Performance testing. Grand theft auto v

The fifth numbered part of Grand Theft Auto, having successfully emptied the wallets of console players, after a long delay, came to personal computers. A large open world and three crazy bandit heroes await those who are ready to share their adventures. But today we will not talk about how GTA 5 can entertain the player, and not about the features of the gameplay. It will be about performance and fine-tuning of graphic parameters.

GTA V offers a diverse game world with completely different locations - the business districts of the metropolis, slums, industrial complexes, mountain ranges, forests and deserts. Huge scale, great variety and detailed study of the environment. You can enjoy some of the views from the lower screenshots in 2560x1440 resolution.

The game pleases with good clear textures and relief surfaces, for which parallax mapping is actively used. Even ordinary lawns have a raised texture rather than the usual painted texture.

As a clear illustration of the work of parallax mapping, here is a screenshot, which at the same time clearly shows the work of the effect of changing the depth of field, which is actively used in the game.

This lens effect blurs the background for a more natural perception of the overall panorama.

The time of day and weather in the game changes. All objects cast correct soft shadows away from the sun. Cute sunrises and sunsets are complemented by rainbow effects.

The drawing range of objects is very high. By default, there is a noticeable change in the clarity of details as you move away from the camera. When using additional settings, the effect is neutralized. This will be discussed in more detail below.

General physics of interaction of objects at the traditional level for such games. The surroundings are mostly static, but the pillars and display cases are beating. In story missions with big explosions, GTA 5 shows a good show with a bunch of bits and pieces. Control and physical model of car behavior at the usual GTA level, without any complications. In particular, only very serious damage affects the behavior of the machine. Externally, the cars look great - they shine in the sun, reflect all surrounding buildings and lights on a smooth glossy surface.

Water surfaces look nice, but nothing more. In Watch Dogs, the water was more beautiful and livelier.

If you make a general comparison of graphics with Watch Dogs, then you can feel the technological advantage of the Ubisoft game. But GTA V has a more meticulous attention to detail and more external variety.

The computer version of GTA 5 has a lot of graphical settings. Not all of them are clear to the average player. Some do not always directly indicate the effect that they have on the overall picture quality. Sometimes the very meaning of the settings is lost due to the free translation of specific names. We will help you sort out all their diversity. Let's see how the individual parameters affect the image, and how it affects performance. Based on the results, it will be possible to draw conclusions about which settings are most critical for performance, which ones hit the visual beauty a lot, and which ones do not. This information will be relevant for owners of mid-range video cards and below. On the basis of our guide, it will be possible to select the optimal ratio of parameters that will increase performance with minimal loss of picture quality.

Those who want to get the most out of the game will not be forgotten either. There will be a comparison of different anti-aliasing modes. Let's find out which of them are the most successful, which are the most resource-intensive. Let's explore the impact of "advanced image settings" that raise the graphics bar beyond what the game offers by default.

Test configurations

Main test bench:

• processor: Intel Core i7-3930K (3, [email protected], 4 GHz, 12 MB);
• cooler: Thermalright Venomous X;
• motherboard: ASUS Rampage IV Formula / Battlefield 3 (Intel X79 Express);
• memory: Kingston KHX2133C11D3K4 / 16GX (4x4 GB, [email protected] MHz, 10-11-10-28-1T);
• system drive: WD3200AAKS (320 GB, SATA II)
• power supply unit: Seasonic SS-750KM (750 W);
• monitor: ASUS PB278Q (2560x1440, 27 ″);

• geForce driver: NVIDIA GeForce 350.12;
• driver of other Radeon: ATI Catalyst 15.4 beta.

This system was used to test the performance of various graphics modes.

For tests of processors, an additional test bench with the following configuration was used:

• processor # 1: Intel Pentium G3258 (3.2 GHz nominal, 3 MB);
• processor # 2: Intel Core i7-4770K (3.5 GHz nominal, 8 MB);
• motherboard: ASRock Z97 Anniversary (Intel Z97);
• memory: GoodRAM GY1600D364L10 / 16GDC (2x8 GB, 1600 MHz, 10-10-10-28-2T);
• system drive: ADATA SX900 256 GB (256 GB, SATA 6 Gb / s);
• power supply unit: Chieftec CTG-750C (750 W);
• monitor: LG 23MP75HM-P (1920x1080, 23 ″);

• operating system: Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 x64;
• geForce driver: NVIDIA GeForce 350.12.

Testing technique

Testing was carried out using the built-in benchmark, which includes five test scenes. The average fps for each scene was taken into account and the final average value was calculated. To reduce the error, four benchmark runs were performed. Note that the test results are not displayed in the game, all data is saved at c: \\ Users \\ Username \\ Documents \\ Rockstar Games \\ GTA V \\ Benchmarks as a text file.

The logs also record the minimum fps for each test scene. But these values \u200b\u200bare too unstable and differ with each new run. At the same time, even in the case of real "lags", noticeable to the naked eye, these values \u200b\u200bwere slightly different from the minimum fps on the cards, which produced a smooth picture. We ended up using Fraps for additional monitoring. And the minimum fps on the graphs is the average minimum value at the end of each of the four runs of the benchmark, recorded by the program.

When considering the effect of settings on performance, one video card will be used - an unreferenced GeForce GTX 760 2GB with frequencies at the level of standard versions. The order of testing is as follows: the configuration of the maximum graphics settings without anti-aliasing is taken at a resolution of 1920x1080, one of the parameters is changed, performance is tested at different quality levels of this parameter, comparative visual materials are provided with a demonstration of the difference in picture quality. Then all parameters are set back to the initial maximum value, and the change of another parameter with the corresponding tests begins.

