And here comes a major leak. Today, almost all logs for GTA V’s internal builds have been leaked. According to the logs, the PC version of GTA V has been under development since 2012. This obviously does not surprise us, as we’ve all known that this game was coming to the PC (sooner or later). Still, this leak somehow explains why the game appeared on AMD’s drivers out of nowhere.
What’s also interesting is the fact that PS4 and Xbox One are never mentioned in these logs. This could mean that the PC platform is the lead platform for the current-gen version of GTA V that is coming later this Fall.
In addition, Rockstar’s game testers have been playing, testing and reporting issues for the PC version until June 2013. Moreover, it appears there will be x64 support as there was an error specifically for it.
Not only that, but we can notice specific PC issues being reported. In short, GTA V PC may not be as bad as GTA IV, especially if Rockstar is using it as the base build for the current-gen version of its title.
Those interested can view the entire log file here (do so while you still can).
John is the founder and Editor in Chief at DSOGaming. He is a PC gaming fan and highly supports the modding and indie communities. Before creating DSOGaming, John worked on numerous gaming websites. While he is a die-hard PC gamer, his gaming roots can be found on consoles. John loved – and still does – the 16-bit consoles, and considers SNES to be one of the best consoles. Still, the PC platform won him over consoles. That was mainly due to 3DFX and its iconic dedicated 3D accelerator graphics card, Voodoo 2. John has also written a higher degree thesis on the “The Evolution of PC graphics cards.”
Contact: Email
Awesome! Huihhh! Where are the Console Peasants now????
Who were saying PC gamers were crying for GTA V Port to PC!!!!!
I really really hope and wants to believe it isn’t just a rumor…. PC should be the lead platform for all the Multi-Platform games. Ubishit you get it? 😀
as long AAA games sell more on console, no
PS4 and Xbox One versions are ports of PC version.
Same as Watch Dogs, but in the end..UBI ditched PC version in favor of consoles…
Lets pray that Rockstar doesnt do us this disfavor!
Maybe is the other way around.
This made me laugh, if you actually belive that I feel sorry for you.
PC and last gen were develope PARALEL. So PC isn’t a port, and consoles either.
Such a bog story out of nothing.
Hahaha…. 😀
nice. but it’s almost Fall, come on R* announce the release date
Oh Come On! We can wait a little bit more… We have already waited long enough. Fall will be soon here Baby! 😀
pushed back jan 27th 2015
yeah, i know
Aren’t the new consoles 64bit? And it was likely developed ON a PC, that doesn’t necessarily mean anything. Rockstar will nail the PC port, though – this is the defining game of their studio. They’ll give it a lot of love.
x64 and 64bit is not the same thing. Even if R* don’t give it enough love, modmakers will.
Um… So what do you think x64 means, exactly?
AMD and Intel have different architectures. x64 is synonymous with 64-bit on either and kinda makes it more obvious I guess.
What are you talking about? Most modern CPUs (Both AMD and Intel) are x86 and are 64-bit. The two terms are not synonymous at all.
They’re x86-64 or x64 for short which means that it supports 64 bit instructions. So yes, something that is x86 can be 32 bit or 64 bit, but x64 is always 64 bit. Well technically I guess they could be talking about running 32 bit code on an x64 processor, but there would be no reason to say x64 in that case because 32 bit code runs exactly the same on x86-32 and x86-64 processors.
The arrangement of transistors and memory on (AMD and Intel) chips are different, yes, but data is calculated using either 32 or 64 bit registers. It’s like making two entirely different cars, but they both need wheels and drive on a road – they both need to adhere to the same rules, regardless of how they’re built.
AMD pioneered their own APU (accelerated processing unit) which is a CPU and GPU on the same piece of silicon. Both the PS4 and XB1 are 64 bit compatible.
!!!!! How??????
Of course they aren’t, one has a “X” in the beggining and the other has a “bit” in the end.
I think maybe he meant something else, but I never got an answer.
I can’t explain it. I’m just not knowledgeable enough. From what I understand both consoles and my PC are running x86 architecture and are 64bit. So if it is really stupid I’m sorry, I shouldn’t have said anything since I am not informed enough.
