You really trust TXAA to work nicely and not introduce blurfest it's been in most games?
GTA V on PC
- Thread starter pjbliverpool
- Start date
If that's the case (GTX660) then I should be able to max everything out and still get 60fps at 1080p. I have a GTX970 and an Ivy Bridge i7. Guess we'll see.
I'll see what it's like. It was decent on assassin's creed and I can't use DSR when streaming to my htpc. When I'm on my desktop I'll be using DSR alone or with some msaa depending.
T-1 hour and 18 bloody long minutes!!!!! 
Yeah, I forgot that DX9 kept the virtual address space in the same pool as the application. In pure technicality, it was only address space and not a full copy of the content, but that's purely semantics -- the memory was still essentially unavailable. Vista SP1 "fixed" this for DX10 by managing per-application video virtual address space to be managed separately because of how window focus switching needed to work in DWM. I believe that DX9 could never be fixed in the same way simply because of the inability to "back port" such a thing into legacy code.
It is my understanding that fully DX10 doesn't have to reserve that address space within the application pool ever since Vista SP1, and I believe that any of the modern DX10_Level9 aware-stuff can similarly take advantage.
Regardless, how many purely DX11 games are out there now, really? And for that matter, why wouldn't they be 64 bit to begin with (and thus, wouldn't care?)
I think a lot of games now don't support DX9 at all if that's what you're asking. Most DX11 games will run on feature level 10 cards like NVIDIA 8800 series but technically they are still DX11 only games. You must have the DX11 runtime installed to play these games.
I did some poking around on Microsoft's site, and I found the patch that I remembered: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/940105
Turns out that it also worked for DX9 applications too; DWM would now manage the "application video memory copy" separately from the application memory pool, so long as the application was using standard DX API calls for doing this work. My memory was also wrong on the use of that memory; keeping the copy of video memory was specific to ALT-TAB focus stuff just like I remembered, but that means it did indeed need a whole copy of the entire working set rather than just the address space reservation.
So, ever since that Vista patch (and subsequently, Vista SP1) any well-programmed DX9 or later video game should no longer be keeping it's own copy of video memory in it's own application memory pool.
Turns out that it also worked for DX9 applications too; DWM would now manage the "application video memory copy" separately from the application memory pool, so long as the application was using standard DX API calls for doing this work. My memory was also wrong on the use of that memory; keeping the copy of video memory was specific to ALT-TAB focus stuff just like I remembered, but that means it did indeed need a whole copy of the entire working set rather than just the address space reservation.
So, ever since that Vista patch (and subsequently, Vista SP1) any well-programmed DX9 or later video game should no longer be keeping it's own copy of video memory in it's own application memory pool.
DavidGraham
Veteran
Many people actually prefers that blur, it adds a filmic appearance to games, it is also more far more effective at removing jaggies than any other solution.
Actually AC:U's TXAA implementation is one of the worst, second only to The Crew and Far Cry 4 which are the worst implementations of TXAA period, these games just don't like AA, in fact none of the AA methods available to them are even half effective in eliminating jaggies. The best TXAA implementations are seen in games like Crysis 3, Evolve, Watch_Dogs, Titanfall, Assassin's Creed games (3 & 4) and Call Of Duty games (BO2 & Ghosts).
Last edited:
Yep I'm one of them.
AC:U may have been a bad implementation, I've never used TXAA in it tbh because the performance is so bad. In Black Flag and AC3 though the TXAA was awesome IMO.
The game works fine on my R9 280X almost everything maxed (as maxed as can be without going past memory barrier), but there's some graphical corruption on rectangle area on lower right corner. Using the fresh GTA5 Catalyst betas.
(also, the game has been playable for nearly 2 hours already with little trickery, if you want small headstart, here's how:
(also, the game has been playable for nearly 2 hours already with little trickery, if you want small headstart, here's how:
Actually I was referring to assassin's creed 3 as that's what I'm up to currently and I thought it was very good, and you seemed to confirm.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
The Rockstar downloader is the crappiest crap of a crappy downloader I've had to deal with for the past decade.
It's the third time I'm downloading no less than 50-60GB of data, because the crappy downloader completely halts when there's a file with a mismatched checksum. Doesn't re-download the file or try to fix it -> it literally hangs and says "error connecting to the server" indefinitely. And then save for checking every. single. file. for its checksum, that crap won't even tell me which files are screwed.
I thought we were past 1998, Rockstar.
And of course now that the game is unlocked, Rockstar is giving me 5KB/s download speeds.
When will I ever learn no to pre-order?!
It's the third time I'm downloading no less than 50-60GB of data, because the crappy downloader completely halts when there's a file with a mismatched checksum. Doesn't re-download the file or try to fix it -> it literally hangs and says "error connecting to the server" indefinitely. And then save for checking every. single. file. for its checksum, that crap won't even tell me which files are screwed.
I thought we were past 1998, Rockstar.
And of course now that the game is unlocked, Rockstar is giving me 5KB/s download speeds.
When will I ever learn no to pre-order?!
Raaaaaaage at the moment. It requires almost 140Gb total free space to unpack completely and then purge the old files. I don't have that amount of space on my desktop drives. I even have a 128Gb SSD dedicated for GTAV and it's not big enough. Now I have to download the entire thing again..... rraaaaaaaage
Don't blame GTA for that, blame SteamRaaaaaaage at the moment. It requires almost 140Gb total free space to unpack completely and then purge the old files. I don't have that amount of space on my desktop drives. I even have a 128Gb SSD dedicated for GTAV and it's not big enough. Now I have to download the entire thing again..... rraaaaaaaage
No such issues on Rockstar Social Club version (which was never encrypted in the first place)The game actually runs fine at max settings for me! Looks great too! Wonder how 4k looks...
Already encountered some bugs though (seems like starting the benchmark before starting the game is broke? or at least for me tried to start both simultaneously...giving me a mission failure for leaving the mission zone). Overall, a much better experience than GTA 4 (that bar wasn't hard to surpass though ).
Already encountered some bugs though (seems like starting the benchmark before starting the game is broke? or at least for me tried to start both simultaneously...giving me a mission failure for leaving the mission zone
). Overall, a much better experience than GTA 4 (that bar wasn't hard to surpass though ).
@Malo probably you can trick steam to accept unpacked files from the pirated version of GTA V. If the game have manifest files on the steamapp hard disk, then it is easier to do (but still not easy) compared to games without manifest file (it need registry edits).
but i guess its much easier to ask other friend to make steam backup and do restore from that backup.
but i guess its much easier to ask other friend to make steam backup and do restore from that backup.
Similar threads