Actively ignoring constraints, which allows you to use the most difficult parameters. All tests were carried out in the DirectX 11 rendering mode, since this API has long been the main one even for budget graphics solutions. But the game also supports DirectX 10.1 and DirectX 10.

The order of studying individual parameters corresponds to their order in the game menu. An exception was made for the shadow settings, of which there are several, and they are to a certain extent interconnected. After considering the main parameters of the graphics, we will move on to additional ones, where a phased joint inclusion of all items will be performed.

The next stage of the article is comparative tests of different AMD and NVIDIA video cards with high graphics quality. In the end, there will be testing of processor dependence using Intel CPUs of different price categories.

Anti-aliasing modes

The game supports FXAA and MSAA anti-aliasing. For users of GeForce video cards, TXAA anti-aliasing is also available. The latter is activated after enabling MSAA in the settings as an additional option. Urban surroundings and industrial landscapes are always full of straight lines, so that the stepped edges of objects are clearly visible here. The stepped outlines of the car against the background of a light road surface are no less visible. So you can't do without anti-aliasing. You can evaluate the effect of activating different anti-aliasing methods in comparison with the mode without anti-aliasing from the lower screenshots.

The color saturation of the car in the foreground changes slightly due to the subtle fog effect. We do not pay attention to this, we carefully study the surrounding objects and elements. For clarity, let's compare the same fragments of each screenshot.

I would like to note the good quality of FXAA, which is not the case in all games. The worst effect of smoothing "steps" at the boundaries of objects is given by MSAA in 2x mode, which is quite expected. Switching multisampling to 4x mode improves the picture. The transition to TXAA provides even smoother edges. And from this point of view, this mode is the most effective. But with it, the overall picture is blurred a little, the clarity of details is lost. Compare the road surface, grass and shingles in the larger screenshots - these are the elements that make the difference most clearly. The relief texture of the grass with TXAA is generally lost. FXAA gives a clearer picture.

The best balance between anti-aliasing and clarity is provided by MSAA 4x. Note the crane and the neighboring house in the background. With MSAA, they are clearer, even the inscription on the poster appears, which is not at all visible with FXAA.

Note also that the game has an interesting parameter "MSAA for reflections". It is logical to assume that it affects the smoothing of the edges of reflections, which are most often seen on the surface of cars. In practice, we did not detect any difference in reflections with and without MSAA 4x. Perhaps we are talking about reflections on other surfaces. It is possible that the very effect of this smoothing is poorly expressed.

Now is the time to take a look at how all of these modes affect performance. Experienced graphics card - GeForce GTX 760.

Activating FXAA relative to the mode without anti-aliasing gives a drop in fps by only 4%. Enabling MSAA 2x relative to the mode without anti-aliasing on the test card results in a performance drop of 21% in the minimum setting and up to 30% in the average game frame rate. Changing to MSAA 4x gives a 16% reduction relative to the simpler multisampling mode. TXAA 4x is given 3-4% harder. If we additionally enable an anti-aliasing mode for reflections of a similar quality to MSAA 4x, then we get the frame rate on the same level as the TXAA mode, which is 46-57% lower than the initial level without AA.

FXAA gives good visual effect and has minimal impact on performance. MSAA is slightly better in terms of clarity, but the performance losses are impressive. Such a serious decrease in fps may be due to insufficient memory. Even without anti-aliasing, the game demonstrates that it will use about 2.5 GB at 1920x1080.

Population

Three points are related to the density of people on the streets of the city. These are Population Density, Population Variety, and Distance Scaling. Each has its own scale with 10 gradations. The first two points are quite obvious - they regulate the number of people on the streets and the use of various models for them. Distance Scaling is probably the distance they will appear. We gradually reduced all parameters from the maximum to half (we will consider it 100% and 50%). Based on the results of several minutes of playing in different modes, one can state the minimum difference in the number of people on the streets. Presumably, this also affects the traffic density on the roads. You don't notice any of this unless you deliberately focus on the task at hand.

At the bottom left is a screenshot of the mode when all parameters are at maximum. On the right is an image of a similar place, when all three parameters are reduced to 50%.

We did not lower these parameters to zero, since even a change from 100% to 50% did not give any significant difference in the frame rate, which is clearly seen in the lower graph.

Reducing "population" and "diversity" has no effect. Changing the distance leads to a meager increase in fps. The result is expected, because a weak adjustment of the population density will not affect the workload of the GPU. This is more relevant for the CPU. Decreasing these parameters can have a positive effect on weak CPUs. More or less modern systems you can immediately set them to the maximum.

Texture quality

It's time to experiment with Texture Quality. As noted above, in Ultra quality in Full HD without anti-aliasing, the game already consumes up to 2.5 GB of video memory. It is logical to assume that graphics cards with 2 GB may experience problems because of this. And reducing the quality of textures for ordinary users will seem the most obvious solution to increase productivity. But is it? Let's figure it out now.

First, let's compare the image quality at the highest, highest and standard texture levels.

Texture Quality Very High

Texture quality high

Texture Quality Normal

Not everything is different. The first screenshots show a gradual decrease in the clarity of the elements of the environment - patterns on the carpet and sofa, paintings on the wall, a slight change in the texture of jeans. In the second scene, the difference in the quality of the textures of the sidewalks and the road surface is striking.

The effect of texture quality on overall performance is minimal. When switching from maximum to high, it is almost invisible. Switching to standard mode gives a ridiculous gain of a couple of percent, and this despite the fact that in this mode the consumption of video memory finally drops below the 2 GB bar. So the quality of textures can be set to the highest position even on average video cards.

Shader quality

Next in line is the Shader Quality parameter. Three levels - from standard to very high. In theory, using simpler shaders should dramatically affect the quality of all surfaces.

