Grand Theft Auto 4 - Specs on Official Site

http://www.rockstargames.com/IV/#?page=pc&content=information

 

must be 128bit card or higher then? I really want this game.

 

Much lower than the crazy nonsense I've been hearing. I think I might pick this up when it's released.

 

Really OLD. :/

 

yea seems like the original thread with the supposed requirements was correct after all

 

The same specs were released almost a month ago to IGN by Rockstar themselves.

 

aren't a nvidia 7900 and nvidia 8600 on par in terms of performance?

 

thats what i hear. doesn't make sense to me.

 

A card like an 8600 coupled w/ a Quad? Which doesn't even make sense compared to the minimum!?

What are they drinking? I want it.

 

My guess is it has to do with Vram. If you look on the left bother cards (min specs) show a 256mb while on the "recommended" they push for 512mb cards.. A lot of textures?

 

this is insane... You can't pair a quad and 8600m! That's completely stupid. And having a quad core as a system requirement is ridiculous in itself! That's like...what... 2% of gamers?!

 

Seems to be a very processor intensive game.

 

Looks like the game is optimized for quad core desktops.

Does this give me a reason to buy a quad core desktop? ... maybe

 

Jesus.. i thought ram requirement was 2gb?

 

I think Rockstar is sending a very subtle message to the PC platform, that being if you're a consumer intending to play on a laptop we aren't going to bother with you as a target demographic.

 

only time will tell, maybe its not so bad, remember assassin's creed requirements?

 

They are trying to tell you, get 1 from the local computer shop, GTA style!

 

i meet ALL the recommended requirements
doesnt mean im going to get it though - i think ill wait for some reviews

though the 32player online feature does sound pretty cool, i think i might wait for SR2 and ProtoType before i decide which on to get
i know im going to be waiting a while, SR2 doesnt come out til Feb i think and the last i heard about ProtoType was Jan release - is that still happening?

 

LOL, i only meet the RAM ))

Still, it was the same for Mass effect, and that one ran fine. I wonder if my 64 bit x1700 can survive this one as well

 

I have confidents in my laptop!

Hoping to run it near max settings....

 

Oh God, now I'm gonna have to commit grand theft just to get a computer to play this!

 

I really don't see why people are freaking out. OH MY A QUAD CORE! 2% of poops! Oh man!1e22423w354

It'll play fine on dual cores. Who ever really listens to what the side of the box says?

 

I've established the fact that the game will probably play fine on a dual core, but the point is that they have paired a quad core (high end) with a 8600GT! (mid range card) I mean, how many people do you know with this setup? I personally think they meant to put 8800 series card, because that would sync with the ATI recommendation of a 3870. Hopefully nobody will pay any attention to this, I just wish, in the case that somebody bases the fact of whether they buy this game on the system requirements, that they could be slightly more accurate.

 

Or maybe that it might now as graphically intensive as it will be CPU intensive. If you play the console version theres alot of stuff going on at once, alot of physics calculations.

 

Now all those people that say E8500s are better than Q6600s at games are going to be proven wrong.

Back to laptops:
I'm pretty sure it doesn't need a quad core. A dual core is probably sufficient if you turn down physics and post-processing. Maybe GTA4 just isn't graphically intensive. I really like games that incorporate a lot of physics because it makes the game much more realistic.

 

i should be fine for this. not sure if im going to get it, but if i do i should be able to run it.

 

a 8600 is lowend now. the new mid-range is 9600gt/hd4670/hd4830.
I hope I can run it on med-low with 40+. that would be awesome.

 

Nice, maybe I'll be vindicated for my Q6600 purchase.

As for who pairs an 8600 with a Q6600, Dell does, apparently, in their Vostro and Inspiron systems -- Although their top offering is a 2600 XT.

 

You guys need to stop worrying about it.

If you can play Fallout 3, Dead Space, Mass Effect, Crysis Warhead, Far Cry 2, then I'm willing to bet you can play GTA IV just fine.

 

If its physics related, shouldn't the phyx/cuda capabilities of the new Nvidias do more then the CPU?

 

My first question would have to be "WHY?"

I don't see what would make this game require such high requirements? Is it significantly different from the X360 version?

 

Just a random guess, would it be because of the PC video editor?

 

You mean besides the fact that the XBOX has 3 monster cores and still freezes up during gameplay?

