and render quality to highest and view distance to the max. Im gonna buy an original copy & patch it. Because my pirated GTA 4 is plagued with bugs especially in graphical issues. I think GTA 4 in PC was badly coded at 1st release.
I guess you were using the GTA IV patch that doesn't work with SLI... I have ~60-65 fps average with GTX 560 and shitty AMD Phenom 2 x4 CPU.
JohnDieselD 2 weeks ago
Feel free to skip ahead to 2:30 to skip all the boring talking.
XxBlakpaladinxX 5 months ago
wasnt this card stopped from being sold because it wouldnt accept the new drivers for some reason....? saying that id still get one if i had the chance nice benchmark
daredevilstu 1 year ago
I thought the gtx 295 had 1.700MB of graphics memory. why does it say that yours has only got 875MB??
hansholzbein1 2 years ago 2
Lol my nvidia geforce 9800 gt 1 gb x2 video card supports 75 hz
SuperFunnier 2 years ago
The GTX 295 does not support more than 59Hz (in high resolution) and thats too bad :(
Why did you putted Texture Quality to high?
Also this card is getting about 31 FPS with all Settings to High. And thats too bad fps.
You gun get about 45 FPS with an ATi 4870 with is a cheaper card :)
johnie1992 2 years ago
try it with grapics on highest too and see if ur comp crashes or wut and make a video XD
suckmylol 2 years ago
i dnt go a grapics card and can max out my gta sa and put 100 veiw distance ahahahah
suckmylol 2 years ago
@suckmylol thats becuase san andreas is a piece of shit compared to gta4 graphics
MegaPancakes 2 years ago
sorry it was a joke lol i can now play gta4 with view distance at 40+ maxed out...
suckmylol 2 years ago
GTA4 Uses CPU not GPU, a game that uses GPU is MW2.
camera31 2 years ago
The i7 Extreme and Phenom II x4 are CISC with L3, SS4 and advance threading models.
The x360 and PS3 are RISC with many threading and cache improvements, and most importantly an embedded kernel that doesn't have near the garbage NT or 2.6 has(drivers and dynamic instruction branches).
Also GTA IV uses mostly CPU. RAGE isn't fully accelerated by GPU API because it isn't direct rendering, and the A.I. and animation engine also.
The CBE kills the i7 Extreme in raw power.
tjc0der 2 years ago
i7-975 clocked at 5.2Ghz is lucky to get 80GFLOP. The cell is commonly 102GFLOP to 150GFLOP
The new core i9 and 2xxxMhz FSB i7 in Q1 2010 will be interesting.
tjc0der 2 years ago
u can put it at red ,gtx295 its too extreme ,and i found solving to run out of vid memory (aka Resc10) error,with Vista make sure u have "maximum pre-rendered frames" at 0. u find this at nvidia control panel,nvidia psyhx properties-at Manage 3D Settings, i never had that error since then :)
sdfefde 2 years ago 3
thx
davinegun 2 years ago
59 HZ xdd mby u maxed it out but u will fuck ur eyes :)
sdfefde 2 years ago
Most montiors at that resolution and above will be 60hz which is waht it is usually set at not sure why it was 59 in thi vid. You can now buy 120mhz monitors at 1680x1050 but they are 22inch only.
R3APERvsTYETREE 2 years ago
MeeceMou, you need a faster CPU or an overclock on your CPU to see higher fames.
NoSpoonOwnz 2 years ago
WTF!!!! I phenom x4 2.2ghz with 4gb ram, a hd3600 series, and i get 31fps avg on 1152x720 >:(
MeeceMou 2 years ago
hahah shit grpahics card
L00peey 2 years ago
bullshit man....gta 4 on pc has a standard damn 875 graphics memory...you know that the gtx 295 has 1790(or so) of graphics memory dedicated....you can pass to 1200 mb usage even if appears the red warning
BBoyT94 2 years ago
er sli & crossfire doesn't give you the full amount of ram that card has on the PCB/DualPCB.
it mirrors it. like a raid 0 setup does.
you only use half of it. - thats why the 9800gx2 was such a freakin flop.
LordNeb 2 years ago
GTA IV is not about graphic card.. its about the CPU, i have 9800GTX+ and Q9550 @ 3.8GHz and i get 55fps avrage highest..
