“cool”

Enjoy your stutter fest with your 2 year old game.

Yeah. I don’t think you understand what you’re talking about. An explosion isn’t a stress on a graphical component. However I can understand the why it can be misinterpreted as so, so I’ll let it slide. Generally explosions are keyframe animations of generated models, nothing more, with the use of CPU to affect physics and other variables. Fast paced action scenes are what the stress test is designed around.

Gaming hardware has changed a fair amount, but I guarantee you consoles wont change for much longer. A graphics card such as a GTX 770 can pull 60 FPS framerates in GTA 5 at high settings, and that card was released in the same period the Xbox One/PS4 came out. It can also run Ultra at 40. Both versions of GTV 5 performed equally based on my experience.

I’m sorry you’re incapable of reading my argument. 20 FPS at 4K does not equal 29. Fixating on minimum values means you pick and choose your information, and ignore the rest of the picture. “Cherry Picking” is a logical fallacy and does not benefit your argument, so therefore by your own admission you have nothing further to add to your own topic of discussion.

Pps – it’s a 2 year old game.

4k gaming on new games is a pipe dream.

PS – those figures you quoted were on the fabricated stress test which doesn’t really stress anything.

Huge explosions and fast paced action sees the fps drop even further.

Guess I was spot on correct after all.

The xb1 version ran better than the ps4 version, which got choppy frame rates at high speed driving. It did have more grass though.

Didn’t read the rest. I did vaguely see 4k at 29 fps though somewhere though. Petty much what I said.

Well, I’m glad to see you’re still spreading misinformation. So let’s get started with some basic facts. As far as console variants are concerned, GTA 5 ran slightly better on PS4 than on Xbox one. Really, the differences aren’t even worth comparing. That said, regardless, they still both ran at 1080p at a locked 30 FPS with no anti-aliasing.

A graphics comparison shows that the PC version is pulling a significant order of magnitude greater workload than the console variants, as demonstrated by these screenshots. There’s also a list of the general improvements on that page. They show the differences between Normal and Very High.

http://gearnuke.com/gta-v-pc-normalv-high-vs-ps3-vs-ps4-screenshot-comparison-shows-wait-worth/

PC version at very high has some effects and settings at a higher quality than the PS4 version of the game. Shadows are more natural and dense, better fog and smoke effects, a higher draw distance, and improved textures. (From above source).

At 1080P on the Ultra preset will run perfectly fine at 105FPS average on 2x GTX 980 in SLI. At 4K in the same configuration you would yield an average of 56 FPS, with a 0.1% low end of 29 FPS, and a 1% low of 33 FPS. You have the option to lock the game at 30FPS. A Titan X alone would allow perfectly playable levels at 4K on high. Please tell me why you’re saying dual 980s yield a 50% lower framerate minimum, and a 300% lower framerate maximum.

http://www.gamersnexus.net/game-bench/1905-gta-v-pc-fps-benchmark-graphics-cards

I don’t think PC gamers are the one in this thread that’s full of crap.

2 x gtx 980 in sli mode runs GTA 5 in 4k ultra at 20 fps.

PC gamers are full of crap with their 4k 60 fps talk.

I agree. people just hate to hate and don’t have a real valid reason as to why they hate.

That’s okay. As long as it’s FUN!

I’ll get my 4K/60fps plus my infinitely beautiful Clone Wars/Republic at War mods too on my MAXXED OUT P.C.!