How do you like GTA V ?

  • 69 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for Hydrolex
Hydrolex

1648

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#1 Hydrolex
Member since 2007 • 1648 Posts

OMG ! Running the game MAXED out at 1440p with my GTX 980. I don't know how many FPS I'm getting but it runs very smooth. Anti Aliasing is set at 4x though

Overall, the game is BEAUTIFUL !! much much better than the PS4 version

Avatar image for Installing
Installing

678

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3  Edited By Installing
Member since 2010 • 678 Posts
@Hydrolex said:

OMG ! Running the game MAXED out at 1440p with my GTX 980.

A $500+ GPU. Is that meant to be impressive or were we all expecting so little performance wise?

Avatar image for Hydrolex
Hydrolex

1648

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#4  Edited By Hydrolex
Member since 2007 • 1648 Posts

Question though, so it's using 3.5/4 GB vram. The bar is yellowish. Would it make a difference in FPS if change the settings to where it would use for example 3GB with a green bar ?

The Anti Aliasing though makes a massive difference in FPS.

Avatar image for KHAndAnime
KHAndAnime

17565

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#5 KHAndAnime
Member since 2009 • 17565 Posts

@Hydrolex said:

Question though, so it's using 3.5/4 GB vram. The bar is yellowish. Would it make a difference in FPS if change the settings to where it would use for example 3GB with a green bar ?

The Anti Aliasing though makes a massive difference in FPS.

Naw, as long as you don't exceed the VRAM limit you're fine. AA always has a massive impact on FPS.

Avatar image for bigfootpart2
bigfootpart2

1131

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 bigfootpart2
Member since 2013 • 1131 Posts

Runs at a constant 60FPS maxed out at 1200p on a GTX 980. First person mode is really nice. Overall this is a big improvement over the PS3 version. I'm actually glad Rockstar took some time and gave us a properly polished PC version instead of a sloppy port like GTA IV.

Avatar image for Hydrolex
Hydrolex

1648

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#7  Edited By Hydrolex
Member since 2007 • 1648 Posts

@bigfootpart2 said:

Runs at a constant 60FPS maxed out at 1200p on a GTX 980. First person mode is really nice. Overall this is a big improvement over the PS3 version. I'm actually glad Rockstar took some time and gave us a properly polished PC version instead of a sloppy port like GTA IV.

everything on very high ? what about 1440p ? I have everything on very high with 4x AA but I doubt I get 60 fps. It's smooth though but not 60fps

Avatar image for JigglyWiggly_
JigglyWiggly_

24625

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#8 JigglyWiggly_
Member since 2009 • 24625 Posts

Runs at 90+ on mainly lowest settings at 1080p on my 670.

Game is pretty fun, but is kind of confusing at times. Trying to join friends online requires some tutorial that I can't seem to find.

Avatar image for KHAndAnime
KHAndAnime

17565

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#9  Edited By KHAndAnime
Member since 2009 • 17565 Posts

@JigglyWiggly_ said:

Runs at 90+ on mainly lowest settings at 1080p on my 670.

Game is pretty fun, but is kind of confusing at times. Trying to join friends online requires some tutorial that I can't seem to find.

I have a feeling everyone is going to spend a few hours with the online mode and realize it's complete and utter crap. Doing anything with your friends requires many steps and a lot of loading. At least that's how it was on the console versions I played.

The main problem is that there's just no straight-forward menu for what you want to do. If you're trying to do a coop mission with your friend that you haven't already done for example, you have to play lottery with the game's mission voting lobbies. It would be one thing if you could refresh the available missions and cycle through them as much as you wanted, but instead you're only limited to a few. By the time you get into what you're actually wanting to do - it feels like it's time to take a break and do something else. It's very reminiscent of RDR's style of multiplayer, but they somehow made it a lot more convoluted and less streamlined.

Avatar image for MaddenBowler10
MaddenBowler10

8999

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 1

#10 MaddenBowler10
Member since 2005 • 8999 Posts

Not sure if I'm going to bother playing it with my PC. I built in a few months ago but on a budget. FX-6300 with 8gb ram, 960 GTX. Sysrequirementslab says I need to upgrade my cpu to run GTA V on recommended settings.

Avatar image for deactivated-579f651eab962
deactivated-579f651eab962

5404

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#11 deactivated-579f651eab962
Member since 2003 • 5404 Posts

Amazing. Everything very high at 1440 with 2x msaa, getting like 60-75 fps

Avatar image for BassMan
BassMan

17795

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 225

User Lists: 0

#12  Edited By BassMan  Online
Member since 2002 • 17795 Posts

Hmmm... I just took a look at my buddy's screenshots. It seems to suffer from chromatic aberration. Is there a toggle to turn it off? I hate that shit. I am waiting on the physical copy.