MarcusN0 2 years ago
ive got q9550 @ 3.2GHz and gtx 260 core 216 and i get 63fps avg
wardy92 2 years ago
Wooooo another Q9550 owner in the 3.8ghz club lol. i downclocked mine to 3.6 for the summer though :(
LordNeb 2 years ago
i use this settings in my 9800 gt ...
utente3893 2 years ago
thats a huge ass nice monitor you got out there.
jeymison2 2 years ago
how can i get sli in gta iv?
tiagom135 2 years ago
u cant
wardy92 2 years ago
i actually contacted rockstar for an answer to this. as all the forums have mixed views. they told me sli is enabled and has been since the first patch. people running in higher resolutions then 1920 x 1080 will benefit....
utter crap when you think about it! anyone playing at that res will probably be getting around 10fps anyway.
Best results i have found is to increase the frames pre rendered by cpu to "7" and then set sli to "single gpu"
i got a significant boost.
LordNeb 2 years ago
hmmm :( i think is a gtx260, or a gtx275
JohnMojo75 2 years ago
This is the 295 not 260 or 275.
The 295 has 896mb memory on each card and sli doesnt add the memory together, as each card takes it in turns in rendering frames not both cards working together to produce the same frame. So advertising it as havin 1792mb is a bs
R3APERvsTYETREE 2 years ago
my specs at the moment, possibly considering faster overclock if i can sort out a voltage conundrum :(
Intel Q9450 @ 3.5GHZ
4gb OCZ 1800MHZ DDR3 Ram
GeForce GTX295 OC (600, 1300, 1050)
Corsair 850TX PSU
What framerate am i expected to achieve?
liquidmetal1 2 years ago
q9450 just on 3.5 ? overclock this bitch more
arni291 2 years ago
idiot GTX295 is 1792MB!! GTA4 look only 875!!
you no problem on a setting texture high NO MEDIUM!!!!!
and colour has been red!!!and no probleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeem!!!!!!!!!
6H6R6 2 years ago
Actually is has 875 x2 but YES it should be saying 1792!
johnie1992 2 years ago
6H6R6 you are the idiot and clearly havent a clue abnout how sli works, the 295 has 896mb of memory available on each card, sli doesnt add the cards memory and power togther to rebnder a single frame each card uses its owen memory to render althernate frames.
If you were correct then it would also add the gpu core clocks together which it doesnt. So go learn about something next time before making stupid comments.
Johnie1996 you are also wrong it shouldnt show 1792mb
R3APERvsTYETREE 2 years ago
then how come I can set on top?
anke and if you see on the screen 896 MB you can set the game up at all!
will be written out all in red with attention etc. etc.
but you can use type 1580 MB succome because it is a dual GPU the total is 1792!
va beh ... not simply exploiting the GTX 295 to its true power ... and do not enjoy GTA IV with texture detail to high!
6H6R6 2 years ago
gta 4 doesnt use sli :( it use onli one gpu
neoonik16 2 years ago
you talk too much! waste my time
Lov3Tikos 2 years ago
i7 is kickass and the cell proccecor thingy is nothing like i7 stupid'o
tzadok06 2 years ago
lol! go tell this to ibm.. they will laugh..u think ur weak lil i7 can beat a cell? lame..
chorinicpker 2 years ago 2
dude this thing can run like 3 instances of gta iv playing its onlike at 30% usage
raumrqz 2 years ago
lol the i7 is a great cpu, no doubts. but the cell is a fantastic bit of technology.
someone mentioned that the cell isn't good for gaming, i would say it's more that gaming isn't good for cell - YET.
but who cares! AMD and Intel have both already produced 6 core HT server chips, and the i9's are due out Q1 of 2010.
LordNeb 2 years ago
When will it be good for gaming then? The Sony fanboys have said every year since the release of the console that, that special year is the year of the PS3. Uhm, those years were pretty much won by the 360 and even the Wii. I have had a PS3 since release, all games except MGS4 and uncharted sucks, and no, I doubt any new games will pop up more superior than any PC game. Cell doesnt do much, look at LBP, lags as hell with 50 physics balls rolling around. yet the game plays at 30fps with 0 AA.
mupp33n 2 years ago
hey hey, lets get it straight, im not a sony fan boy. i own a ps3! but it's gathering dust.