Texture Shader Very High

Texture shader high

Texture Shader Normal

In fact, changing this parameter only affects the surface of the earth. As you decrease from a maximum level to a high level, the effect of the embossed surfaces becomes weaker. In normal mode, the ground and grass completely lose volume - everything is flat. And even the clarity of surfaces is sharply reduced, as when the quality of textures is lowered.

Between Very High and High, the difference is less than 3%. Switching to the simplest mode gives a noticeable increase in performance, at the level of 12-14% relative to High. And for the first time we see an increase in the minimum fps with a decrease in a specific graphics parameter. Hence, it is highly critical to overall performance. But the image quality also suffers greatly from the minimum shader level. It makes sense to use the standard shader level only on very weak video cards.

Reflection quality

This parameter (Reflection Quality) affects all reflective surfaces - cars, shop windows, windows, etc. Four levels of quality. You can evaluate their impact on the overall picture by looking at the screenshots below. The rest of the graphics parameters, recall, are at the maximum level without anti-aliasing. Half of the screenshots are at 1920x1080, half at 2560x1440.

Reflection Ultra

Reflection Very High

Reflection High

Reflection Normal

In the first scene, we turn our attention to the surface of the cars and the shop window. As the Reflection Quality decreases, the reflections gradually lose their sharpness and become more blurry. And at the standard level (Normal) they practically disappear, there are only glare and frosted glass windows. At the same time, even the advertising stretch on the left side of the frame looks different - the effect of iridescent gloss near the inscriptions is lost. In the night scene, everything is similar - the reflections of the lights on the surface of the cars lose their shape, and then completely disappear.

It should be noted that highly detailed reflections fully correspond to real objects of the environment. This is not Watch Dodgs, when the windows of the buildings reflected not the opposite side of the street, but some standard image for everyone.

Reflections have a significant impact on performance as well. The decrease in quality from the highest level to a very high one is most strongly affected - an increase in fps at the level of 8-11%. And again there is an increase in the minimum fps, which is the most critical. There is little difference in frame rate between standard and high, but the picture is completely different. So we do not recommend lowering this parameter to a minimum.

Water quality

Everything is quite obvious. Changing Water Quality affects the display of water. Three levels of quality, which can be assessed by the below screenshots.

Water very high

Water high

Water Normal

The difference between the maximum and average levels is difficult to see. But the standard mode is fundamentally different - it is easier to detail waves, less reflections and glare.

Higher water quality regimes have no effect on overall productivity. Enabling the simplest display mode allows you to win up to 3%.

Particle quality

A parameter that controls the amount of particles. Originally called Particles Quality. Its influence is quite obvious, only the particles themselves in the game are not enough, except perhaps sparks and fragments during collisions or explosions. There are no wind-blown foliage or newspapers in GTA 5. So it's not easy to tell the difference between the maximum particle level and the minimum.

Here we will do without comparative screenshots. And even in testing we will limit ourselves to extreme values \u200b\u200b- a very high level and standard.

The minimum difference. So it makes sense to reduce this parameter only on very weak systems.

Grass quality

The Grass Quality parameter affects the display of grass. Four discrete values \u200b\u200bfrom standard to ultra. For comparison, we have combined fragments of the same frame from the built-in game benchmark in one image.

Decreasing the quality of the grass by one value slightly affects its density. Further decline is accompanied by the disappearance of fern shadows. In the simplest mode, the large grass disappears. This parameter does not in any way affect the density and quality of the shrub, does not affect moss and small grass, which is realized using embossed texturing technologies.

Significant impact on minimum fps. Hence, the quality of the grass is very important to the overall performance. Switching from maximum quality to very high quality allows you to increase the minimum fps by 12%, the next decrease gives an increase of another 8%. Between the extreme positions of quality (Ultra and Normal) there is a difference of 29% in the minimum setting and 9% in the average game frame rate. Special effects and post-processing

Let's combine several parameters into one benchmarking test. In Russian translation, special effects is the name of the Post FX parameter, which is responsible for the quality of post processing. This concerns the Motion Blur and Depth of Field effect. There is still a weakly pronounced lens effect like chromatic aberration. At the maximum level of post-effects, it is possible to manually set the intensity of the Motion Blur and activate / deactivate Depth of Field. In our tests, we used Motion Blur at 50% intensity. Although in GTA it is not aggressive, so there will be no strong blurring of objects even at 100%.

The effect of changing the depth of field is used very actively. In a balanced position, it only slightly blurs the background.

The blur distance depends on the gaze and constantly changes, creating the effect of gradually adapting the gaze to focus on specific objects. With a sharp change in gaze, the depth of the focal length gradually changes from a minimum to a higher. If the camera is aimed at a close object, then a slight blur will hide objects at a medium distance, increasing the effect of concentration. All this is implemented very realistically and without particularly aggressive blurring, without creating discomfort in the game.

Decreasing the special effects from the highest level to the highest level automatically turns off Depth of Field. Dropping to the minimum (standard) level prevents Motion Blur from being activated.

Testing was carried out at maximum effect level with 50% Motion Blur. The next position is to lower the special effects by one point with the Motion Blur turned off completely. The next downgrade by one more point is accompanied by an obvious disconnection of Depth of Field. Next comes the minimum level of special effects.

Motion blur has little impact on overall performance. But disabling DOF with a corresponding decrease in the overall level of post-effects gives a sharp jump in performance at the level of 14-22%. Given the widespread use of the depth of field effect, this effect on performance is quite expected.

Tessellation

Not without tessellation support. During our acquaintance with the game, we noticed its influence only on trees and palms. And, most likely, the possibilities of tessellation in the game are limited to this.