Avatar image for jaenjaes
jaenjaes

30

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#13 jaenjaes
Member since 2014 • 30 Posts

@MaddenBowler10: I was originally holding off on purchasing GTA V on PC until a few weeks went by to see how it fares but it's legitimately very optimized. My PC has the same CPU as yours as well, stock with it's original CPU fan too (so not even overclocked):
AMD FX 6300 Black Ed.
Sapphire R9 270x 4GB DDR5
1TB HDD
16GB DDR3 RAM
Windows 7 Home Pre, 64-bit.

The game runs exceptionally well on my PC considering it's a "budget" build as well. AMD released a driver update too with catalyst profiles for GTAV, running the benchmark on first boot of GTAV and the FPS radar was between 48-60 frames. My game play, both on single player & online was tremendously smooth too. Rockstar did well in my opinion with optimizing this game to run on all kinds of modern, to semi-modern hardware. Mind you I'm playing on 1080p with most settings on High and a few on Ultra and I'm only using 2.7GBs out of the entire 4GBs of VRAM on my Graphics card.

Avatar image for MaddenBowler10
MaddenBowler10

8999

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 44

User Lists: 1

#14 MaddenBowler10
Member since 2005 • 8999 Posts

@jaenjaes said:

@MaddenBowler10: I was originally holding off on purchasing GTA V on PC until a few weeks went by to see how it fares but it's legitimately very optimized. My PC has the same CPU as yours as well, stock with it's original CPU fan too (so not even overclocked):

AMD FX 6300 Black Ed.

Sapphire R9 270x 4GB DDR5

1TB HDD

16GB DDR3 RAM

Windows 7 Home Pre, 64-bit.

The game runs exceptionally well on my PC considering it's a "budget" build as well. AMD released a driver update too with catalyst profiles for GTAV, running the benchmark on first boot of GTAV and the FPS radar was between 48-60 frames. My game play, both on single player & online was tremendously smooth too. Rockstar did well in my opinion with optimizing this game to run on all kinds of modern, to semi-modern hardware. Mind you I'm playing on 1080p with most settings on High and a few on Ultra and I'm only using 2.7GBs out of the entire 4GBs of VRAM on my Graphics card.

That's good to hear that you aren't having issues with the FX-6300.. I just wonder if the settings I'll be able to run it on will exceed that of what I already get on the Xbox One version. You also gotta consider my GTX 960 only provides 2gb of RAM so I likely wouldn't be able to max as many settings out as you can with your R9 270x 4GB version. I suppose if I could run this at 1080p with most settings on high between 45 and 60 FPS then it would be better than the XONE version.

Avatar image for deactivated-579f651eab962
deactivated-579f651eab962

5404

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#15 deactivated-579f651eab962
Member since 2003 • 5404 Posts

Anyone else having trouble with using the steam overlay on the Non-steam version?

Avatar image for MuD3
MuD3

2192

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16 MuD3
Member since 2011 • 2192 Posts

There is this one issue I hated about the game when I played it on it's initial release that still exists. The characters changing their own clothes. I get why they did this, but there needs to, at the very least, be a way to set up your own handful of outfits or something. Trevor can still wake up in his underwear or in a dress though because that's amusing. But I don't really enjoy going on my crime spree in khaki shorts and loafers...

Avatar image for C_Rule
C_Rule

9816

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#17 C_Rule
Member since 2008 • 9816 Posts

@MuD3 said:

There is this one issue I hated about the game when I played it on it's initial release that still exists. The characters changing their own clothes. I get why they did this, but there needs to, at the very least, be a way to set up your own handful of outfits or something. Trevor can still wake up in his underwear or in a dress though because that's amusing. But I don't really enjoy going on my crime spree in khaki shorts and loafers...

Worse than that is when you need/want to do something on Trevor and he's in the middle of a bloody police pursuit!

Avatar image for wis3boi
wis3boi

32507

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#18 wis3boi
Member since 2005 • 32507 Posts

maxed, 1440p, on a 970, 60fps, maxed 1080p 100+ fps in many places. Amazing game

Avatar image for saintsatan
SaintSatan

1986

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#19 SaintSatan
Member since 2003 • 1986 Posts

@BassMan said:

It seems to suffer from chromatic aberration.

No, it doesn't.