I'm saying the cell processor is a fantastic bit of kit, i'm not saying it was a good choice for the ps3! or it ever will be.
it's like saying a G5 Mac is shit because you can't game on it. it's a stupid argument!
Sony shouldn't have put it in a ps3. it cost 'em too much - R&D costs were through the roof. and game developers weren't ready for it.
LordNeb 2 years ago
Never said you're a fanboy might be misunderstood. But youre right anyway.
mupp33n 2 years ago
You talk too much.
omri1324 2 years ago
my specs:
4gb drr 2 memory
1TB solid harddisk (total)
procesor: Q9550
video: 2x GTX 285 SLI
rollinsixfo 2 years ago
who cares?
ClearSkyTMD 2 years ago
I have 9800 GTX and i wana instal more 9800GTX can i instal 9800GTX(+) with 9800GTX?
xxrogi69 2 years ago
yes i think u can... but i don't recommand it you should use the identical cards
rollinsixfo 2 years ago
acctuly i care, i have Q9550 1TB 4 GB DDR2 but i have 9800GTX+ and im acctuly about to buy 2 GTX 285 so i wonder what avrage fps you get in GTA IV on highese settings 1440x900 ???
MarcusN0 2 years ago
@ 1440x900 not alot of difference between the 9800GTX and the 280.
i contacted R* support, because of the amount of shite threads on the net about SLI
They told me it IS supported, but only effective at high resolutions. (they told me higher then 1900 x1200!)
the difference between my 8800GTX and the GTX 295 wasnt alot. and to be honest, setting View distance and detail distance past 38 doesn't really give you a better experience.
LordNeb 2 years ago
The game uses mainly a Quad core cpu, the only thing youd get an improvement of by getting a new card would be smoother reflections and shadows and higher view distances ofc. but you wouldnt get that much more fps. And theres barely any fps differences between 1920x1200 and 1280x720 for me. :p
mupp33n 2 years ago
I didnt notice any "smoother reflections" from my jump in cards, and you wouldn't. they were set to V high anyway. and again viewing distance past around 38 doesn't make a damn difference.
oh, it does like multicore, but as it doesn't need the horsepower from my gtx295, it doesn't really require the overclock to feed my card. i had fuck all of an improvement going from 2.8 to 3.8.
as everyone says, it's a badly coded game. but who cares! i can run it smooth! and it's hellafun
LordNeb 2 years ago
They arent smoother, your frames are, and view distance dont make a damn thing? Eh. It sure DO actually, you just wont notice it if you're in tight places. Youll see cars popin up farther away, buildings farther away are in higher detail. Lampposts traschans, shitloads of stuff. Its just that people havent realised the differences between LOD distance and View distance, ask rockstar. There are differences. Also console versions had only 15 view distance, 25 detail distance, 15 vehicle, 0 shadows
mupp33n 2 years ago
well actually, the difference between 100 and say... 30 is marginal. you might think theirs loads. but for me, it's nothing to get excited about. setting it to 100, giving me the ability to see a more detailed window in a far away building is not as important as say system stability and a good frame rate. and my experience with asking rockstar? it's just not worth it. no denying it looks better on pc. just maxing it out doesn't make it that much better!
LordNeb 2 years ago
do you have vista ?????
avihai92 2 years ago
i have the same PC like on the video exept lower RAM frequency and i should tell im really really disapointed, i got like average 30 fps in single-player and 20fps in multiplayer, the game'sbenchmark is something completly different, im really really disapointed, only the video card cost 1/3 of the price of a car and runs like somebody shited in it, the processor is retarded for its time. (They used to give the things that they are the best for ther time, u call 20-30fps the best? comonbullsht!
Bazziliska 2 years ago
Bazz - you might have got it working smoother since you posted, but if you've got an nvidia card, using the driver profiles, try setting the amount pre-rendered frames renderd by the cpu to around "7". as everyone keeps going on about, this game barely uses SLI, but relies on the power of your CPU. doing this really helped me out anyway, i'm a fellow GTX295 user.
Good luck.
LordNeb 2 years ago
if overclocking your cpu increases fps at all but is less than 100% doesnt that mean that the bottleneck is the ram? (because I presume you would be upping the fsb and working with the cpu ratio to give it's overclock?)
