Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter


Forgot your password?
Graphics Upgrades Games Hardware

A Look At GTA V PC Performance and Image Quality At 4K 72

MojoKid writes: Rockstar's Grand Theft Auto series has been wildly successful for many years now, offering some of the edgiest story lines, game play tactics and objectives the gaming industry has ever seen. With psychopathic main characters, you are left in the depraved communities of Los Santos and Blaine County, to walk a path few would dare choose in real life. And it's rather entertaining of course, that you're tasked with leaving a virtual world worse off than you found it, consequences be damned. But what does it take to run GTA V at 4K (3840X2160) resolution? This article takes a look at that, as well as how it scales over multiple NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 GPUs, along with some screen shots that look at image quality at Ultra HD resolution. It's safe to say one strong, high-end GPU will get the job done, but two in SLI or CrossFire are better of course, if you want to max out all IQ settings.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

A Look At GTA V PC Performance and Image Quality At 4K

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Wake me up when they do a review on 16k

    • by Adriax ( 746043 )

      640k res. That should be enough for anyone.

      • by pspahn ( 1175617 ) on Friday May 15, 2015 @08:45PM (#49702515)

        I keep trying to play this new PC game, and it just throws an error that says, "Terminate all TSRs and try again".

        WTF, this PC gaming shit is stupid.

        • by megabeck42 ( 45659 ) on Saturday May 16, 2015 @03:44AM (#49704177)

          Running out of conventional memory? Yeah, I know your pain. Well, I'll tell you a secret. There's this fancy thing called EMM386.. just add it to your CONFIG.SYS after the LOAD=HIMEM.SYS and don't forget to specify DOS=HIGH. It's really that easy and it should get you an easy extra 30 maybe even 45 kB more free RAM.


          P.S. MSCDEX is for wimps.

        • by Bengie ( 1121981 )
          I remember having a virus on my computer that all it did was consume some conventional memory, even to keep many programs from working, but your system would still boot.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    That was a pretty not in-depth performance review [] [] []

    • Yup, I always ignore Hothardware submissions. I'd mod you up, but they expired yesterday :(

      [H]ardOCP has much better methods and much more thorough tests, since they actually try to find the best settings each video card can use. Techreport is also pretty good.

      Hothardware used to be good about 10 years ago, but they lost their insight and depth.

      • by unrtst ( 777550 )

        Continuing your criticism...

        Who the fuck does a review whose primary focus deals with 4k video, and then resizes all the screenshots to 720p?!?!? How the hell is that 720p static image going to tell me anything useful about how well (or poorly) his rig did in that setup?

  • by Aryeh Goretsky ( 129230 ) on Friday May 15, 2015 @08:52PM (#49702561) Homepage


    If one looks at MojoKid's submissions to Slashdot, one notes they exist exclusively of links to articles at HotHardware.Com [], which according to the whois data, is registered to a Dave Altavilla of Mendon, MA.

    Never to ActiveWin, Ars Technica, HardOCP, Neowin, TechReport, WinBeta or the scores of other web sites which discuss, review or "engage in coordinate PR disclosure" of technology news, but always to HotHardware, never anywhere else.

    Are MojoKid and Mr. Altavilla the same person? And why is he (are they?) only posting links to Slashdot to HotHardware,a site which, coincidentally, seems to rely on links to,,, and other advertising and privacy-invasive sites in order to monetize its page views. All these hostnames should be blocked in your hosts file before visiting any links to to ensure you are not being advertised to or tracked (which seem to be very similar, these days).

    If MojoKid/Altavilla are going to use Slashdot to generate revenue for themselves, they should at least let Slashdot's management know and note in their submissions that they are sending Slashdotters to a site which they generate revenue from; to not do so is unethical and abusive of Slashdot.

    And in case anyone wants to throw a stone at my glass house, I've submitted a grand total of one articles to Slashdot, and it mentioned a free service being offered through the auspices of the IEEE which not just my employer but dozens of our competitors were involved in. Not a single banner ad or privacy-invasive script to be had there at all.


    Aryeh Goretsky

    • Seriously? The majority of stories submitted to Slashdot are from people that are associated with the publications they're sourcing, and I think Slashdot's management is astute enough to know. Finally, virtually all of the sites you named also rely on the same "privacy-invasive" ad services you mentioned. Thanks for the pointless observation.
      • by Anonymous Coward

        " The majority of stories submitted to Slashdot are from people that are associated with the publications they're sourcing"

        And this is a good thing? Unethical behaviour should be tolerated because it is common? And you dare criticise him for questioning this situation? When did you give up on ethics?

    • What sites does Slashdot send people to that aren't there to make money? I don't get this witchhunt.

      • by Mashiki ( 184564 )

        What sites does Slashdot send people to that aren't there to make money? I don't get this witchhunt.

        Some people have this belief that in order to be ethical, you don't shill. That there are no financial ties, that the people involved have disclosure if there are any related issues. I realize that this is a difficult subject for some people to understand, but if you want to know why, you only need to look at the mess ABC news is in.

        This is an extension of the clickbait culture that exists with sites like gawker, kotaku, polygon, vox and so on.

