A few games recently, like Prototype, GTA4, they look fine, but compared to designed-for-PC games e.g. Source engine games, they seem to perform so badly. Take Prototype, it looks ok, but can’t even manage high FPS on my PC when the same hardware delivers massively higher FPS on Source-based games (which arguably look prettier too) and can play Crysis on High at 1680 x 1050 so I know it is still capable of decent gaming performance. I used to have similar problems with console ports like Just Cause on my old system.
GTA 4 I know is cpu-limited but even then, so are Source-based games. But Source games run well on even low-end hardware and yet even on high-end hardware the ports look good without being amazing on PC and still suffer from low FPS. Plus, turning down the graphics settings doesn’t even improve FPS in Prototype, so does that mean it’s cpu-limited also?
GTA 4 looks good (but not great IMO) but why does it seem to waste so much cpu and gpu power to only look nice? I know people say you need a quad-core for GTA 4, but even on the fastest dual-core on the market, both cores are continually maxed out but seem to be producing only mediocre (slightly turned down) graphics/physics etc. for so much effort. My GPU fan never even sounds like it has to spin up near full while playing, yet FPS dip to sub-20 at times, even with the distance settings already turned down? That’s another question, are console ports getting the cpu to produce some graphics/effects instead of the gpu, is that the main inefficiency for console ports on PCs?
Also COD series – they seem to run so much better than any of the badly ported games and yet look even better too! So what is the problem here? It’s obviously possible to port games so they perform well. Are games that are just “badly ported” (most console ports it would seem) doomed to run badly on all but Uber-PC’s?
They just feel to be running so inefficiently, considering the capabilities of the hardware. Sorry, just trying to get my head around this, any advice welcome. Cheers.
GTA 4 I know is cpu-limited but even then, so are Source-based games. But Source games run well on even low-end hardware and yet even on high-end hardware the ports look good without being amazing on PC and still suffer from low FPS. Plus, turning down the graphics settings doesn’t even improve FPS in Prototype, so does that mean it’s cpu-limited also?
GTA 4 looks good (but not great IMO) but why does it seem to waste so much cpu and gpu power to only look nice? I know people say you need a quad-core for GTA 4, but even on the fastest dual-core on the market, both cores are continually maxed out but seem to be producing only mediocre (slightly turned down) graphics/physics etc. for so much effort. My GPU fan never even sounds like it has to spin up near full while playing, yet FPS dip to sub-20 at times, even with the distance settings already turned down? That’s another question, are console ports getting the cpu to produce some graphics/effects instead of the gpu, is that the main inefficiency for console ports on PCs?
Also COD series – they seem to run so much better than any of the badly ported games and yet look even better too! So what is the problem here? It’s obviously possible to port games so they perform well. Are games that are just “badly ported” (most console ports it would seem) doomed to run badly on all but Uber-PC’s?
They just feel to be running so inefficiently, considering the capabilities of the hardware. Sorry, just trying to get my head around this, any advice welcome. Cheers.