Bozebo 2 years ago
Deeee Deeeee Deeee Of course a 295 can run GTA without problems. It's ment to play on PS3 and Xbox. Thats a give me. Worthless video.
RStickMan22 2 years ago
it runs on a ps3 at very low settings and this game is hard on gfx cards at those settings. This video was a request from some of my subscribers so they could see how it runs on the 295 this was for them not you, so jog on ding
R3APERvsTYETREE 2 years ago
Still High or Low far above the hardware specs for game... 8800's can run this maxed. Anyone should know a 295 will crush a game like this regaudless of settings. Now I will jog on, kiddie!
RStickMan22 2 years ago
8800 ultras in 3 way sli run terrible with this game, the hardware specs are also way off in this game pretty much like most. 1 gig of ram, or 1.5 on vista when vista recommends 2 gigs for it to run so 1.5 would be a joke, 3 gigs gets 86 percent used after about 15mins gameplay,
256mb 7900, lol if you wanna play at 800x600 with everything as low as possible and core 2 duo at 1.8ghz, yea right get real im sure anyone with that setup will have the worst time running this game.
R3APERvsTYETREE 2 years ago
also the 295 doesnt nearly crush this game.
R3APERvsTYETREE 2 years ago
If three 8800 Ultras don't run this then that computer is fucked. Next 7900 is old school so I don't even know why you said that. And yes most game specs are off but to play this game and have a enjoyable time killer hardware is not needed. Most PC exclusive games are what I want to see benchmarks not consoled games, because I like benchmark and not even try consoled games. With 1048MB graphics RAM and the clock speeds and a healthy HDD the game is going to run playable+
RStickMan22 2 years ago
Its not the ultras that are fucked its the guys who ported this to pc they did a bad job thats it, the rockstar forum has pages of complaints about how there 2000 dollar systems werent able to run this game at max settings when it runs on a console, the reason i mentioned the above specs 1 g ram 256mb 7900 and core 2 duo 1.8ghz is because they are the system requirments for gta 4 on pc. Now like you said the game will run playable on a decent system just not at the settings they may like to run.
R3APERvsTYETREE 2 years ago
Well PS3 putting out 3.8GHz on 8 cores. So 7900 on 1GB RAM with 1.8 and like a 800MHz fsb the game is not going to run all out. Anyone gaming a 7900 just is not setup for gaming now a days, that many cards back. Even most higher end laptop would have no problems playing this even better then a PS3. I sim (FSX) witch is more demaning the Crysis and theres a few laptops that run in playable. I do like my settings maxed.
RStickMan22 2 years ago
No :) But maybe it would if the game hade some proper SLI support.
AbtinX 2 years ago
im getting core i7 and quad sli GTX 295 hope it runs it well with low res like 1025x768. =) ( i mostly play on that res)
forsakenfallenangel 2 years ago
I got that config it will play great at any res
kimyo1973 2 years ago
Why would you buy FOUR GTX295s just to play at that resolution? You don't even need one to play at that res [GTX260 would do just fine].
That's just overkill.
kriis1986 2 years ago
you dont buy 4 you buy 2 which is 4 as its a dual head card.
and you could run it on a 9600gt as i have tested but people dont just want 25-35 fps
Hardscript 2 years ago
The point still stands, a 295 is overkill for 1025x768.
kriis1986 2 years ago
The game has no SLI support, so if you run it with a 295 you are only using half of the card ... and the port is horrible. Im running it myself, and I'm not impressed at all with GTA 4
AbtinX 2 years ago
Im in awe that you actually just said that.. fucking moron
dag11 2 years ago
GTA in benchmarking anit shit and GTA needs no benchmarking. FUCKING DIP SHIT. I want to see games benched that are hard to run not something a PS3 or Xbox can play.
RStickMan22 2 years ago
My point exactly, PS3/Xbox are better engineer'd that any computer you can build.. so if your COMPUTER can run it.. PS3 or Xbox can..
u idiot
dag11 2 years ago
no, some PC's are better
Tohinho1 2 years ago
Um, no your wrong lol. R700 and Nvidias Platform GPU's are better then any marketed GPU for purchase.
dag11 2 years ago
I agree i have this game it doesn't inpress me on the pc I have the 295
kimyo1973 2 years ago
rly ive been playing on an 8800gt and i thought the graphics were great
sublimegold 2 years ago
Thats not entirely true. The software is just very well adapted to run on the static console hardware as it's all the same in all consoles. The GTA 4 port to PC is anything but :) It's god awful
AbtinX 2 years ago
Lmao your one dumb fuck.