Tessellation Very High

Tessellation high

Tessellation Normal

Tessellation Off

As the quality of tessellation decreases, the trunk of a palm tree loses its complex geometric structure, becoming completely smooth without this mode. At the same time, the influence of tessellation on the geometry of the tree trunk located in the background is also noticeable, although the effect is not so obvious. There is almost no difference between the highest and highest quality tessellations. Only with a very careful study of the screenshots can you notice the complexity of the geometry in some areas.

In our benchmarking test, we missed the high setting level.

No difference between different tessellation levels. And even turning it off has little effect on the overall performance level. So feel free to set this parameter to a high or maximum level. It makes sense to reduce tessellation on old DirectX 11 video cards, which are much weaker in processing tessellated surfaces than modern solutions.

Shadow quality

Let's move on to studying shadows. The Shadow Quality parameter affects the overall quality and detail of shadows.

Shadow very high

Shadow high

Shadow Normal

As the parameter decreases, the detail of the shadows decreases, they become more blurry. In standard mode, their saturation is additionally lost, shadows from small details disappear altogether (note the shadows of the armrests and a weak shadow at the edge of the pool).

Another parameter important for overall performance. Lowering it to a high level increases the minimum fps by 8%. Reducing the quality of the shadows further results in a smaller increase in frame rate.

With the maximum quality of the shadows, you can increase the distance to load the detailed shadows in the advanced graphics settings. When the quality is reduced, this option is disabled. With an average quality of shadows, it makes no sense to chase the effect of soft shadows. If the quality is low, you can also opt out of global shading.

Soft shadows

The game supports several levels of implementation of the soft shadow effect with the ability to use NVIDIA PCSS or AMD CHS technologies. This effect itself adds realism, because in diffused sunlight, shadows do not have clear edges. In NVIDIA PCSS, shadows are calculated using even more complex algorithms, taking into account the removal of the shadow from its source. Therefore, for example, the upper part of the column shadow will be lighter than its lower part.

Soft Shadows NVIDIA PCSS

Soft Shadows AMD CHS

Soft shadows very high

Soft shadows high

Soft shadows

Soft shadows off

From the selected scene, you can immediately see that the detail of the shadow changes with distance from the character. It is also noteworthy that the soft shadows of AMD CHS easily worked on the GeForce, although a slightly pronounced quadratic structure does not make this mode the best. With NVIDIA PCSS, shadows are softer and softer, and there is no clear transition from detailed shadows to less detailed ones. With the usual algorithm for processing soft shadows in the “maximally soft” mode, the clarity is slightly higher in comparison with NVIDIA PCSS, the effect of changing the palm shadow detail is also smoothed well. As the degree of softness decreases, the difference in detail changes becomes more pronounced. When the soft shadows are completely turned off, the part of the shadow on the wall crumbles into squares, and the general feeling of a living shadow is completely lost. But notice that the quadratic structure shows up clearly on the vertical surface. In the distant section of the shadow on the ground, which we observe at a high angle, this is hardly noticeable.

We know from past games that NVIDIA PCSS can slightly change the overall shading pattern at long ranges. Let's see how this affects GTA.

Soft Shadows NVIDIA PCSS

Soft shadows very high

At close range, the shadow is softer. At an average distance, the shadow from a tree with PCSS is not so solid, there are gaps in the crown - this is a plus. But the shadow from the roof of the house on the right is overgrown with a comb - this is a minus. With PCSS, the shading intensity of distant trees decreases, their tops become lighter. That is, it looks different, but the overall impression depends on subjective impressions. Comparison of performance will help determine.

NVIDIA PCSS and AMD CHS are the most resource-intensive modes that consume up to 7% of the performance relative to the usual mode for the highest quality soft shadows. So it is better to stop at this option, and do not bother with questions of studying shadows under a magnifying glass. If you want, you can try one of the methods from NVIDIA and AMD, suddenly you like it more. A further decrease in the quality of soft shadows gives a meager performance gain.

AO shading

The game allows you to use high quality Ambient Occlusion, in normal mode and without AO. It is difficult to make the same screenshots due to the need to restart the game to apply the new parameters. So there may be some deviations in the position of the camera. But the overall impact of global shading can be estimated from such illustrations. These screenshots are in 2560x1440 resolution to better see small details.

Ambient Occlusion High

Ambient Occlusion Normal

Ambient Occlusion Off

Global shading adds additional shadows and penumbraes, taking into account the influence of objects on each other. With Ambient Occlusion, light shadows appear at the junction of the walls, where the furniture meets the walls. The intensity of the shadows in the area above the stove increases, and the lower part of the kitchen table also darkens slightly. Such details slightly enhance the overall sense of volume in the virtual world. It's a pity that there is no support for NVIDIA's HBAO + mode, which has proven itself well in other games.

Low impact on overall performance. Switching between AO modes gives a difference of less than 4%. There is even less difference between turning off AO completely and the poor quality of this shading.

Additional settings

The Advanced Graphics section is useful for those who want to get more out of the game than is offered by default. Initially, all the parameters in this section are disabled, you need to activate them manually. Let's first consider their purpose.

Long Shadows all of a sudden make the shadows ... longer. The only practical sense that can be seen in this, more realistic shadows in the morning and evening, when the sun is low on the horizon. But this parameter does not fundamentally change anything, during the day we did not notice any difference.

High Resolution Shadows is an important parameter that affects shadow detail. Did you not like the shadow of a palm tree crumbling into squares in the "soft shadows" section? Then we will immediately activate this item!

Loading more detailed textures during flight (High Detail Streaming While Fly) - increases the detail of visible objects when flying by air.

Extended Distance Scaling - Adjusts the LOD, allowing you to increase the detail distance of objects. A very important parameter for improving general perception. Adjustable using a scale from zero to maximum with 10 discrete gradations.

Length of shadows (Extended Shadows Distance) - the scale sets the distance for loading detailed shadows. Increasing this parameter will improve shadow detail at medium distances and add new shadows from distant objects.

