Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Anybody know GTA V's requirements, PC?


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 NabeelFarooqui9000

NabeelFarooqui9000

    Vandal

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 15 posts
  • No Flag 

Posted 14 July 2013 - 06:29 PM

ok, so i know that the PC version hasn't been announced yet but if you could guess the requirements then what would you say?

I am actually going to buy the PC version because I don't have a PS3 or a Xbox, and have a very cheap laptop, whose specs are:

 

intel i3 2.2 ghz processor

4gb ram

nvidia geforce 410 GPU

500gb HDD

 

I have been able to play GTA IV, Assaissins Creed Revelations (2011), and NFS MW: 2012. plus Hitman Absolution 2012.

 

Please you tech. guys, help me!!!!

 

(can i run it?)


Edited by NabeelFarooqui9000, 14 July 2013 - 06:29 PM.


#2 BlackListedB

BlackListedB

    Executioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,440 posts

Posted 14 July 2013 - 10:23 PM

Nobody KNOWS any requirements obviously, but base the decision on how well GTA IV Episodes from Liberty City works on any computer you own. I've done tests on first generation PCIexpress with Pentium D, precursor of Core2 technology for Intel, and any AMD64 x2 or newer will ACTUALLY run GTA IV so there's no worry about RAGE not working on technology based on Direct X 9 or newer, but you obviously need Shader Model 3.0 on up, once you jump to newer Core2 chipsets for instance, you have Direct X11 or 10, and SM 4 on up. (some YTers have shown Intel GMA graphics trying to run GTA IV, but with some poor results, Haswell will clearly dominate in fixing the issue of onboard graphics) Also keep in mind graphic resolutions, try and run on low if you need to, it will always be good enough when frame rates are up to par!

 

Graphic performance is key to those factors along with what type memory is used for graphics, remember discussions about GDDR versus DDR for video, there is a clear difference.

 

Dedicated, or Shared System ram can help, but there is also Memory Interfacing as a factor, this is improved with later RAM, so entry and mid level systems again revert to small memory interface numbers. I mentioned early ATI or nVidia I had that was cheap actually at a 128bit memory interface, and nVidia's 8800 Ultra is above 300bits, but typically this is never all that high. 512MB for any dedicated RAM is what you should be looking for, typically you only have 512 or 1GB on an affordable budget, as options.

 

If you do prefer ATI all around, AMD specifically, keep in mind that AMD is and has struggled against the superiority of Intel Core tech. They still don't have a clear advantage even now, with multiple cores that seem to impress, but when benchmarked, they can't really topple Intels' 3D transister Cores now in their 4th generation.

 

What's confusing is that Core2 goes back to 2007. Core Duo to Core2Duo and Quad coming out a bit later.

 

No matter if you have that available, even a HyperThreading Pentium can do the chore, but obviously at a disadvantage, add HTT to a multiple core and you're even better suited, this allows multi threaded programmed apps, but also multiple things being done by the operator as well. More memory and more CPU horsepower are always the key factors for power users


Edited by BlackListedB, 14 July 2013 - 10:29 PM.


#3 amazingdude

amazingdude

    Executioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,130 posts
  • No Flag 

Posted 15 July 2013 - 09:31 AM

R* said that they only can consider on making a PC version. Visit their website http://rockstargames.com/V

Hard to say but we can only predict that any pc that can play IV without much of a lag can play GTA V at average.

Edited by amazingdude, 15 July 2013 - 09:49 AM.


#4 NabeelFarooqui9000

NabeelFarooqui9000

    Vandal

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 15 posts
  • No Flag 

Posted 15 July 2013 - 11:15 AM

hm.... I can play GTA IV at around medium to sometimes high, i usually set everything to High or Medium, and the sliders to 40% or lower.

 

Time will tell, won't it?

 

By the way, the PC versions will eventually come out, right?

 

How long do you think? how much time did IV's PC version take?



#5 amazingdude

amazingdude

    Executioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,130 posts
  • No Flag 

Posted 15 July 2013 - 01:59 PM

2nd December 2008 after they released it for ps3 and Xbox in April. They were trying to release on all of the platform at the sane time but they faced some bugs in the pc port.