Well, you’re sort of right, there. But your original statement was false. x64 is simply a shorthand for x86/x64, or 64 bit. I know it’s a little confusing, which is probably part of the reason x64 took so long to adopt. Engineers are not good at marketing/ branding 🙂
Learn about PCs before talking shit.
x86 = 32 bits
x64 = 64 bits
That’s not how it works, theres x86-32 for 32 bit, and x86-64 for 64 bit. Search it up, 32 bit CPUs can have a max of 4GB of RAM, but the new consoles are x86, which means they can’t be 32 bit.
x64 is 64 bit.
The Playstation 4 (the only one I bothered to look up just now) has an x86-64 APU, so it’s 64 bit. Which is good because the new consoles have 8 gigs of RAM.
Saying x86-64 simply means it can do both 32 and 64 bit calculations.
Contrary to popular belief, there is no physical reason why a x86 cannot access memory above 4GB, but it’s more a case of Microsoft opting not to allow it on Windows.
Get out of here, you don’t know what you’re talking about.
I do, do your research newbie.
You have no knownlegde at all in IT, and I feel sorry you think you do.
I have over 15y of experience with computers, I studied more than 4y on a professional course, and I have a Microsoft IT Certificate.
Goodluck trying to act smart with me.
At the very least you’re being obtuse. x86 can be either 16/32/64 bit. And Windows “not allowing” PES is like BMW “not allowing” a hand-crank starter on the front grill of their cars. It’s not an issue of allowance – it’s that PES is obsolete.
The new consoles are x86-x64, so even though they don’t take advantage of more than 4 GB (4/4GB for the integrated CPU/GPU), the games themselves can still take advantage of the x64 registry for double-precision if they need to. It depends on the game at this point.
I have no idea what you’re talking about, and makes no sense at all.
First, the consoles use x64, and support more than 4GB, even if they used x86 they would support more than x64. And registry? That makes no sense at all, they do the instructions faster, has nothing to do with registry, that is a Windows feature, nothing to do with consoles nor x64.
Second, PES is (Pro Evolution Soccer), you can’t even name it right.
Learn more about PAE, before talking shit, because it’s technology available in every CPU, and is used everywhere besides Windows, and even on Windows you can activate it and use more than 3.5GB, unlike what Microsoft says.
The same way Microsoft limits ram on x64, Home Premium (16GB MAX), they limit x86 to 3.5GB for no reason.
Like I said, learn more about IT, before even trying to act smart with me.
You’re only partially right, but you’re being a dickhead and not worth talking to. I hope you mend that shit with your father ’cause no one’s going to want to be your friend.
4GB is the limit of x86, PAE doesn’t actually solve that because 32bit application still have a 2GB limit, so all PAE does it is make the OS see more physical RAM. x86_64 solves both issues of course.
You got mixed up mate. Linux distros use PAE enabled kernel for people who don’t want to move to a fully fledge 64bit system, whether that be for app comparability or other reasons so they can use more than 4GB RAM on their 32bit OS. Windows doesn’t give you that option because it has a 32bit layer so really there is no need for PAE enabled Windows versions. Not sure where you’re getting dual-precision from, that sounds like you mixed it up with graphics precision.
The consoles must be 64bit because the virtual address space of 32bit would limit it to 2GB per app.
Contrary to popular belief, there is no physical reason why a x86 cannot access memory above 4GB, but it’s more a case of Microsoft opting not to allow it on Windows.
Please learn more about IT.
You’re confusing things here. x86 can be either 32 or 64 bit. Windows (for normal consumer use) doesn’t support PAE http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension beyond 4GB because why should it? Now that we have multiple x64 cores and multithreading, there’s no reason to run multiple 32 bit programs with access to more than 4 gb RAM (unless for some reason you NEED to run Windows Server 2008, which is just silly). Going full 64 bit made PAE entirely obsolete. Now software developers either manage the RAM usage in their programs to stay under 4 gb, or they make their program x64 compatible and eliminate the RAM cap almost completely.
Windows supports PAE, x86 is 32 bits, not 64 bits.