All these parameters are interrelated, since it is their combination that gives the most noticeable effect of visual improvement of the picture. Without turning on high-res shadows, there is little point in increasing the display distance of the detailed shadows. Without increasing the last two parameters, there will be no significant picture improvement when High Detail Streaming While Fly is activated. But if you turn on everything, then the picture in flight is completely different.

For comparison, here are screenshots of the same scene with additional parameters and without them.

With additional settings, shadows on distant trees immediately appear. There is a clear division into shaded and light zones at distant buildings. More details to the point that without additional parameters, one of the buildings in the center of the frame loses its roof. More details in the farthest shot (look at the skyscraper under construction on the left). Some confusion is caused only by the comparison of the upper right corner. With additional settings, the shape of the trees on the slope is clearer, new bushes appear, but the grass effect disappears. Apart from this slight oversight, the first screenshot is better in every way.

In dynamics, the difference is visible no worse, if not better. Compare videos of the built-in benchmark with and without the maximum quality of additional options. Pay particular attention to the last airplane test. Without additional settings, a clear border of the zone is visible, only at the intersection of which shadows and new details appear. It comes to the point that even the wires of the power line are visible only after activating all the Advanced Graphics options.

Advanced Graphics Settings On

Advanced Graphics Settings Off

The positive impact on graphics quality is clear. Now let's examine the impact of these parameters on performance. First, we will consistently include the first three points. Then we will additionally increase the “shadow length” parameter to 50% and 100%, then we will additionally increase the distance for loading detailed objects.

The activation of the first item does not affect the overall performance. High-resolution shadows reduce the frame rate by 30% at once at minimum fps with a difference of 8% in average fps. Loading detailed textures in flight, without adjusting the last parameters, has little effect on fps. Extended Shadows Distance reduces performance by a few percent. But the reaction to an increase in the loading distance of detailed objects is extremely critical. The minimum fps drops sharply by half, noticeable slowdowns begin in some test scenes. In this mode, the game already reports up to 3.3 GB of video memory reservation instead of 2.5 GB at the same resolution without additional settings.

As a compromise, you can set the detail distance of objects and shadows to half of the maximum (lower values \u200b\u200bin the diagram). In this case, the overall performance will be higher. Compared to the initial settings mode, this gives a performance drop of 56/21% (min / avg fps).

Comparison of graphics cards performance

Let's move on to comparing different graphics accelerators in Grand Theft Auto 5. First, we will test a group of video adapters from AMD and NVIDIA at maximum quality settings without activating the advanced settings options.

First comparison with MSAA 4x anti-aliasing in Full HD.

Immediately striking are the close results of the GeForce GTX 770 with 2 GB and the Radeon R9 280X with 3 GB on board. And this is in a mode that requires more than 3 GB of video memory. On the GeForce GTX 980, the peak memory load reached 3400 MB, while the Radeon R9 290X was 100 MB less. The reference GeForce GTX 780 is slightly inferior to the Radeon R9 290 in Uber mode. The performance of the GeForce GTX 780 Ti is 1-4% faster than the AMD flagship, and the GeForce GTX 980 is another 9-10% faster. The GeForce GTX 760 and GeForce GTX 960 have the lowest scores, but in this test they have no direct competitor from AMD.

Now let's see how our members cope with the higher 2560x1440 resolution. Against the background of the top results, it is clear that junior representatives will not be able to handle such a mode with MSAA, so we will test them with FXAA.

Overall results are better than lower resolution with MSAA. There is a slight lead for the Radeon R9 280X over the GeForce GTX 770. The new GeForce GTX 960 falls short of the GeForce GTX 760, but both will need overclocking to provide comfortable performance levels.

Now let's look at the performance of senior participants in high definition with multisampling.

GeForce GTX 780 Ti and GeForce GTX 980 are faster than the Radeon R9 290X. Taking into account the minimum fps below 30 frames, overclocking or reducing the quality of anti-aliasing will be required to achieve a comfortable level. The leader NVIDIA uses up to 3.5 GB of video memory, AMD representatives have a little less memory load.

The most pleasant picture is ensured by the activation of all the possibilities of additional settings. But will the participants cope with such a difficult regime? Let's find out now. We choose Full HD resolution, set FXAA and turn on additional parameters to the maximum. We exclude the younger participants from the comparison due to the deliberately low results.

Even the Radeon R9 280X has good average frame rates, but very serious drawdowns in the minimum fps. In the red camp, only the Radeon R9 290X's results come close to a comfortable level. But the ideal option would be the GeForce GTX 980, which is 6% better than the leader AMD in the minimum parameter, and in the average game frame rate it is more productive by an impressive 29%. Peak load of video memory at the level of 3370-3330 MB.

Let's use MSAA.

Performance drops dramatically. Even the GeForce GTX 980 drops to 25 fps at minimum fps, but maintains a very high average frame rate. GeForce GTX 780 Ti outperforms Radeon R9 290X in average fps, but loses one frame at minimum. The memory load reaches 3600 MB.

Let's try to switch to 2560x1440, but with a more gentle anti-aliasing mode.

The GeForce GTX 980 is still confidently leading. The predecessor GeForce GTX 780 Ti lags behind by 11-14%, and the Radeon R9 290X is weaker by 5-20%. Load video memory up to 3.6 GB.

As a small addition, we offer a comparison of "retirees" in the face of GeForce GTX 580 and Radeon R9 6970. For clarity, let's add a GeForce GTX 760 to them. Tests were carried out at 1920x1080 with maximum graphics quality with anti-aliasing disabled. The second test mode assumes additional reduction of post-processing and complete disabling of the effect of depth of field. In both cases, all advanced settings options are disabled.

