[TheSilentKiller]

My Computer Specifications
________________________

AMD FX-4100 Quad Core Processor 3.6Ghz 8MB L3 Cache
4GB DDR3 1333Mhz RAM
Radeon HD 6570 1GB DDR3

How much FPS will I get?

[Zxirius]

How are we supposed to know? GTA IV can run differently depending on what you set the graphical settings to. You should be able to run at satisfactory (20-35) FPS on average with mostly everything on high and vehicles, detail distance, and view distance between 30 and 50.

[Carl CJ Johnsons Brother Brian]

It depends on which settings you're playing the game. GTA IV is more a NVidia game and runs usually on AMD graphic cards worse than on a NVidia GPU with usual equal performance. You can be probably glad if it's possible to run GTA IV on low settings with a decent performance so at least 30FPS but performance issues will nevertheless happen in extreme situations as for example lots of exploding cars and so on. You can look here how the game will have a decent performance and on which settings this would be.

This post has been edited by Carl CJ Johnsons Brother Brian on Thursday, Dec 13 2012, 11:57

[Zxirius]

QUOTE (Carl CJ Johnsons Brother Brian @ Thursday, Dec 13 2012, 04:53)

GTA IV is more a NVidia game and runs usually on AMD graphic cards worse than on a NVidia GPU with usual equal performance. You can be probably glad if it's possible to run GTA IV on low settings with a decent performance so at least 30FPS but performance issues will nevertheless happen in extreme situations as for example lots of exploding cars and so on.

I have an ATi Mobility Radeon HD 5870 pulling everything high except night shadows and shadows, which are on medium. Vehicles, Detail Distance, and View Distance all at 40. FPS is a stable 20-35 FPS, which above I classified as "satisfactory". I experience no problems in the extreme situations you specify.

I'm sure he could run that well, if not better.

This post has been edited by Zxirius on Thursday, Dec 13 2012, 12:01

[Carl CJ Johnsons Brother Brian]

QUOTE (Zxirius @ Thursday, Dec 13 2012, 12:57)

I have an ATi Mobility Radeon HD 5870 pulling everything high except night shadows and shadows, which are on medium. Vehicles, Detail Distance, and View Distance all at 40. FPS is a stable 20-35 FPS, which above I classified as "satisfactory". I experience no problems in the extreme situations you specify. I'm sure he could run that well, if not better.

You can't compare a HD5870 with a HD6570. That's like comparing a Bugatti Veyron with a VW Golf. The HD5870 is much stronger than the OP's GPU and this theoretical comparison already shows it even though it's only the theory. I don't know if you can say that 20-35FPS is satisfactory because usually everything under the 30FPS mark isn't smooth anymore and 20FPS is almost unplayable. The OP won't be able to play GTA IV on mid-high settings. He only can pull the vehicle density on middle or high settings because of his Quad-Core CPU but everything else needs to be on low settings or the game won't run smooth.

[Zxirius]

QUOTE (Carl CJ Johnsons Brother Brian @ Thursday, Dec 13 2012, 05:21)

QUOTE (Zxirius @ Thursday, Dec 13 2012, 12:57) I have an ATi Mobility Radeon HD 5870 pulling everything high except night shadows and shadows, which are on medium. Vehicles, Detail Distance, and View Distance all at 40. FPS is a stable 20-35 FPS, which above I classified as "satisfactory". I experience no problems in the extreme situations you specify. I'm sure he could run that well, if not better. You can't compare a HD5870 with a HD6570. That's like comparing a Bugatti Veyron with a VW Golf. The HD5870 is much stronger than the OP's GPU and this theoretical comparison already shows it even though it's only the theory. I don't know if you can say that 20-35FPS is satisfactory because usually everything under the 30FPS mark isn't smooth anymore and 20FPS is almost unplayable. The OP won't be able to play GTA IV on mid-high settings. He only can pull the vehicle density on middle or high settings because of his Quad-Core CPU but everything else needs to be on low settings or the game won't run smooth.

You actually have a good point since I read his post incorrectly and thought that was a 6870 for some reason. However, you compared the wrong card entirely. You also failed to analyze that I use the Mobility counterpart of the HD 5870, which would be less powerful. This website doesn't allow you to compare with the Mobilitys.

Also, just for laughs, lets compare the HD 5870 with the HD 6870 here. With this analysis, are you trying to claim the HD 5870 is still better than the HD 6870? I can confirm that assumption would be incorrect since I own a HD 6870 for my desktop which runs much better than my laptop's Mobility HD 5870. So, your theoretical comparison runs void when it doesn't prove any actual performance value considering performance is a lot more than memory bandwidth and texel/pixel rates.