Computers infact have more memory and if you got a good graphic card is destroys and CPU any PS3 and Xbox360 any time.
Also Xbox and Ps3 are for people that can't afford a good computer.
CCCPSovietSoldier 2 years ago 5
no dumb ass console are for smart people..pcs have more memory and graphics cards...but the console has better cpus..the cell in the ps3 is the mosrt powerful chip in the world...
chorinicpker 2 years ago
LMAO SO YOU ARE SAYING THE PS3 HAS A BETTER CPU THAN A INTEL CORE i7 965?
CCCPSovietSoldier 2 years ago 3
hes stupid i7 kills that cell processor is maybe as strong as AMD triple core MAYBE lol
DarianXsXCrans 2 years ago
Not even that , the PS 3 dont need a good processor couse its onlt processing games so it can be compared to a cheap dual core..
MarcusN0 2 years ago
rofl the ps3 has an 8 core IBM cell. it's a complete power house.
the early ps3 games were unoptimised as they found it a hard programming platform.
I'm a pc gamer, and i don't enjoy the ps3 to anywhere near the extend of my rig. but as far as CPU power goes, it's defenetly got it. and has had it for years in advance of the pc market.
LordNeb 2 years ago
The PS3 processor wasnt made for gaming, and its only using 4 cores, 2 dedicated to system, 1 is defect/dead and the other one I dont know about that one.
Kutaragi said they wanted to replace the PC with the PS3, but that failed. (I have a ps3+pc anyway)
mupp33n 2 years ago
I completely agree with you - the cell cpu isnt designed for gaming, it was designed for multi tasking. i'm pretty sure it is a 8 core cpu, i thought only one of the cores was used as a backup or something.
I will have ti wiki it!
I've got the lot, but my ps3 and xbox360 sit there gathering dust. while my pc gets use every day.
Q9550 @ 3.6ghz (downclocked for the summer)
4GB DDR2 @ 1102mhz
p5k Premium (best overclocker so far)
GTX295
LordNeb 2 years ago
xD xD xD xD xD xD xD xD xD xD xD xD xD xD xD xD xD xD xD xD xD xD xD xD xD xD
ps3 chip better than core i7 975?
never
hiphoper19881988 2 years ago 2
lol well, the ps3 chip was a native 8 core. the i7 is HT.
so one could argue. - however the i7's have a great all round peformance - and the programmers can actually code for it.
I'm waiting for the 8 core HT's!
LordNeb 2 years ago
lol what a comment, cant afford a PC ? buy a PS 3
ForbiddenVideos 2 years ago
if the PS3 cpu was the worlds best, why isn't it used more often? :P
Phantompr56 2 years ago
cus its not the best
R3APERvsTYETREE 2 years ago
exactly!
Phantompr56 2 years ago
well to be honest, i've read alot of developer interviews, despite how much we have been spending on the latest hardware, consoles have had a step up from our quad cores for quite some time. it's only since the i7 has come out we've had the upper hand.xbox 360 uses a tri core cpu, but it also uses hyper threading, giving the developer 6 cores to work with, and we all know the ps3 has 8. they get all the good shit first, and it's generally provided by IBM.
LordNeb 2 years ago
The 360 chip is slow, it is made by PowerPC and any game made on the 360 u take it on the PC and it loads so much quicker, depending on your chip, e6750 was even faster than the 360 chip when I had it. 2nd the PS3 chip, i don't know about so I have no opinion. 3-5 year old technology for a, console.. is not going to be better than present day technology for computers or companies wouldn't be wasting their time trying to research and develop what we have if something better already exists.
Phantompr56 2 years ago
it might be slow, but as we are beginning to understand, the more threads the better! and the 360 had 6 to play with from the start.
don't get me wrong, you say "it's not going to be better then present day technology" we get better graphics cards, they generally get the better cpu's. plus, porting it over to the PC generally makes it worse.
we only get a good deal if a developer is keen on bringing it to the pc in all its glory. or only developing for the pc. e.g. crysis.