One could say that the old people are about the same level. They have a negligible difference in minimum fps, GeForce GTX 580 wins only in average fps. But in reality, on the Radeon HD 6970, the image is jerky even in the simpler second mode, and this rather noticeably spoils the sensations. Although the GeForce GTX 580 does not show serious advantages in graphics, the game on this video adapter is much smoother and more comfortable.

Comparison of processor performance

Now is the time to figure out which processor can handle the game at an acceptable level of performance. During the fourth part, it was processor dependence that became the cornerstone for many players. It got to funny situations when the owners of dual-core processors, who by default were doomed to unsatisfactory low performance, had fierce arguments about the required amount of video memory.

To get an idea of \u200b\u200bthe impact of processor potential on overall performance, we took several Intel models:

• Intel Pentium G3258 (3.2 GHz, 3MB L3 cache) LGA1150;
• Intel Core i7-4770K (3.5GHz @ 3.9GHz Turbo, 8MB L3 cache) LGA1150;
• Intel Core i7-3930K (3.2GHz @ 3.8GHz Turbo, 12MB L3 cache) LGA2011.

The Core i7-4770K will be tested with various core configurations at a junior 3.2 GHz frequency. By bringing Pentium and Core to the same frequency and the same number of cores, it will be possible to reveal the impact of the L3 cache on performance. Then the remaining cores and Hyper Treading will gradually turn on, which will show the influence of these factors. Another platform, Intel Core i7-3930K, was tested at a fixed frequency of 3.2 GHz and overclocked to 4.4 GHz. Pentium G3258 was also tested in overclocking.

For all processors, a GeForce GTX 760 video card was used. The test mode assumes the maximum settings of the main section of the graphics settings without anti-aliasing, reducing the level of special effects to "high" and completely disabling the depth of field effect.

Based on the testing results, it is clear that two cores are too small. With a good average fps level, we can occasionally observe terrible "brakes", which can be clearly seen from the level of the minimum fps. Increasing the L3 cache gives an acceleration of 5-7%, but does not solve the problem. Only by activating Hyper Treading can you achieve an acceptable level of performance. Real four cores give up to 34% advantage over two HT cores. With four cores, Hyper Treading is no longer useful. The six cores of the Intel Core i7-3930K also do not provide any advantage. Overclocking top-end processors makes no sense, except when using the most productive video cards. Overclocking a dual-core processor also does not bring much benefit, but for another reason - an increase in frequency does not save you from catastrophic fps drops.

conclusions

It's time to take stock. Let's start with lovers of visual beauty and owners of top-end configurations. If you want to get the most out of the game, be sure to activate the advanced graphics settings. If this hits performance hard, try increasing the distance of loading detailed objects and shadows not to the maximum, but to lower values. It is these parameters that most noticeably affect the final fps. Among the anti-aliasing modes, the best is MSAA, with which there is no loss of clarity of small details. But it is also the most resource-intensive. FXAA is the optimal choice, providing good anti-aliasing quality with minimal performance loss.

To achieve better performance, you first have to abandon additional settings and anti-aliasing. Although we would recommend using FXAA even for those who have to slightly lower the graphics quality. At the same time, you can experiment with the detailed shadows from the advanced settings. For example, to get a good increase in fps by turning off the effect of depth of field and a slight decrease in the quality of reflections, trying to complement this by turning on detailed shadows and slightly increasing the distance of details of objects. But you need to understand that such experiments require a video card more powerful than the GeForce GTX 760.

If we are talking about a low-power map, then along with reflections and post-effects, you can partially sacrifice the quality of the grass. If necessary, you can safely set many parameters one point below the maximum level. This is often fraught with minimal loss in image quality. All shadow settings can play an important role. As mentioned above, they are interrelated. If your goal is to achieve the highest possible fps, then in addition to a serious decrease in the quality of shadows, you can sacrifice the effect of soft shadows and turn off Ambient Occlusion. But a complete reduction in all shadow parameters will noticeably affect the image quality. It is also highly discouraged to lower the quality of textures, shaders and reflections to a minimum - it hits the graphics a lot. It makes sense to resort to this only on the weakest systems.

Among Intel processors, the Core i3 is the minimum option to play. You will not be able to play normally on dual-core models. The best option even for a mid-range graphics card is a full-fledged quad-core Core i5, which will not become a performance limiter.

No one will dispute that Grand Theft Auto 5 is the most advanced game in the series. It has a huge variety of possibilities that other games in the series can only dream of. However, is it that much better than its predecessor GTA 4 in terms of the physics of the game world?

The entire Grand Theft Auto universe is conventionally divided into three unequal parts. The oldest top-down games in the series are categorized as 2D Universe. Games from GTA 3 to GTA San Andreas are called 3D Universe. And finally, the last two games in the series - GTA 4 and GTA 5 - make up the HD Universe. The last two GTA games are in the same category for a reason. They are very similar indeed. The games have the same physics engine, the peculiarity of which is that the calculation is carried out anew in each specific case. However, the physics in the two games has significant differences. In particular, this applies to ragdoll. Meticulous players even made a special video comparing the behavior of bodies in GTA 4 and GTA 5:

The video clearly shows that in GTA 4 Rockstar Games just tried a new engine, evaluating its capabilities and potential, and in GTA 5 they have already used all the experience gained. Of course, not everything was left unchanged. Some things were most likely specially simplified for the sake of better optimization or for some other reason (like the ability to run the game on the PlayStation 3 with its 256 MB of RAM). Good or bad it is difficult to say, because in GTA 4 you will have to pay for a slightly more realistic physics in 7 times smaller game world, lack of an online mode, worse graphics and so on. In addition, there are many mods for GTA 5 that will make the physics of the game no worse than in GTA 4.