He'd be able to run the game mostly on medium settings. I wouldn't underestimate AMD cards. I used to be an Nvidia fanboy until I nabbed this laptop and I haven't been disappointed yet.

Also, mind explaining to me how 20-35 FPS is "almost unplayable"? 20 FPS was even pretty common on the console versions of the game during stress. I am pretty picky when it comes to FPS and would definitely say anything below 12 FPS becomes unplayable. I believe this is completely opinionated and most people would disagree with you.

This post has been edited by Zxirius on Thursday, Dec 13 2012, 12:52

[Carl CJ Johnsons Brother Brian]

QUOTE (Zxirius @ Thursday, Dec 13 2012, 13:42)

Also, just for laughs, lets compare the HD 5870 with the HD 6870 here. With this analysis, are you trying to claim the HD 5870 is still better than the HD 6870? I can confirm that assumption would be incorrect since I own a HD 6870 for my desktop which runs much better than my laptop's Mobility HD 5870. So, your theoretical comparison runs void when it doesn't prove any actual performance value considering performance is a lot more than memory bandwidth and texal/pixel rates. He'd be able to run the game mostly on medium settings. I wouldn't underestimate AMD cards. I used to be an Nvidia fanboy until I nabbed this laptop and I haven't been disappointed yet.

I know that the theoretical comparison isn't fair and it has no significance but I just wanted to show that in this case, the HD5870 is more than clearly way stronger than the HD6570. I didn't know before that you thought that the OP talked about a HD6870. And also it's not fair to compare a desktop GPU to a mobile GPU. It's clear that mobil GPUs have not the performance of a desktop GPU. I think that's pretty much a given. If we're only talking about desktop GPUs then the spiritual sucessor of the HD5870 is the HD6970, not the HD6870. How do I come to that conclusion? Well, the desktop HD6870 has less performance, sometimes significantly less performance than the older HD5870. AMD likes to play with the names it seems. I'm not a NVidia fanboy even if I have a GTX460.

In fact I critize them a lot since the new GPU generation because of things like too little VRAM, short memory bandwidth or the weak GPGPU performance compared to the potencial strong core performance of them. I'm open-minded but it's simply a fact that NVidia GPUs run better with GTA IV than a AMD GPU with usual equal performance. GTA IV is more optimized for NVidia graphic cards for whatever reasons. It's not the first game on planet earth that is more optimized for NVidia than for AMD or vice versa. Metro 2033 for example has a NVidia logo which should mean the game has a slightly better performance on NVidia GPUs than on the AMD ones but in fact AMD GPUs have in extreme situations a up to 50% better performance than NVidia GPUs and the game has a siginficantly better lightning on them!

EDIT: I think it depends on what you're used to be if it comes to the framerates. I have sometimes 20FPS in GTA IV and it looks in my opinion horrible. 25FPS is okay but 20FPS or even less is terrible for me.

This post has been edited by Carl CJ Johnsons Brother Brian on Thursday, Dec 13 2012, 13:23

[Zxirius]

QUOTE (Carl CJ Johnsons Brother Brian)

It's clear that mobil GPUs have not the performance of a desktop GPU. I think that's pretty much a given.

That's where I'm getting at. You didn't prove much with your analysis since you used two incorrect cards, especially since the site doesn't prove much. There are better comparison sites out there. However, we can both agree his card is not built for gaming. The HD 6870 is built for gaming, which is the card I thought he was using originally. It's six in the morning, in my defense. =P

QUOTE (Carl CJ Johnsons Brother Brian)

Well, the desktop HD6870 has less performance, sometimes significantly less performance than the older HD5870.

I'll have to disagree here. I'm not going to boot my desktop to record a benchmark right now, but the HD 6870 has an obvious increase in performance over the HD 5870. Perhaps part of my difference is the fact I have the Mobility card on my laptop, but the difference isn't that substantial and is just something to consider.

QUOTE (Carl CJ Johnsons Brother Brian)

GTA IV is more optimized for NVidia graphic cards for whatever reasons.

You made it appear as if you were giving Nvidia the upper-hand. Since you emphasize that specifically GTA IV is optimized better for Nvidia cards, I can agree with you since it's true. Rockstar probably tests the games on these cards, which is why the game is optimized for them. Rockstar even added an Nvidia logo at the beginning of the PC version of San Andreas for the same reason. I've never played San Andreas on an AMD card to notice any performance difference.