Avatar image for Paddy345
Paddy345

860

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#20 Paddy345
Member since 2007 • 860 Posts

I have a r9 290 4gb grahpics card, 8gbram. I5 2500k processor. I can play on max grahpics very smooth however i notice when i drive very fast or there is fast paced action the game will become extremely choppy. Changing graphics options didn't help this. Does anyone else experience this???

Avatar image for Truth_Hurts_U
Truth_Hurts_U

9703

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 0

#21 Truth_Hurts_U
Member since 2006 • 9703 Posts

The online part sucks so far... So many people with high levels thanks to the dumb transfer system. They just go around shooting nubs. To many loading screens too. A lot of people bail on games after the first match is over. So then you have to find a new one.

The single player graphics are decent, but MP looks like poop.

Game also suffers from the typical streaming slow downs, now and then. I see a lot of activity on my SSDs. I should turn on page file and see if that helps.

The controls are pretty crap, I had to start changing them (keyboard and mouse).

When I get around to playing heist and more single player... I hope I get a better impression. Because it really doesn't feel worth the wait right now.

Avatar image for Kh1ndjal
Kh1ndjal

2788

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22 Kh1ndjal
Member since 2003 • 2788 Posts

it definitely runs better than GTA IV on my rig: core i5 3450, 8GB RAM, GTX 770.

the movement feels a little boaty, but thank goodness the driving and shooting is fine. first-person mode is a wonderfully unique way to play.

haven't touched online yet. cutscenes feel jerky, maybe the animations are low framerate? regardless, i'm quite pleased with the performance. i couldn't enjoy GTA IV for many, many reasons, but the hour or two i've played so far has left a really good impression.

Avatar image for with_teeth26
with_teeth26

11511

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 43

User Lists: 1

#23 with_teeth26
Member since 2007 • 11511 Posts

Its running better than I expected on my ol' GTX670/2500k combo, I did have to tell the game to ignore recommended limits to enable high textures (med textures look pretty bad) but so far I haven't had any problems despite being ~200mb over the video memory limit. The rest of the settings are on high/very high with 2xMSAA at 1080p and I get 50-60fps all the time so far though I haven't ventured out of the city yet.

The only complaint I have about the visuals so far is that the textures on people clothes are incredibly inconsistent and often super blurry, this might be better with very high textures or even an issue with me going over the video memory limit but its pretty distracting in cutscenes.

Avatar image for BassMan
BassMan

17795

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 225

User Lists: 0

#24  Edited By BassMan  Online
Member since 2002 • 17795 Posts

@saintsatan said:

@BassMan said:

It seems to suffer from chromatic aberration.

No, it doesn't.

Take a look at his screenshot. The image doesn't lie. It is not exaggerated like Dying LIght, but it is there.

Avatar image for wis3boi
wis3boi

32507

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#25 wis3boi
Member since 2005 • 32507 Posts

@BassMan said:

@saintsatan said:

@BassMan said:

It seems to suffer from chromatic aberration.

No, it doesn't.

Take a look at his screens. The images don't lie. It is not exaggerated like Dying LIght, but it is there.

I dont think you know what that effect is, then

Avatar image for BassMan
BassMan

17795

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 225

User Lists: 0

#26  Edited By BassMan  Online
Member since 2002 • 17795 Posts

@wis3boi said:

@BassMan said:

@saintsatan said:

@BassMan said:

It seems to suffer from chromatic aberration.

No, it doesn't.

Take a look at his screens. The images don't lie. It is not exaggerated like Dying LIght, but it is there.

I dont think you know what that effect is, then

Look at the pic. In the office windows to the left. Also, the buildings in the top right. How can you not see the fringing? The game looks like it is being rendered through a cheap digital camera.

Avatar image for deactivated-5ebea105efb64
deactivated-5ebea105efb64

7262

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#27  Edited By deactivated-5ebea105efb64
Member since 2013 • 7262 Posts

@saintsatan: lol your steam review is at the top in the helpful review section.

Avatar image for whalefish82
whalefish82

511

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#28 whalefish82
Member since 2013 • 511 Posts

@wis3boi said:

maxed, 1440p, on a 970, 60fps, maxed 1080p 100+ fps in many places. Amazing game

What are your settings? The reason I ask is because I have 8gb ram, a stock 3570k (just meeting the recommended) and 970, but can't max the game out in 1080 with 60fps. I have the latest Nvidia driver but had to put grass to very high, shadows to high, high res shadows off, water reflection MSAA off and turn down the LOD slider. This is with FXAA, MSAA x2 and TXAA on. Are you playing without AA or something?