Like I said it's R*, They are highly unpredictable but the chances of V arriving on pc next year is close to 80%.

#6 NabeelFarooqui9000

NabeelFarooqui9000

    Vandal

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 15 posts
  • No Flag 

Posted 15 July 2013 - 05:59 PM

what? it tool 8 months for the pc version? And i also remember that drunk camera, plus dozens of other little bugs and glitches that got fixed over time (1.0.4.0/1.0.7.0)

 

I hope V isn't like that.



#7 Chris

Chris

    Limbal Rings

  • Administrators
  • 10,939 posts

Posted 16 July 2013 - 12:04 PM

Look at the specs for Max Payne 3 PC version. Now increase them.

 

But basically no, you're not, that's a pretty low spec PC you have. In fact I don't even believe you can play IV on that. If you can you must have it on literally the lowest settings possible, like lower than console. It's not playable like that.



#8 NabeelFarooqui9000

NabeelFarooqui9000

    Vandal

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 15 posts
  • No Flag 

Posted 16 July 2013 - 12:40 PM

aw, well time to either get a PS3 or upgrade my laptop, which is not possible.

 

Or I should just sell this, buy a desktop, then upgrade that one. Hm.....



#9 NabeelFarooqui9000

NabeelFarooqui9000

    Vandal

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 15 posts
  • No Flag 

Posted 16 July 2013 - 01:29 PM

um..... i have decided something, http://www.sevenforu...udget-help.html

 if this is spam then i'll delete it.



#10 BlackListedB

BlackListedB

    Executioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,440 posts

Posted 20 July 2013 - 03:34 PM

Chris, I'd been reading that because of Nehalem's technology, it could, in theory, eclipse all the prior generation Core2Duos and Quads in performance, even with lesser cores or clocks, etc. That the past Core2 operates on slower bus speeds, and even the commication standard between cores and system, the Front Side Bus is going away in favor of something much more efficient. AMD has striven to do this since the Athlon I believe, and come up with a slower clock speed CPU that could beat many Pentium4s based on efficency. In the world of GPUs, you have CrossfireX and SLI that stand to aid just the graphics end, and memory buffers and interfaces. I believe a more modest Nehalem CORE platform should be able to handle anything a Core2 with moderate to high specs could do. I can't benchtest them in person though, but what I read suggests the advancements should play a role. There is never a good comfort zone if everything in your system is getting taxed.

REFRESHER COURSE:

For those not technically clued in, Again, Intel's i945 chipset is the first to support actual DUAL CORE processors, Pentium D is two Pressler cores glued together, operating on one FSB. It had too many issues to gain wide favor, a key issue is heat, but it can be controlled. It also didn't deliver twice the performance of a single core, and can be bested by a HyperThreading Intel I believe.

Core Duo came next, on a 533Mhz FSB, then 667Mhz with Meron true Core2Duo (Core2's first appearence predates Core2Quad, and also runs on the modest 533Mhz front Side Bus)

 

After widespread adoption of Meron, came a die shrink of Penryn. What's somewhat confusing is actual CPU generational names like Yorktown and Gulftown, but if you want to nail down what CPU class and group you need, this is good to get to know in your head.

Sockets and associated CPUs that you can drop right in to perk up what you already own.

Penryn is a 45nm CPU that is found on both laptops and desktops, it is the last before Intel unvieled the Nehalem, now in it's 4th Generation with Haswell (Broadwell is shelved for now). The very confusing factor is that Intel opted to keep using it's Core name brand across all of these spanning 2006-7 to the present time period, which covers more years then most would assume!


Edited by BlackListedB, 20 July 2013 - 03:44 PM.


#11 Victor_Vance

Victor_Vance

    Drop Man

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 290 posts

Posted 20 July 2013 - 06:22 PM

BlacklistedB, seriously are you trolling?

#12 BlackListedB

BlackListedB

    Executioner

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,440 posts

Posted 25 July 2013 - 01:10 PM

^ Are You?? 

I always read up on computers, whether after the fact of buying something or before, so I base my information on lots of sources, what have you got to counter?? Nothing from the looks of things






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users