I feel sort of bad having hijacked the OP's topic. There wasn't really a proper answer for his question, so of course it turned into a GPU discussion. Feel free to PM me instead.

This post has been edited by Zxirius on Thursday, Dec 13 2012, 13:29

[Carl CJ Johnsons Brother Brian]

QUOTE (Zxirius @ Thursday, Dec 13 2012, 14:21)

QUOTE (Carl CJ Johnsons Brother Brian) It's clear that mobil GPUs have not the performance of a desktop GPU. I think that's pretty much a given. That's where I'm getting at. You didn't prove much with your analysis since you used two incorrect cards, especially since the site doesn't prove much. There are better comparison sites out there. However, we can both agree his card is not built for gaming. The HD 6870 is built for gaming, which is the card I thought he was using originally. It's six in the morning, in my defense. =P

Yeah, the HD6870 is actually still a good GPU. I searched for a test between the HD5850 and the HD6570 but I don't have found one but I'm not surprised at all because nobody would test a low end GPU with a high performance GPU. I think we can leave that point as it is.

QUOTE (Zxirius @ Thursday, Dec 13 2012, 14:21)

QUOTE (Carl CJ Johnsons Brother Brian) Well, the desktop HD6870 has less performance, sometimes significantly less performance than the older HD5870. I'll have to disagree here. I'm not going to boot my desktop to record a benchmark right now, but the HD 6870 has an obvious increase in performance than the HD 5870. Perhaps part of my difference is the fact I have the Mobility card on my laptop, but the difference isn't that substantial and is just something to consider.

Okay, now I have made a mistake. I have searched for the wrong benchmarks. But still the HD5870 has a about 10% better performance than the HD6870. Remember I only talk about the desktop versions of these GPUs.

[luceberg]

OP, your cpu is good, but the graphics card is comparatively weak. You will get a decent framerate on low/medium settings, imho.

[unc13bud]

QUOTE

your cpu is good, but the graphics card is comparatively weak. You will get a decent framerate on low/medium settings, imho

best response, in my opinion. not to complicated for the original poster, especially as they left out their game playing monitor resolution.

QUOTE

But still the HD5870 has a about 10% better performance than the HD6870. Remember I only talk about the desktop versions of these GPUs.

i have agreed with everything you said, although i don't think it was anything the original poster could use in their decision

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3987/ams-ra...range-market/21

QUOTE

With AMD’s choice of names in mind, Barts and the 6800 series isn’t the true successor to Cypress; but it is the next generation of Radeon for another market.

This post has been edited by unc13bud on Friday, Dec 14 2012, 13:28

[TheSilentKiller]

On 1280x1024 resolution High Settings, Game Debate and other Sites show 6570 will work Smoothly..

[Extronic]

QUOTE (Carl CJ Johnsons Brother Brian @ Thursday, Dec 13 2012, 16:04)

GTA IV is more optimized for

GTA IV is not optimized for anything, lol. Its a 4 years old game, yet you still have to have high end hardware to run it smoothly.

QUOTE (Carl CJ Johnsons Brother Brian @ Thursday, Dec 13 2012, 16:46)

a test between the HD5850 and the HD6570 but I don't have found one but I'm not surprised at all because nobody would test a low end GPU with a high performance GPU

QUOTE (TheSilentKiller @ Friday, Dec 14 2012, 17:00)

On 1280x1024 resolution High Settings, Game Debate and other Sites show 6570 will work Smoothly..

Im not sure why, but theyre lying bluntly. Smoothly on low settings, probably.

On a side note: Zxirius, what type of memory does your card have? I have uber texture pop-ups using my HD6850M, though fps correlates with what you have, only a bit lower. However, it has DDR3 memory so i guess thats the bottleneck

[willhub]

Mobile 5870 is nothing like a desktop 5870:

Mobility: http://www.amd.com/US/PRODUCTS/NOTEBOOK/GR...5870-specs.aspx
Desktop: http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/gra...overview.aspx#2

It's like half the card, not even a 4870.

And it's well known the 6870 is a slower card than the 5870.

[luceberg]

QUOTE (willhub @ Monday, Dec 24 2012, 20:15)

Mobile 5870 is nothing like a desktop 5870: Mobility: http://www.amd.com/US/PRODUCTS/NOTEBOOK/GR...5870-specs.aspx Desktop: http://www.amd.com/us/products/desktop/gra...overview.aspx#2 It's like half the card, not even a 4870. And it's well known the 6870 is a slower card than the 5870.

How is that relevant to this thread?

[willhub]

It just is.