Quite another matter, this is the melee system and the behavior of people in the game world. Another video provides a detailed comparison of key gameplay elements in GTA 4 and GTA 5. The differences are even greater. Better car physics and more realistic explosions can be considered a definite advantage of GTA 4 (although this is the subjective opinion of our analytical department). It also has the ability to pick up and throw items, although the need for such a function in a GTA game is highly questionable. It is also worth mentioning the interactivity of many buildings in GTA 4, which is not even mentioned in GTA 5. Although, the 7 times larger game world should somehow compensate for this.

Summing up, we can say that GTA 5 is definitely more perfect, larger and better quality than GTA 4, despite the simplification of some game elements. Don't forget, also, about GTA Online and the regular updates for it. Meanwhile, GTA 4 has almost nothing to offer the player other than the main storyline and two not-so-big (albeit very high-quality) DLCs for it. Not a very smart approach when creating a game in an open world, right?

System requirements for GTA 5, judging by the first trailer, promise to be very serious. And now, finally, the developers announced OFFICIAL system requirements that are published on their website. All that differs from them are rumors and fakes!

Official system requirements of GTA 5 :

GTA Online on PC will support the game on 30 players... Online will be available immediately with the release of GTA 5, GTA Online Heists will also be available.

The PC will have a higher level of detail running on 1080p and 60fps at 4K resolution... Will support systems with up to three monitors, as well as NVIDIA 3D Vision.
GTA V for PC includes a new editor that gives players a complete set of tools to edit and publish gameplay videos directly to Social Club and YouTube.

Minimum requirements:

• OS: Windows 8.1, 8, 7, Vista 64 bit (NVIDIA video cards are recommended for Vista)
• CPU: Intel Core 2 Quad CPU Q6600 @ 2.40GHz (4 cores) / AMD Phenom 9850 Quad-Core Processor (4 cores) @ 2.5GHz
• RAM: 4 GB
• Video card: NVIDIA 9800 GT 1 GB / AMD HD 4870 1 GB (DX 10, 10.1, 11 or higher)
• Sound card: 100% DirectX 10 compatible
• Disk space: 65 GB
• DVD drive

• OS: Windows 8.1, 8, 7 64 bit
• CPU: Intel Core i5 3470 @ 3.2GHZ (4 cores) / AMD X8 FX-8350 @ 4GHZ (8 cores)
• RAM: 8 GB
• Video card: NVIDIA GTX 660 2GB / AMD HD7870 2GB
• Sound card: 100% DirectX 10 compatible
• Disk space: 65 GB
• DVD drive

Pay attention to the requirements for 4 cores! It is possible that the owners of processors with fewer cores will not be able to run the game (more precisely, they can, but with the help of a separate program). So it was with the game FarCry 4, which we will talk about below, owners of 2-core processors had to download Dual Core Fix to launch the game, without it the game simply hung with a black screen.

Testing GTA 5 on different computers

Will your game run?

Will it go with me ??? To be honest, I don’t want to explain to everyone personally whether he will use GTA 5. There is an easier way: install FarCry 4.If you go to the maximum settings - there is nothing to worry about, if at the minimum with lags - then in GTA 5 the lags will be even stronger.

• OS: also 64-bit versions of Windows 8.1, 8, 7
• CPU... Intel processors need more powerful, AMD processors are the same. Intel® Core i5-2400S 2.5 GHz (i5 3470 @ 3.2GHZ) or AMD FX-8350 4.0 GHz
• RAM: also 8 GB.
• DirectX: For FarCry 4 only version 11, for GTA 5 - DX 10, 10.1, 11
• Video card... The graphics requirements for GTA 5 are below. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 2GB (NVIDIA GTX 660) or AMD Radeon R9 290X (AMD HD7870)

PS4 Features

Recently, the Internet is full of different options system requirements... There are even those that the requirement of GTA 5 was taken, almost according to the maximum possible computer configurations. Judge for yourself how much income the publishers will have if the game gta5 is not bought by everyone because of the weak hardware. There were others who published the requirements of GTA5, where only 25 GB was allocated for the game, although about 50 GB is spent on PS4, but in fact it turned out that you need 65 GB... And nothing, fakes were actively spreading.

Judging by the graphics quality by the version for xbox 360 and PS 3, then the game GTA 5 could well run on computers 5 years ago. But with the release of the GTA 5 trailer on PC, PS4 and Xbox one it became clear that the requirements will be much higher (the maximum requirements will not be lower than that of the hardware on the PS4 Xbox One, their characteristics are indicated below).

• CPU: 8-core x86-64 AMD Jaguar processor - 1.6-2.75 GHz
• RAM: GDDR5 8GB (5500 MHz)
• GPU: Integrated, approximate analogue of Radeon HD7850 / 7870

Characteristics of the PS4 version of GTA 5.

• 1920 × 1080 resolution, 30 FPS, double buffering.
• 2xMSAA (2x anti-aliasing).
• Increased in size and bump maps.
• HDAO.
• Tessellation
• Reduced the delay when switching characters from single player for GTA Online.
• The number of pedestrians and vehicles on the roads has been increased.
• The best quality of game videos.
• Best quality radio music.

Compared to the xbox 360 and PS3 versions, you can see the following improvements that increase the hardware requirements:

• Improved waves, water ripples, water in rain and when passing cars.
• More grass and bushes will appear.
• Improvements to various structures. For enterprises, smoke pipes and workers will be added.
• More traffic on the roads.
• Vehicle interior has been significantly improved.
• Increased draw range, shadow range.
• Improved textures.