LordNeb 2 years ago
Dude, i hope you was jokinh when posting this..
MarcusN0 2 years ago
You don't know consoles very well either.
The advantages for consoles however are that ALL the available system resources are being used on running the game (except for 2% of the CPUs on the Xbox 360 and 1 SPU on the PS3 for the system software & security functions).
On the 360 load times are good and games use less data than they would on a PC because they can be compressed as the 360 has a dedicated decompression chip.
Cov3rt360 2 years ago 2
Also dev kits, game engines, and graphics drivers are constantly being improved and optimized for consoles, far more optimized than PC games because PC game devs have less time to optimize for the large amount of GPUs and processor types.
Since the PS3 and Xbox 360 now use mainstream processors, you can expect their graphics to improve much more over time than previous consoles too, especially with drivers
Cov3rt360 2 years ago 2
Covert.. I love you
dag11 2 years ago
Everyone who bitches about this game just shut the fuck up and upgrade your pc. I have a gtx 295 with an i7 and 6 gigs ddr3 I remove the restrictions and maxout everything played for several hours and had no stutters or problems whatsoever.
Fawk2099 2 years ago
Comment removed
0vid0 2 years ago
ok sory but my pc is shit
0vid0 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
shadowhearts897 2 years ago
you whould need to upgrade all things... and also upgrade your knowledge about computers
TWJ8305 2 years ago
Did u ever think mayb its a cpu bottleneck? same rates on diff gpu setups ......
bpmhopper 3 years ago
bottlenecked? It's a i7 920!
hakaluku 2 years ago
I got an xbox360, it works.....job done
Now commence console bashing kids!
ichithekiller85 3 years ago
Let's face it guys. This is a crap port of a crappy console game. I can run Crysis maxed out with smooth framerate but this runs like a crock of shit. Rockstar should be ashamed to bring out a broke game. Even the patches don't fix it. Out of video memory errors are rampant on this game.
Gaudianbou 3 years ago 2
Agreed ive actually lost a shit load of performance with the latest patch and ive never had somany out of memory crashes even thoiugh i have 1024mb of mem and have it set in the green at around 820ish the game is a joke at the moment ive not even finished it yet because of the constant restarts every half an hour.
It also ahuge memory leak with 3 g ram it would use over 84 percent of sys mem now with 6 g ram it still manages to get in to the 80 percent area after about 25mins of play.
R3APERvsTYETREE 3 years ago
Just because you have an i7 and GTX295 does mean you can't be pwned by a mobile 8800 card with a dual core mobile processor :-p
Gaudianbou 3 years ago
I'm running high texturesand65 view distance.
8800mGTS512mb OCed to 650Core 900mem(powerful as a 8800GTX512mb DESKTOP)
T9300 2.5ghz6mb cache (#20 on the best CPU mobile list with the majority of the top 20 being C2X's)
Averages 35-45 with dips to high 20s at time but very rarely. I'm using a ton of user end optimization which accounts for my running the game mostly maxed at averag 34fps.
Gaudianbou 3 years ago
nice fps
acreaterz 3 years ago
$500 for a graphics card but you cant drop $35 on a mic and fraps?
PurplePanda1233 3 years ago
On a mic?
R3APERvsTYETREE 3 years ago
So they will here you on Fraps.
PurplePanda1233 3 years ago
dude, fraps kills fps
martysmartylol 3 years ago
lol . but fraps kill some frame rate
xdirt1 3 years ago
You can't use all the memory of those GTX295 cards only half the memory it claims to have 1798MB but it's a dual card solution.
GTAIV doesn't work in SLI.
So only medium. I'd rather have a full 1GB card over this to use high textures.
tinkyshearer 3 years ago
new card graphic released ?? it's son of the bitch 1200 BTX hahahaha
topcharacter 3 years ago
I run it at 1680 x 1050
I don't know if its just my card or what.
I get really laggy in serious gunfights of DOW II.
and its an RTS game.
All of the games that ran perfectly fun with VERY high FPS with my GTX 260 now runs like pure shit on my GTX 295.
I can still max everything out but FPS drops a lot at times. I am not please with this card. I plan to return it as soon as my GTX 285 arrives.