Avatar image for rogelio22
rogelio22

2477

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#29 rogelio22
Member since 2006 • 2477 Posts

Is anyone else showing double the vram? I have two 970s and the game is saying i have 8gbs.... But i know thats not true should i jus keep it at 7gbs because i know only have 3.5x2. Or should i actually try to keep it under 3.5

Avatar image for whalefish82
whalefish82

511

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#30  Edited By whalefish82
Member since 2013 • 511 Posts
@rogelio22 said:

Is anyone else showing double the vram? I have two 970s and the game is saying i have 8gbs.... But i know thats not true should i jus keep it at 7gbs because i know only have 3.5x2. Or should i actually try to keep it under 3.5

I've read various reports about this. The game seems to imply that Vram is stacked but that's not possible until DX12. Ignore it and keep usage under 3.5 for optimal performance.

Avatar image for deactivated-579f651eab962
deactivated-579f651eab962

5404

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#31 deactivated-579f651eab962
Member since 2003 • 5404 Posts

@rogelio22 said:

Is anyone else showing double the vram? I have two 970s and the game is saying i have 8gbs.... But i know thats not true should i jus keep it at 7gbs because i know only have 3.5x2. Or should i actually try to keep it under 3.5

It was the same in GTA IV and MP3. It's just how the engine recognises it.

Avatar image for MK-Professor
MK-Professor

4214

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#32 MK-Professor
Member since 2009 • 4214 Posts

@Chatch09 said:

Same, 1440p maxed with dual 280X, I facking love it (wish online was working though, I keep getting dropped back to story mode after 5-10min)

How CF scaling is in this game? what AA? fps?

Avatar image for rogelio22
rogelio22

2477

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#34 rogelio22
Member since 2006 • 2477 Posts

@whalefish82: yeah but ive gotta turn everything down to low to get the vram that low. Ive only played a for a few minutes because i was on lunch.. But it was playing smoothly at 7gbs usage.. Havent been out in the open world yet tho

Avatar image for rogelio22
rogelio22

2477

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#35 rogelio22
Member since 2006 • 2477 Posts

@Chatch09: cool thats good to hear! :) cant wait to get home play it

Avatar image for undeadgoon
undeadgoon

706

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#37 undeadgoon
Member since 2006 • 706 Posts

only played about an hour.. but im liking it alot so far.looks great and runs fine.. an hell yeah i get a blimp..!!

Avatar image for Nick3306
Nick3306

3429

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#38 Nick3306
Member since 2007 • 3429 Posts

Runs great (mostly a constant 60fps) on all high setting 1080p with i5 4670k and HD 7950

Avatar image for saintsatan
SaintSatan

1986

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#39 SaintSatan
Member since 2003 • 1986 Posts

@Gamerno6666 said:

@saintsatan: lol your steam review is at the top in the helpful review section.

Yeah that happens really often to me. I woke up with like 50 notifications and friend requests and I got about 25 more since then. Ugh.

Avatar image for whalefish82
whalefish82

511

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#40 whalefish82
Member since 2013 • 511 Posts

I've been tweaking options but haven't found a set I'm totally satisfied with yet in terms of IQ and FPS. Can anyone give me some suggestions? My specs are 8gb ram, 3570K stock (3.4ghz) and a GTX 970. I hate jaggies but I also hate blur so a compromise between the two would be great, and that's what I've been struggling to achieve. My monitor is only 1080 but DSR is a possibility with my card, except I struggled to see a big difference when trying it.

Avatar image for byshop
Byshop

20504

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#41 Byshop  Moderator
Member since 2002 • 20504 Posts

@Installing said:
@Hydrolex said:

OMG ! Running the game MAXED out at 1440p with my GTX 980.

A $500+ GPU. Is that meant to be impressive or were we all expecting so little performance wise?

You'd be surprised at how many games won't run maxed at 1440p with a single 980. The difference between 1080p and 1440p may not seem like much, but it's pushing nearly twice as many pixels. On my box it runs around 80-100fps in single GPU mode which for a brand new AAA title is actually really impressive.

One thing I did notice, though. Many people complained about GTA4 being terribly optimized on PC. It was demanding, but one of the reasons it was so demanding is that it came with about a dozen sliders that you could push WAY past what the console version did in terms of view distance/detail/whatever. People would push every slider to the max and then complain that the game doesn't run at "max" settings very well.

In GTA5, they have the standard settings and then another section of advanced settings that are turned off by default. That whole section comes with a performance hit warning label.

