How much does Crysis torture a rig?

[nes]

You see what I'm working with. Will this game, which I haven't bought yet, make me want to upgrade? I hate getting games that make me want to upgrade. I have heard horror stories that only a SLI Setup can give you the true Crysis and other tales of it being only truly expressed with 'Quad Core'.

I'm going to buy it but I really don't want to have to upgrade. Online retailers don't like me when I upgrade

:lol:

[Scott]

Run it at 1280x1024 with no AA and should do okay. I would not buy SLI since we do not know what new highend card may be in the wings.

[Kougar]

Ya should be more than fine with what you have, although you may not be able to max out everything. I don't believe Crysis makes full use of a QuadCore anyway but will have to wait and see to be sure.

[zachig]

I'm having almost the same setup as yours (E6600@3Ghz, 2GB of RAM, Leadtek 8800GTX) and I've ran the DEMO (still waiting for my pre-ordered full game to arrive...;-)) on HIGH settings, except for "Object" that was set to VERY HIGH) with a resolution of 1680x1050, but with AA disabled and I got around 25-30 FPS and gameplay was quite fine and smooth.

I don't the point in upgrading your rig just for Crysis, as it'll run quite good on your rig. Unless, you really want to put everything on VERY HIGH and use 16QxAA, but believe me, you won't see a big difference in the graphics if at all...:roll:

[Frag Maniac]

Watch the video review at Gamespot for an overall idea of what you'll need and what it will allow on Crysis. In short you need at least a pretty good dual core and high end card just to use high detail at moderate resolutions. There is no hardware made yet that will play it on Ultra at high res. Best case scenario of course is a fast or OCed quad core with high end DX10 card, 4GB RAM, and Vista 64 bit.

The game on Medium and esp Low by comparison is much less impressive. Low detail results in objects like rocks appearing right in front of you as you move forward. Thus, if you now have gear that can play it on Low, it's better to upgrade to something that can play it on High than merely bumping up a little and expecting Medium settings to be impressive.

My rig (P4 3.0GHz, X800XT, 2GB RAM) can play it @ 1024x768 with Med textures, High sound, 2xAA, and everything else Low. I went into windowed mode @ 1024x640 using everything Low and High textures and it does start looking noticably better but much more laggy. You really need everything High and a good 1680x1050 or more before everything looks really nice though.

One of the main reasons for that is the shaders start really showing nice light and shadow detail like sun filtering through trees and the res at that point keeps the jaggies minimized. A card with high memory capacity (at least 512-640 MB) will help keep the Lod from making rocks and such appear out of nowhere too.

[nes]

Okay, I'm going to pick up a copy today and I'll post what I can run this monster at.

[darkorb]

my system in my sig, medium settings, 0xaa, 1680x1050. i get average 22fps

i tried same medium settings, and 1280x720 and no difference in FPS. FPs wise its really gay, but the game is still sick

[nes]

Well, I couldn't help it and I went ahead and upgraded my graphics card from XFX 8800 GTX XXX Edition to an XFX 8800 GT Alpha Dog Edition XXX!

I'm going to get Crysis tonight. I know, I know, I just couldn't go and get it after my last post on this thread. I had to go and get the Alpha Dog XXX. I read the XFX 8800 GT Alpha Dog Edition XXX review and I had to do it.

Okay, so I'm going to Walmart tonight after we get down with our 24hour ops mission. I'm going to have to get a ride from somebody who has a 4x4 vehicle so I can actually get through the snow up here. The North Country NY is ruled by the Lake Ontario Snow Machine!

[darkorb]

Lake ontario w00t w00t

So lemme get this straight, u 'upgraded' from a GTX to a GT?

Souds like a downgrade to me..

[PP Mguire]

No, the GT outperforms the GTX. REad the review. Sounds like a downgrade but its really not. I play wiht my setup high settings except texture which is on medium with 0AA @ 1440x900. I did not see a difference with SLI.