Max Payne 3 system requirements

With the release of Max Payne 3, more information has been added to compare. The PC version looks prettier on powerful computers than on consoles. The resolution in Max is scalable, you can even display it on 6 monitors. In addition, Max Payne 3 supports DirectX 11 and, therefore, there are Tessellation, Hull, Gather4, Domain Shaders, Stream Output, FXAA, Geometry Shaders. But the developers promise that even owners of old cars will be able to play Max Payne 3.

Minimum Requirements

OS: Windows 7 / Vista / XP PC (32 or 64 bit)
CPU: Intel Dual Core 2.4 GHz or AMD Dual Core 2.6 GHz
Memory: 2GB
Video card: AMD Radeon HD 3400 512MB RAM or NVIDIA GeForce 8600 GT 512MB RAM

OS: Windows 7 / Vista / XP PC (32 or 64 bit)
CPU: Intel Dual Core 3GHz or AMD equivalent
Memory: 3GB
Video card: AMD Radeon HD 4870 512MB RAM or NVIDIA GeForce 450 512MB RAM
Bottom line: 30 FPS at 1920 × 1080

OS: Windows 7 / Vista (32 or 64 bit)
CPU: Intel i7 Quad Core 2.8GHz or AMD equivalent
Memory: 3GB
Video card: AMD Radeon HD 5870 1GB RAM or NVIDIA GeForce 480 1GB RAM
As a result: 60 FPS at 1920 × 1080

Highest tested

OS: Windows 7 / Vista (64 bit)
CPU: AMD FX8150 8 Core x 3.6 GHz or Intel i7 3930K 6 Core x 3.06 GHz
Memory: 16 GB
Video card: AMD Radeon HD 7970 3GB RAM or NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 2GB RAM

We collect a PC for GTA 5

Grand Theft Auto 5 became available on the eighth generation consoles - PlayStation 4 and Xbox One - a year after the original release on older consoles. How does the famous car limit game look like on the next generation of devices? Journalists of the Western site Digital Foundry, which specializes in the analysis of graphics and performance in games, also asked this question and compared the two versions. In this article, you will find out what conclusion they came to, and which version is preferable from a technical point of view.

American beauty

There is no doubt that with the transition to the power of the eighth generation consoles, GTA V has gained in beauty. Versions for both consoles offer 1080p resolution, and new in the improved release is a first-person camera mode, so you can see in detail the brave new world of Los Santos. There is something to look at - the textures were redrawn in high resolution, and in addition, the graphics engine was replenished with new types of effects.

However, it's not just about high definition. 1080p picture supports high quality anti-aliasing effect. Thanks to it, distant details on the horizon are easier to see, and road trips through the cities and wilderness of the Rockstar version of Los Angeles no longer result in uneven loading of textures and objects. The main resource required for the improved versions - large amount of memory - is abundant on both the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One, and objects are now loaded evenly as you explore the world.

Twilight rays in action

The powerful GPUs of both consoles have allowed more picture effects to be included in the game. The depth of field has changed, and twilight rays and volumetric reflections have appeared. After playing on new consoles, it is difficult to revert to previous generation versions. By purchasing this version, the owners of devices from both companies - Sony and Microsoft - will remain in the black.

New graphic effects

The video shows a face-to-face comparison of the two versions in slow motion for better detail.

In short, both versions are graphically identical, with a couple of exceptions. The most noticeable difference is the less dense vegetation in the Xbox One version compared to the PlayStation 4. Of course, on the Microsoft console, the landscape of GTA 5 does not look like a desert at all, but comparison with the version on the Sony console reveals less dense trees and grass. However, this does not affect the enjoyment of the game on the Xbox One version. Players will hardly notice such a minor detail that is irrelevant to in-game mechanics.

The texture quality is identical on both devices. Rockstar has tweaked the resolution for all objects and surfaces - from Michael's winter jacket fabric to the gravel in his garden. Some objects have been given a three-dimensional shape due to the inclusion of the Parallax occlusion mapping effect. Individual branches and the shape of the trunk are now highlighted on trees, and volumetric relief on the brick walls of the game world. Another change is the volumetric lighting system. Light now plays with tints on in-game character models, and shadows are more complex. Sunsets in Los Santos have become especially beautiful thanks to the twilight rays streaming through the buildings. Added anisotropic glare effect when car headlights are turned on at dusk.

Parallax Occlusion Mapping adds volume to Michael's garden stones

All of these visual goodies are best appreciated in first-person mode, an exclusive feature of the enhanced version of GTA 5. In this perspective, you will appreciate the depth and richness of detail. Once behind the wheel, you will be surprised to find that the car interiors in the game are also worked out to the smallest detail. In a new perspective, you can go through the game from start to finish - a completely new experience of traveling across Los Santos.

Performance test

Both consoles play 30 frames per second in vertical sync mode. The introductory game hour gives the promised amount, but the fps parameter sags in later missions. On PS4, for example, it is possible for frames per second to drop to 24 during races through the crowded main streets of Los Santos, which does not happen in the Xbox One version. The amount of traffic on the roads is identical in both versions, so the Microsoft console has an advantage here. However, the Xbox One version sags at other points - during explosions and water effects.

Verdict

Technically, GTA 5 was created with an eye on the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 consoles, but the improved version brings enough changes to return to the world of Los Santos. Versions for both devices run at 1080p, have sharper textures and longer draw distances. The only visual drawback of the Xbox One version is the less dense vegetation, but it is quite minor. None of the consoles hit 30 frames per second throughout the game, but overall, the performance of the updated version is noticeably higher than the release for the previous generation. In moments of intense gunfights, the frame rate drops on Xbox One, and with heavy traffic, on PlayStation 4.

However, the players are unlikely to notice the small flaws of the updated version. The advantages far outweigh the disadvantages - updated graphics and a first-person perspective will show you the world of Los Santos from a new angle.

Buy GTA 5 for and you can in the PiterPlay store.