DSuheyb 3 years ago
hahaha the games gonna run like a bag of shit!
yidoh 3 years ago
I just recently bought a GTX 295.
I have 8 gigs of DDR 2 ram at 800
and a intel quad core at 2.83GHz.
I have everything maxed except texture, which is on medium, all the bars at halfway except shadow which is completely off.
when I benchmark, I get 20 FPS.
I got 45 FPS on my GTX 260. I'm not sure whats wrong..
help please =\
DSuheyb 3 years ago
your quad core is 2.83 not good id reccomend 3.2 and 8gigs ram doesnt matter i dont think any game will take advantage of that ram maybe 6 definetly 4 but not 8
myg0tpurepunk 3 years ago
what resolution are you running at.... btw the 295 is a dual card gfx its like having 2 cards in sli togther they are very powerful but apart not so much.... as gta 4 doesnt allow for sli at the moment you are a little out of luck... look for a sli fix for gta4
sacredgeometry 3 years ago
actually half of that card is equal to a 260 216 graphics
kimyo1973 2 years ago
? i didnt say it wasnt
sacredgeometry 2 years ago
same with me thy need a update i run 3.2 on a i7 and a gtx 295 still has problems and shuts off just that game
kimyo1973 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
hi
i have the ati 4870 x2 and it cannot play crysis or farcry 2 on max with no lag if i get a gtx 295 will i be able to play all games on very high with no lag?
the rest of my system is
q9550 @3.0ghz
4gb ddr3 1333mhz
74gb raptor
antec nine hundred
1000w ocz psu
thanks
snake786123 3 years ago
Please Suscribe me:! :D and i suscribe u! :)
storpojke1337 3 years ago
GTAIV is a horrendus port to PC. So i'd say don't try and compare a computers performance to a consoles using this game. PC or PS3 they do the same exact thing. play video games. The big bonus about PC gaming is the Vast amount of modifications for the video games themselves. I sure as hell dont see dual AK-47's on COD4 for PS3.
You know thats not even mentioning the Severe handicap on total player limit on playstations 16 people tops?!!? What in the hell where is my 64-128 im used to seeing
ganymedeIV4 3 years ago
why not high res?
taekcokcok 3 years ago
First of all, if you have a bullshit PC, then buy a ps3. But if you have or like extreme PCs, then a I7, 2 x 295GTX a 6GB of ram, will run GTA4 at 1900 x 1200, 16AA and 1000 better graphics than ps3, and you don't have to spend 70$ in game. Also a I7 can make videos, programming, compiling music, etc. PS3 is for kids or freaks that want to spend money without learn anything. PCs teach you a lot of things in hardware,software,bugs,etc. So... please shout up and cry with your toy called PS3 ;)
NudilloS83 3 years ago 7
Dont forget that if you fail in most things, the knowledge that you gained may find you a job in computers!
CloudRayne 3 years ago
@nudillo LOL don't be aggressive,PS3 is not expensive like this fukin beast PC.. ^^
PS3 is for kids and adults,there are no problem -.-
PS3 is cheaper,PC gaming could cost 2000 $ or 3000 $.
So please shut up and don't waste your time to say that PS3 is a toy.All we know that is a fukin toy.
Pc is only for hardcore gamer.
In 2006 PS3 was like a GAMING PC with a 7900gtx.
When will come out the ps4 with a 295 gtx we'll can be happy =D
lil50money 3 years ago
My answer is to freaks that thinks PS3 is better than PC GAMES at max settings ;). PC is cheaper with the time, and many people knows why xD. PS3? 50$ or 60$ every game, soooo... how many games you'll buy in 1 or 2 years???
NudilloS83 3 years ago
lol i with you, but GTA4 doesn't support antil aliasing, even if you force it on.
LordNeb 2 years ago
GTA IV has Visual-IV mod that smoothens out jaggies quite alot not like real AA but it works and has some other nice improvements.
mupp33n 2 years ago
really?! Ooooh i might have to check it out? how does it perform?
