Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. #1

    Post GTA 4 (PC): CPU benchmark review with 13 CPUs

    GTA 4 (PC) seems to be quite demanding as hardware is concerned. Thus we tested the game with several processors to find out which CPU is best for a trip through Liberty City. Furthermore we give a short overview about the required graphics card power.

    The PC version of GTA 4 has CPU power for breakfast - independent on clock speed, L2 cache or number of cores. The latter ones are very important, because without quad-core power GTA 4 is noticeably less enjoyable. For example: A Q6600 is about 52 percent faster than the dual-core E6600 when both CPUs are running at 2.4 GHz. If the clock speed is increased, the difference gets smaller, but is still huge and a QX6850 is 47 percent faster than an E6850. Dual-core processors have a serious disadvantage and only with 3.6 GHz an E8500 is able to beat the Q6600, but GTA 4 nevertheless suffers from frequent lags on dual-core systems - no matter if an AMD or Intel CPU is used. The Phenom X4 9950 easily passes the Q6600 and theoretically is on the same level as the Q6700 (not included in the benchmark).

    AMD's Athlon 64 X2 6400+ is doing fine compared to the E6600 and beats Intel's Conroe CPU, while the X2 5000+ is equally fast. A single-core CPU is unsuitable and only reaches single-digit results and additionally the game freezes and the animations of the characters is running in slow motion sometimes. Increased L2 cache results in about 8 percent more fps.

    GTA 4 (PC) - Processor benchmark review: Conclusion
    GTA 4 benefits from quad-core CPUs as no game did up to now. Even a 4.0 GHz E8500 is not able to compete with a quad-core that has 25 percent less core frequency. Both, the K10 and the K8 architecture are doing quite well.,6...13_processors/

  2. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    In Singapore, on a Land.
    5,175 E8600..poor thing...=(
    Home Entertainment: Xtreamer NMT | Hotway Probox 4 Bay Enclosure| WD Green 808.88GB x2 Seagate 750GB

    Currently using: Samsung Galaxy Note II

    Cowon J3 + FischerAudio DBA-02 + Fiio E11

  3. #3
    38fps at 1280X1024 on the GTX 280? Are these guys at Rockstar serious? What the hell do you need to play this stupid game?

    Jeez all the hype....!

  4. #4
    Shake! extr3mus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    this game is

    Live the way you want it to be, don't waste it.

  5. #5
    Sounds like its more demanding then crysis!!!

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by psolord View Post
    38fps at 1280X1024 on the GTX 280? Are these guys at Rockstar serious? What the hell do you need to play this stupid game?

    Jeez all the hype....!
    No doubt. And check out the game settings: only 50% view distance! If you were to push that all the way to 100%, the framerates would easily plummet down into unplayable territory. I'm guessing that only a Radeon HD 4870 X2 and a Core i7 965 Extreme Edition would be able to play this game at completely full detail levels at 1280x1024.

    Grand Theft Auto IV is an amazing game, no doubt, but I think that Rockstar North could have done a better job at optimizing it for the PC. Not that it matters much to me personally; I beat the game long ago on my PlayStation 3.
    Apple MacBook Pro (2009 Model)
    - 15.4" LED-Backlit Glossy LCD Display (1440x900 Resolution)
    - Intel Core 2 Duo Processor (2.53GHz, 3MB Shared L2 Cache)
    - NVIDIA GeForce 9400M GPU (256MB Shared Memory)
    - 4GB (2GB x 2) DDR3-1066 Memory
    - 250GB Hard Disk Drive (5400 RPM)
    - Mac OS X "Snow Leopard" (v10.6.7)

  7. #7
    GTA's engines are notoriously inefficient, that's why I really don't care about benchmarks for it unless it is to judge the game.

    That's the same reason why I don't really care about Crysis benchmarks, since it seems, at least to me, that the engine is inefficient. I don't believe Crysis is as bad as GTA, but it is a far cry from the best

    Anyway, I haven't played GTA IV yet, so who knows, maybe they actually have a good one this time.