[Frag Maniac]

Don't know about downgrade, but if it plays ANY games better than the one you had it certainly won't be by enough of a margain to warrant the expense of the swap. If you wanted to upgrade you should have waited until Feb when the release of the 9800GTX and GTS is rumored to be. The 9800GTX will likely run any game at even 2560x1600 by itself for some time. Just don't waste money on another 8800GT to go SLI and if you want to sell it do so well BEFORE the 9000 series release and revert back to your 8800GTX until it's available.

[PP Mguire]

Id stick with the 8800GT. More potential.

[Miker]

Yet to play it. With my PC I know better, that game will make me want to upgrade.

[bobletman]

Even though I have a better CPU you have a better GPU and I run the game on high with 1680x1050 resolition and no AA. I get 27 FPS average. You should be fine.

[nes]

I can run Crytek's Crysis with all settings maxed out except for post processing. I have post processing set to high. And I also have AA set to none. It runs just fine actually. I do run into some FPS hiccups on cut scenes. It's a little strange.

Honestly, I wonder if Crytek is going to do some patching. I'm sure that they can do something about smoothing it out. I would get another 8800 GT Alpha Dog XXX but you guys are dropping science on the 9800 and now I'm getting hesitant.

I am sad that Game Developers aren't simply optimizing codes for current DX10 and 88series GPUs. I see all sorts of untapped potentials. One thing that console gaming shines in. Developers are forced to roll with the current hardware and therefore create amazing amounts of techniques that push the hardware to new heights. DX10 and 88series GPUs have not been around for long at all and yet developers are already talking about DX10.1 and 98series GPUs. This is getting a bit ridiculous. I mean is the average gamer rich? Each one of these cards is like buying a PS3 or buying two PS3s.

I know my pleas won't be heard, maybe someone will champion my cause. Probably not. Developers should just slow down, stop looking at the dollar, euro, yen or whatever and I'm not saying that the new technologies shouldn't be developed. I'm saying that they should shift down to third gear, work within the envelope of DX10 and 88series until they reach its limits (I dont' mean see them and run for the hills of DX10.1) and, in the meantime, farm the new technology. By the time they run out of tweaks, surprises, and achievements they will have been ready to put forth fully realized next gen DX10.1 cards and the tweaks and workarounds for the current hardware can be readily handled alongside implementing the next gen tech.

just my two cents:keepfolding:

[PP Mguire]

Dude DX10 hardware support and 8800s have been out for like a year. You hamper the technology upgrade/inscrease and things will really slow down. Just quit trying to stay top of the line and youll be fine. Also i believe 10.1 and 10 will be like 8 and 8.1. No real difference.

[Frag Maniac]

Nes I don't see a lot of sense to the complaining in that last post. What the heck do you mean by "dropping science on the 9800"? If anything the latest rumors, from a fairly reliable source this time (Digitimes), indicates they are coming out with the 9800s Feb with a new high end enthuisiast level chip dubbed the D9E. Word is these cards are going to support DX10.1 and shader 4.1 as well.

Also, Crysis in general is NOT the game to pick on as far as optimization goes. Heck I have just a P4 3.0GHz, X1950Pro 512MB AGP and 2 GB RAM system and even I don't blame Crytek of such things. It looks and sounds fine at the settings I can use which are High textures, Medium shaders, shadows, water, sound, rest Low, at 1200x900 using 8x AF averaging 35 FPS. If you want to use post processing try fine tuning the blur commands as per the TweakGuides.com guide. By default they are quite heavy and I actually prefer them off except for a little depth of field, which can't be turned completely off anyway.

If I were to single out some games that really DO need optimizing it would be any of the Matrix games, Just Cause, Boiling Point, MoH: Airborne, GRAW 1 & 2, Bioshock, etc. Crysis by comparison looks better and plays smother than ANY of these titles by far. It's common for someone to buy current hardware spec and automatically assume they're going to be able to use any settings and res they want. This is a game that will last into future gear but also looks and plays better than current games even without it.

