I am not sure I would go that far. It seems all GTA games get a pass because it's "GTA" and open world. GTA IV's graphics were pretty much crap from day 1 - the game really shines when modded though. While the graphics and draw distance are impressive for an open-world style game, when we gauge the graphics for any style game, they are not really that impressive. The character models, textures, animation do not look and feel next generation like say Star Citizen does.
I mean can we really compare the detailed characters/faces of Crysis 3 to this game? What about the amazing amount of foliage and world detail of the Witcher 3? This game was always designed for PS360 generation. Don't get me wrong, it did get a nice facelift on the PC and the game looks miles better than the console version, but this is not some Far Cry, Doom 3 or Crysis 1/3 moment in PC gaming, or even in regard to 2015 gaming. This game doesn't even come close to the graphics of Ryse Son of Rome or The Order: 1886 (or say what we've seen from the Uncharted 4 gameplay). Also, looking at the performance, it's MSAA and grass that's bringing down the performance a lot, not necessarily next generation high polygon count models or next gen physics effects.
By the time games like Just Cause 3 or Deus Ex: Mankind Divided come out on next gen game engines, I feel like this game will have aged a great deal. A true next gen PC game does not age fast (see Metro series, Crysis 1/3 series). Now this doesn't take away from the gameplay of GTA V but I do not find the graphics impressive at all -- in my opinion no one in this thread posted even a single screenshot that was jaw dropping. Maybe I am expecting too much out of next gen PC games? I mean compared to AC Unity and Watch Dogs, GTA V is awesome.
Glad to see the game is decently optimized and CF/SLI work well right out of the gate.
Nice video and great performance on your cards! The lighting and road textures look great. This game is going to look spectacular once modded for years to come. Made me laugh during your driving and swimming portions. :thumbsup:
Wait wait wait wait wait....
In the recent interview they said a 7870 would be able to get you 60fps at 1080p, yet on your first benchmark it shows that using the standard textures the 7870 is pulling mid 30's. What's the deal with that? Are you telling me 7870 and 270x users are going to have to play with below standard settings in order to gain 60fps? Thats a joke, considering its the recommended system specs.
Also, as expected, the polish site makes AMD look even worse.
Ya know, back in the day, there were demo / shareware versions of games, people could easily see, how well games run on their PC, how it looks, etc. Thought, that was a great model. Nowadays, you have to buy before you can draw any worthy conclusion. Basing your virtual opinion on some dodgy web sites / etc. This is what I call "progress"Would also like to say something else....
This isn't directed towards you, just in general.
I can't stand it when people who don't even own a game just jump in threads to trash on them. It gets old after awhile. In my opinion, they are worthless.
a lot of people are satisfied with the performance of gta5, right out the gate.
You have the 4GB model? That's not common. Glad, it runs fine for youMy GTX 770 does well in this game at 1920x1200 with all settings on maximum.
Video ram usage is 3.8 GB
You have the 4GB model? That's not common. Glad, it runs fine for you
whose review is to be trusted?
Are you for real?
Do you think most every site just makes up numbers or something?
There are so many settings and so many variations in how each site benchmarked gta5. There are millions of possible scenarios, no need to invent conspiracy theories.
Some reviews use multiplayer scenes, some use single player multiplied by the massive open world locations multiplied by the route and actions the reviewer repeats multiplied by the hundreds of possible setting combinations.
It yeah, if you choose to see it like that, just pick the benchmark results you like the most and conclude all the other ones can't be trusted :thumbsdown:
You need to know how cards perform in general and then compare it to benchmarkwhose review is to be trusted?
whose review is to be trusted?
There are loads of graphic options, loads and loads of them. More options than any recent game I have ever played. Look at last link in the OP and check out the settings page in the review.
I have no idea what you mean by standard settings but the game has suggested settings which you can chose to ignore. There are plenty of options to tweak desired performance and I have read enough post now to see that a lot of people are satisfied with the performance of gta5, right out the gate. I am talking about people that don't have too of the line GPUs that are completely satisfied.
Would also like to say something else....
This isn't directed towards you, just in general.
I can't stand it when people who don't even own a game just jump in threads to trash on them. It gets old after awhile. In my opinion, they are worthless. (Edit: those post are worthless)
#s are all over the place
I'd trust the ones with the smaller #s though. their test is at least stressing the cards more
Computerbase, pcgameshardware and guru3d are sites that I trust. Not aways agree with they metodology but they are miles better that gamegpu, pclab, etc.whose review is to be trusted?
Computerbase, pcgameshardware and guru3d are sites that I trust. Not aways agree with they metodology but they are miles better that gamegpu, pclab, etc.
Did u check Guru3d benchmark settings?It seems reviews that use the auto bench test does not reflect in-game performance, because things differ greatly, depending on the in-game locations for the few reviews that have tested it (Guru3d, pcgamehardware.de etc).