-Byshop

Avatar image for rogelio22
rogelio22

2477

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#42  Edited By rogelio22
Member since 2006 • 2477 Posts

Ok im loving this so far looks like im holding a rock solid 60fps at 4k! I have all aa off, ao on normal and post fx on normal. Everything else cranked up all the way.. Its says im using around 6900MBs so split that in half and it should be 3450. Right under my 970s 3.5gbs. Full specs are i52500k@4.4 ghz, 8gb ram and 2 970s also regular 1tb 7200rpm hdd..

Edit.. I guess that extra 1.5 yrs of development time really payed off! Nice job rockstar!

Avatar image for mastershake575
mastershake575

8574

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#45  Edited By mastershake575
Member since 2007 • 8574 Posts

@Installing said:

A $500+ GPU. Is that meant to be impressive or were we all expecting so little performance wise?

Usually PC games (especially ones that aren't exclusive) struggle big time with the advanced options (most muti platform games are near impossible to run all advanced options on, even with thousands of dollars worth of GPUs). Raw power cannot overcome the sloppy coding

Him getting the advanced settings turned on all while playing at a solid resolution (1440p) on just a single GPU is defiantly something worthy of noting (it shows good optimization and coding on Rockstars part, something they haven't always been notorious for).

As you read more benchmarks and do some yourself, you will notice this trend as well (hope this clears it all up for you)

Avatar image for JigglyWiggly_
JigglyWiggly_

24625

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#46 JigglyWiggly_
Member since 2009 • 24625 Posts

@Chatch09 said:

@JigglyWiggly_: Should've been a scene where Michael calls an old friend, then there should be an "L" on the mini-map while playing as Michael.

Yup, thanks a lot.

Avatar image for ribstaylor1
Ribstaylor1

2186

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#47 Ribstaylor1
Member since 2014 • 2186 Posts

I havent been able to play my boxed copy due to the fact I don't have internet back at my house where my rig is stationed, so the mandatory 5gb patch they couldn't be bothered to put on one of the 7 fucking disks is keeping me from playing it outright.

Avatar image for wis3boi
wis3boi

32507

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#48  Edited By wis3boi
Member since 2005 • 32507 Posts

@Byshop said:

@Installing said:
@Hydrolex said:

OMG ! Running the game MAXED out at 1440p with my GTX 980.

A $500+ GPU. Is that meant to be impressive or were we all expecting so little performance wise?

You'd be surprised at how many games won't run maxed at 1440p with a single 980. The difference between 1080p and 1440p may not seem like much, but it's pushing nearly twice as many pixels. On my box it runs around 80-100fps in single GPU mode which for a brand new AAA title is actually really impressive.

One thing I did notice, though. Many people complained about GTA4 being terribly optimized on PC. It was demanding, but one of the reasons it was so demanding is that it came with about a dozen sliders that you could push WAY past what the console version did in terms of view distance/detail/whatever. People would push every slider to the max and then complain that the game doesn't run at "max" settings very well.

In GTA5, they have the standard settings and then another section of advanced settings that are turned off by default. That whole section comes with a performance hit warning label.

-Byshop

That traffic slider....at max, time square had like 150 cars in it, absolutely ruined the framerate.

Avatar image for BassMan
BassMan

17795

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 225

User Lists: 0

#49  Edited By BassMan  Online
Member since 2002 • 17795 Posts

@ribstaylor1 said:

I havent been able to play my boxed copy due to the fact I don't have internet back at my house where my rig is stationed, so the mandatory 5gb patch they couldn't be bothered to put on one of the 7 fucking disks is keeping me from playing it outright.

I have been downloading this fuckin 5 GB patch for an hour now. Was getting 30 KB/sec at one point. 20 years ago I would have been impressed, but this is just fuckin ridiculous. They are too cheap to lease more servers for the launch. Fuckin joke. The game ships unfinished and then they release a day one patch that takes forever to download. Thanks Rockstar.

Avatar image for wis3boi
wis3boi

32507

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#50 wis3boi
Member since 2005 • 32507 Posts

@whalefish82 said:

@wis3boi said:

maxed, 1440p, on a 970, 60fps, maxed 1080p 100+ fps in many places. Amazing game

What are your settings? The reason I ask is because I have 8gb ram, a stock 3570k (just meeting the recommended) and 970, but can't max the game out in 1080 with 60fps. I have the latest Nvidia driver but had to put grass to very high, shadows to high, high res shadows off, water reflection MSAA off and turn down the LOD slider. This is with FXAA, MSAA x2 and TXAA on. Are you playing without AA or something?

everything is as high as it could possibly go, with aa at 2x