Simply put if Crysis could not go beyond the capabilities of current gear it would not compete as well with games down the road. They wrote it with a trilogy in mind, that means by the 3rd installment this engine must still be cutting edge by the standards of Crytek, which I feel is reasonable given how well the game looks and runs even on current gear. I think you need to be realistic about it.

[PP Mguire]

Ok i have the actual game. Figure id post my experience with it.

1440x900 no aa all high settings except post which is on low and i get about average 25fps.

[zachig]

I think I've mentioned it somewhere, but in case I didn't...

I'm currently running Crysis @1680x1050 with everything set to VERY HIGH, but with AA disabled and I'm getting an average FPS of 20.

It plays quite smooth, as most of the time the FPS are around 20-23, but sometimes, during massive combats, the FPS drops down to 12.

Anyway, with my new 4GB of RAM, I got increase of 3-4 FPS, compared to my previous 2GB of RAM. Not a big performance increase, but still "something". :grin:

[PP Mguire]

For the extra money id say thats not worth it.

[zachig]

For the extra money id say thats not worth it.
Yeah, but with the cheap prices nowadays of 4GB kits (less than $140 for a good kit), I just couldn't hold myself...:lol:

[PP Mguire]

I just noticed this from posting on AJs thread about the ram. You are quite right. I nearlly peed myself seeing thoe cheap prices. I thikn i might do it too! :D After getting a new board of course.

[zachig]

I just noticed this from posting on AJs thread about the ram. You are quite right. I nearlly peed myself seeing thoe cheap prices. I thikn i might do it too! :D After getting a new board of course.
GOOD LUCK then...:icon_tiphat: ;-)

[PP Mguire]

Im thinking about purchasing these
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227278

[zachig]

Im thinking about purchasing these
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227278
That's the kit I wanted to buy at first, but finally ended up getting the much cheaper (~$110) kit with much more loosened timings (5-5-5-18).

If you really care about tight timings and don't mind paying the extra money for it, you'll be VERY satisfied with this kit, as the timings are great, 4-4-3-15, or something like that, if I'm not wrong.

And those Heatpipes Coolers are very impressive, so you can reach VERY HIGH speeds with these...

So, if you're going to overclock you memory as well and really care about the tight timings, that's definitely the kit for you.

I know I didn't care about the overclock and tight timings and that's why I bought mine...;-)

Hope this helps...:icon_tiphat: GOOD LUCK!

[PP Mguire]

Yea i chose these cause the tight stock timings and i thought the heatpipes where cool. When i get my new board i also intend on OCing big time. So great ram helps :)

[zachig]

Yea i chose these cause the tight stock timings and i thought the heatpipes where cool. When i get my new board i also intend on OCing big time. So great ram helps :)
Well...GOOD LUCK then with your overclock.

I bet you'll achieve high overclock levels with this set of RAM.

I've heard/heard it easily reaches 1066MHz on stock/tight timings of 4-4-3-10 and with a slight voltage bump and loosening the timings to something around 5-5-5-15, it can even reach 1333MHz!!! :jawdrop: And just thinking it's originally a 800MHz PC6400 RAM.

And one more thing, those heatpipes look COOL!!! :-D

[PP Mguire]

Now the question is, how high can my proccy go.

[zachig]

Now the question is, how high can my proccy go.
That's a good question. ;-) You know, the sky is the limit...:lol:

Keep us updated...:icon_tiphat:

[bobletman]

wouldnt the voltage be the limit?

[PP Mguire]

Haha kinda, but like my 3000+ and Jerrys 4000+ i was runnin them at 1.6v ;) supposed to be mad crazy but they ran cool.

[bobletman]

They might have ran cool but I bet there life was shortened a bit.

[werty316]

wouldnt the voltage be the limit?
More so it the chip than the voltage.

[PP Mguire]

They might have ran cool but I bet there life was shortened a bit.3000+ ran 2 years that way and still is goin strong.

[zachig]

I was just kidding, you know...;-)

Of course there is a limit, and probably like werty said, it's the chip and/or CPU itself that will limit him.