You guys can't be serious with this " OMG QUADCORE NOOOOO" talk. Play the game until you get to at least 30% completion, and look around. A lot is happening, a lot will happen. That game is no joke.

 

What??????????????

http://www.gtaforums.com/index.php?showtopic=377735&st=0

 

Difference between minimum and maximum settings.

 

redda2 thats bullsh!t obviously...i mean Crysis was shy to do that lol

 

That picture can't be right.

Difference between max and min details a couple of windows? And not even on the farthest object?

Kinda shady...

 

This game is turning more and more into a worse version of Crysis... I reckon i could play it on High settings, but only at 1280x1024. Not too bad in the end REALLY... Thats if this is reliable, which i some how doubt it is.

 

I doubt it. The 9800M GT is worse than the desktop HD3870, and thats required for recommended settings.

Factor in your mobile CPU and its relatively low clocks compared to E8000 cards, i dont think high at that res will do.

 

Thats if you pay attention to the requirements; which i honestly can't believe. Anyway, only time will tell, i'll let you guys know as soon as my notebook and the game arrive.

 

i was wondering about the same thing here... shadows are the same? -.-

 

Hardly. Quads are becoming standard in medium to higher end desktops. Most people playing these games are NOT notebook users. The mobile gaming market constitutes a small fraction of the PC gaming market as a whole.

Give me a break. This is a terribly ignorant comment. Quite simply, a quad core only uses as many cores as the application is capable of handling. Most games to-date really only use core, some are designed for dual core, few (perhaps GTA4 will be the first?) can address 4 cores. So if the quad core uses only one core, it will function no better than a dual core of the same processor speed with similar cache. Since the E8500 has a much higher clock speed, the q6600 cannot compare in single threaded applications.

All told, I don't understand the fuss. This game is huge, with complex physics, and detailed textures. It needs a lot of video and CPU processing power to run! Why is this a surprise, or even a negative? There are many gaming rigs out there that can handle this, but most notebooks, even many designed for gaming, may struggle. Guess why - because they don't develop games for notebooks with castrated video capabilities. If you want a real gaming machine, either pony up $3000+ for a hard-core gaming notebook or spend less than half of that on a desktop designed for gaming.

 

First of all, i thought that laptop gamers have peaked above 40% this year,

Secondly , there are some games that support Quadcores, that are devil may cry 4, Crysis and Race Driver : GRID, but NONE of those games said that quadcores are recommended, maybe they are trying to tell customers if you are willing to play PERFECTLY then you'll need a Quadcore, lets hope for that, otherwise, Recommended settings are always inaqurate and games always exceed the recommended setting by far (IE:Crysis) rofl

 

The 9800mGT is slightly better, based on the 3D marks and real world gaming bench's I've seen.

 

that was before the latest driver hotfixes i believe...

 

The 9800m gtx is less powerful than the desktop 8800 gt.Go Figure.

 

Really looking forward to this game even though Il be playing on Low,I dont care this game looks fantastic.Just hoping it doesnt lag for me with the video editor.

 

Whoooa did anyone read this?

Now read it again. And keep reading it til it goes through your head. For those people saying "meh the game wasnt all that", you must have been blind to the hundreds of objects interacting in any given scene. And god the car explosions alone look like tiny nuclear warheads.

<object width='425' height='344'><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/uXKCe4Polyo&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/uXKCe4Polyo&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width='425' height='344'></embed></object>

Notice the choppiness on the console? Skip to 2:00 for to get to the point. I -seriously- don't understand why people underestimate the game .

 

This may indeed be a typo, but if it is not, would it really be that surprising? Think about it: this game was made for consoles first and the PC afterwards. The console GPUs are the contemporaries of the GeForce 7 (PS3) and Radeon X1K (360) series. They were powerful for their times, but they're now 2-3 years old which means the modern high-end stuff is twice to 4 times as good. On the other hand, the processors that were crammed into those consoles were absurdly powerful for their time (3x3.2 GHz for the 360 and (6+1)x3.2 GHz for the PS3) and are only now being eclipsed (I would guess that the recently released Nehalem processors outclass the Cell, but not much else does).

Since few people are making games that are truly PC-exclusive and I have yet to hear of a reliable release date for the next generation of consoles, I would expect games to rely on processors more and more while the use of graphics cards stays about the same (the 8800/3780 will do).

 

Yeah, processor bottlenecks may start to pop up more often as a result.