      • by Uberbah ( 647458 )

        What sites does Slashdot send people to that aren't there to make money?

        Not the point, but you knew that already.

        I don't get this witchhunt.

        I don't get the willfully obtuse act, unless you're a sockpuppet account.

    • by Anonymous Coward

      What was that? Something about a lack of disclosure and ethics in game journalism?

    • by Njovich ( 553857 )

      This is not Wikipedia, on Slashdot you are allowed to make submissions about yourself. This is not your website, and you do not make the rules. If you want to make a website where that is not allowed, you are free to do it.

      Given that it's a fairly interesting story, who cares anyway?

      Aside from that, I don't get why you would speculate on the exact person doing this, writing out his full name in a public forum. You could be right, but for all we know it could be a completely different person.

    • Unless things have changed the editors used to mash together submissions. If there were a range of submissions on one topic (GTA V in 4k), then the submission text would get rewritten to include links to most of the sites that you list. If it was a more esoteric story then the submission from one person would be used raw.

      Performance figures for one resolution in one game is a bit lightweight and sketchy. Combination of nobody else cared and a slow news day? Never attribute malice to the actions of slashdot

    • Do you pay for a subscription to slashdot?

      I'm just curious as to if you expect people to spend their own time and money providing a website you use but they don't get any avenue to make a return on their investment and time.

      If you pay, great. Good for you.

      If not, then shut the fuck up you worthless leach, no one gives a shit what you say. :)

      I'm better you don't pay for a subscription ... Do you?

  • is most important for games. Probably see better performance out of a 4790K which is still king for i7s AFAIK.

    • Are there any i5 class CPUs that will work well with 2 video cards? If not, I'll just stick with one 970, I guess. I'm not interested in 4K at this point, since I just bought a really top-shelf 1920x1080 monitor, and am happy with it.

      I need a new mobo and CPU though. My old i5-750 is just not up to any of the new games.

    • Single-thread performance is irrelevant when discussing any game written first for a modern console. The last GTA game for the PC, based on the 360 edition, wanted four cores.

      • As far as I have understood it, GTA IV uses 3 threads, and GTA V can adapt to both 2-core and 4-core CPUs.
  • I won't even consider it until DisplayPort 1.3 is the prevalent standard on all monitors. Don't give me that g-sync/free-sync crap either. :)

  • it still drops frames. Not that it matters to an old codger like myself. I can't tell the diff between 1080p & 4k :P
  • Best character ever in a game you love to hate, hands down. Love the tattoo around his neck that says 'cut here'.

    Oh, article is about 4k? Sorry, I game on a PS3. Gaming on a PC is better, except that during a couple lean years I got really addicted to gaming in my La-Z-Boy with my cat in my lap, on my big-ass TV.
  • by Jupix ( 916634 ) on Saturday May 16, 2015 @03:09AM (#49704117)

    It runs on some people's laptops (not even gaming laptops) at reasonable quality settings and resolutions like 1080p. That makes it easier than most to run at high resolutions on a desktop gaming PC. It's caused by two things. Firstly it's obviously well optimized, and secondly, sometimes it looks like crap for a 2015 game. Which is because the base game is from... 2013? And for consoles. The best example of it is during the tutorial, when you get in a car that looks like things haven't moved on at all since GTA: San Andreas. Overall, the game is a mixed bag of great high poly models, average models, and terrible eyesore models.

    On my PC it's the easiest game of late to run at 4K. It runs smoothly on GTX 980 SLI without sweating the GPUs. But it has some very strange framedropping happening occasionally which I can't pinpoint but would assume is the content streaming tech working (badly). In terms of system resources it might be VRAM running out and having to be repopulated, since the GTX980 is light on VRAM (only 4 gigs). The other hardware should be fine (i7 5930k at 4,2 GHz, 32 gigs of DDR4, 1TB SSD with more than a third of it empty).

    The 4K experience in GTA V isn't as incredible as all the hype makes it out to be. It's nice for detail in certain scenarios (cutscenes with closeups of people, flying, offroading, looking out in the distance). Otherwise 4K works much better in open world environments with lush foliage and high details, like the latest Dragon Age, Skyrim, Tomb Raider and so on. 1080p just can't resolve the details of foliage and that makes the 4K experience so amazing. GTA on the other hand is mostly cityscapes, desert and ocean and while it's nice at 4K, it's not mindblowing, because it's old hat by 2015.

    I have a couple of screenshots on my onedrive [] if you want to have a look. It's at 4K almost maxed settings - yes, even the Ultra settings which some people have missed. IIRC one of the advanced sliders didn't go all the way up because the VRAM-meter very helpfully prevented it. Anyway, compare the graphical fidelity to Inquisition [] for example, and judge for yourself.

    • This is great news for me, in a few weeks I'll be trying to run this on a GTX 275 (once the torrents clear up - fakes weeded out, latest-patch versions get well-seeded, copyright-notice attention dies down). This year I encountered the first game it's had trouble running on default settings, which was Wolfenstein: The New Order. Which did run smoothly on low settings. Rockstar has a frankly shitty track record of PC games, so I was still worried despite my card's demonstrated competence. But this post has g

Never say you know a man until you have divided an inheritance with him.