LordNeb 2 years ago
not sure, didnt try it out yet. but have seen vids of other people running it.
mupp33n 2 years ago
i had a SSC 280 before the step up to the GTX295
the performance in GTAIV seems much worse with slow downs, im pretty gutted
the 280 seemed smoother and didnt have slow downs
Crysis warhead and others seem ok, so its very odd why GTAIV has slow down :headexplode:
any solutions?
wysiwyg2006uk 3 years ago
Driver updates.
therevengeofsaladboy 3 years ago
shouldn't it be 1870 mb ? its only 875
sliskigt 3 years ago
GTAIV only recognizes 1 gpu's memory, so even if its a 2-gpu card, it still will come out to around 875-876 on a GTX295.
keep in mind the card might have 1.792 gb, but the gpus can only access half of that.
smartwarlord 3 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Cheats4win 3 years ago
uh oh i feel a bashing coming on lol
you really shoulnt come on a channel about high end pc's and then talk about how good your ps3 is. i havnt got the energy to tell you how wrong your statment is i will leave it to sombody else.
R3APERvsTYETREE 3 years ago
it doesnt matter if we have to buy the newest video card to play the newest games
console fanboys have to wait fucking 6 years before another console comes out so they could play the next generations of gaming.
girondi1 3 years ago
That's a little narrow minded.
Firstly; "ALL" games? There are thousands of titles available for PC and that not including thousands more mods and custom content which would never surface on a console.
PC's are just on a completely differently level with games. The community and power the platform provides.
Don't get me wrong, I love my 360; but console gaming won't ever come close to PC gaming.
And without PC gaming, consoles would have never been there in the first place.
therevengeofsaladboy 3 years ago
btw i run mine on a 9800gt 512 and i use over 1000 mb ram and it never crashes
Jellyhat 3 years ago
the games gonna run like a bag of shit lmao
Jellyhat 3 years ago
57 Fps on Medium Texture (Gtx295)
55,7 Fps on High Texture (Hd4870x2)
The winner is Hd4870x2 !
Why? The Hd4870x2 has more Power.
Watch the Hd4870x2 Benchmark you will see it.
Cheats4win 3 years ago
lol your an ati fanboy the gtx 295 got 57fps on highest and the 4870x2 got 54fps at highest too there both good cards but on gta4 4870x2 gets a greater advantage becuase of the ddr5 it has.
martinolatino123 3 years ago
GTA is made for NVidia architecture. So of course the GTX is slightly better.
Once sideport is unlocked it's good to go. Also the 4870 X2 has a 3.6GHz core clock.
JerzeyLegend 3 years ago
can your pc run starcraft?
luisronaldofigo 3 years ago
Is that game released? i think i ran the benchmark for starcraft and it ran that no probs maxed out
R3APERvsTYETREE 3 years ago
lol it was a joke comment but nvm great pc you got
luisronaldofigo 3 years ago
what the fuck aint star craft some old peice of shit
R3APERvsTYETREE 3 years ago
i got geforce 9800GTX+ and it says i got 486 MB memory available, but i got 1,7 gigs.. i can use everything on high and get 30+ fps due to my dual core processor, would get more with quad core
Dreathy 3 years ago
me too!
re1gamer 3 years ago
The game uses the memory on your video card not your system memory ansd im guessing the 9800 has 512mb
R3APERvsTYETREE 3 years ago
its complitely different things.. i got 512mb card but it has nothing to do with the speed of the card itself. 256mb cards and kick 1024mb cards arse
Dreathy 3 years ago
Could you get a benchmark of the NVIDIA GTX 295 on Oblivion with maxed out graphics? I just want to see the benchmarks before I buy the card. I'd be really grateful!
GeekingForJesus 3 years ago
Yo R3aper wuz up, I got a I7 920 OC to 4 Ghz, still using my old 8800 GTX and when i run the benchmark it says its only using 15 % of the cpu, am I doing something wrong isnt it suppose to use alot more of my cpu.. ? i have ALL 4 cores enabled and the HT is enabled as well.... it seems its not using alot of my CPU
why ?
SpeeDupString 3 years ago
at 1st I thought GTA 4 is gonna be a cakewalk for my system with a 4870X2. But I got owned when I turned the texture quality to high and render quality to highest and view distance to the max. Im gonna buy an original copy & patch it. Because my pirated GTA 4 is plagued with bugs especially in graphical issues. I think GTA 4 in PC was badly coded at 1st release.
yusukegarners 3 years ago
The game does not support SLI, thats why you dont have more ram to play with.
Decenium 3 years ago