Good look trying to run 64 bits on a x86 (32 bits) only system.
You’re mistaking x64 that supports both x86 and x64 for a CPU that only supports x86.
Straight from Microsoft, goodluck with your wikipedia, http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa366796(v=vs.85).aspx
Like I said, don’t try to act smart on me, with your low knownlegde and wikipedia false information.
I wasn’t talking shit, I was just saying.
Lol forgot to relog to your Jay account after thumbing yourself up? so pathetic…
Jose Alves knows his shit, and manners have nothing to to with knowledge imo
Hopefully. Max Payne 3 was awesome on PC
Yeah I was entirely impressed with the controls in MP3. I think I read somewhere that they used the tighter, more accurate controls they pioneered in Max Payne.
When you forget how much i love Max Payne in general, the game itself (3) was one of the best looking, smoothest and great shooters i’ve ever played. The story was okay, but i love how they gave it to us with all of those cool videos.
No, the PS4 and the XO are x86 (32 bits).
explain how a so-called 32bit ps4 handles 8gb ram… the new consoles are 64bit using the x86 (that doesnt mean 32bit) architecture you find on PCs
It’s possible to use x86 (32 bits) and use more than 4GB of RAM.
Contrary to popular belief, there is no physical reason why a x86 cannot access memory above 4GB, but it’s more a case of Microsoft opting not to allow it on Windows.
Learn more about IT please.
x86 is just an architecture name. x86-32 is a 32bit extension and x86-64 is a 64bit extension to the x86 architecture, usually known as “x32” and “x64”. A 32-bit only CPU can address a maximum of 4GB (2^32 bits = 4294967296
bits = 4194304 KB = 4096 MB = 4GB). This is the limitation of 32-bit only
systems. This is the reason where the “you can’t use more than 4GB ram!” comes from. Yeah, old x86 CPU’s before Pentium 4’s or Athlon 64’s couldn’t use more memory than that.
They just wanted to limit Windows like that too, even if you had x86-64 compatible processor. So if your CPU is lets say, 64bit (standard nowadays) – it can be made to use more memory even on a 32 bit compiled OS – IF the OS is decent. The reason we are using “higher bit OS” too now is to have the benefits of 64bit registers on the 64bit CPU’s.
For ordinary folk it means in optimal cases you can get more performance out from it, if the program is compiled on 64bit.
It’s not ram. It’s vram. Hence why they say they have GDDR5 and gddr3 ram. They don’t have system ram. It’s all don’t with vram.
False. It’s one pool of GDDR5 used for everything, it’s not all VRAM, only about 3.5GB max is used for VRAM when needed. There other 3GB and 2 cores are reserved.
Also, stop with this RAM and VRAM, they’re the same thing on consoles.
You are misinformed, sir. They are both x86-64, which means they’re both 64 bit.
Only two testers? lol 😀
http://steamdb.info/app/271590/graphs/
I think it is because 2 guys were testing steam verion they have closed firmware version for themselfs
They might be the only ones testing the online system since they haven’t gotten the online servers up for it yet.
These are old, this leaked a long time ago.
What about this…?
Whats the problem?
LMAO….john, are you seriously just finding out about this “news”? it’s been known for just about a year now that the PC version was developed well before the so called “next gen” consoles were released. the PC version was in developed BEFORE 2012.
look at it’s first mention in the dev file and you will see that it was already fully functional and ready for mission bug tests, which logically implies the base build began development well before that.
also, OF COURSE the PC version is the lead platform for the new console ports. how else do you think rockstar would have managed to create it for those consoles in such a short time period? the only possible way to achieve this is by creating a dedicated PC version first, and then porting them to the new x86 based consoles. easy peezy while saving lots of time and more importantly, money.
the PC VERSION is the definitive version of GTA V. i know this because i spent countless hours researching, investigating the dev files and speaking with “insiders” who post at the official gtaforums.
When is the PC not the lead platform for multiplats? Even games people consider poor ports are superior.
Yes! we did it!
well no shit the PC is going to be the lead platform, i didnt invest 2500 dollars into my rig for nothing!