OH...and PP Mquire...don't take too much risks, as I guess you don't want to fry your CPUs, Ah? :ahhhhh:(I know I would never try to run my CPU at a Core Voltage of more than 1.5V, unless using water, but even then, no more than 1.55V/1.6V. And also about my NB, never tried and never WILL TRY to run it on more than 1.56V...Just my 2 cents...;-))

[PP Mguire]

I had a spare X2 3800+ and my X2 4800+ at the time. No worries for me ;)

[bobletman]

lol in that case. If you have a spare torture the crap out of the one ur useing right now.

[PP Mguire]

My 5600+ is AM2, all my other proccies are 939.

[Xero (1)ne]

:threadjacked:

Anyone know when the first patch is due? I know it's already been pushed back but is there any evidence of a date?

[PP Mguire]

From what ive read so far no leaks yet.

[Sera]

So far I am surprised this game is playable at 2560 * 1600 resolution, using a mix of high, very high and some other settings beyond very high. I am satisfied with the compromise of settings vs performance, and I am looking forward to the patch:

http://img408.imageshack.us/my.php?image=crysislr9.jpg

I have played it through twice, and I am now attempting to finish it at delta difficulty.

[Frag Maniac]

A bit of a nod to Crysis the other way for those of you still trying to tweak it for better performance and/or visual quality. You can if you have adequate RAM (and preferably high VRAM) turn off texture streaming with NO FPS drop which noticably improves textures on things like the rocky peaks. Use the command r_TexturesStreaming 0 (make sure you use 2 Ss).

In case you're wondering what adequate means I have 2GB DDR PC 400 and (and 512MB VRAM). It's mainly just the RAM though. I get absolutely NO FPS drop and if you have your objects quality set to High you will really notice the difference in texture detail. Your Texture Quality tab will say "Custom" once you apply this tweak. For some reason at Med or Low objects quality these rocky peaks look terribly blurred with no texture detail whatsoever (read on).

I have also found that for lower spec systems you can keep rocks and vegetaion from noticably drawing in and out of view in front of you even on Low objects quality if you use the e_view_dist_ratio_vegetation command. Setting it to at least midway between it's Med and High objects quality values is necessary to do this. It's Med value is 21, High being 31, so use at least 26.

This creates MUCH less FPS drain than using Med or High objects quality and puts your OQ tab at "Custom". The performance you get will depend on how high you go with the value. You cannot however eliminate the noticable texture flickers and distant blurriness on some things like the rocky peaks mentioned unless you use High objects quality (so far in my testing anyway).

I am currently trying to find a way to keep the rocky peaks detailed in texture without using High objects quality. So far in my process of elimination I know it has nothing to do with any of the cvars listed under Med (2) or High (3) objects detail in the Objects Detail file in the CvarGroups directory.

My last hope is that some of the cvars listed under Low objects detail settings but not Med or High have something to do with it. If not I can only assume setting objects quality to High automatically tweaks one of the lua files or something, whcih may be too complex for me to pursue.

[Sadasius]

So far I am surprised this game is playable at 2560 * 1600 resolution, using a mix of high, very high and some other settings beyond very high. I am satisfied with the compromise of settings vs performance, and I am looking forward to the patch:

http://img408.imageshack.us/my.php?image=crysislr9.jpg

I have played it through twice, and I am now attempting to finish it at delta difficulty.

Nice pic! Hopefully with the new setup I will be able to play those settings.

[bobletman]

Anyone know when the patch is coming out?

[Frag Maniac]

OK guys, don't know if any of you tried the above performance tweaks I mentioned, but here's another for you. This now completes my performance tweaks for Crysis and I now can only wait and see if their performance patch will improve FPS any further. Last I heard it's due early January btw.

OK, now for that tweak. I found out how to keep the rocky peaks and rock cliffs looking sharp in texture even with Objects Quality set to Low. First off do use the e-view_dist_ratio_vegetation command to keep the nearby beach rocks from popping in and out of view as mentioned above. I found setting it to it's High OQ value of 31 works quite well and keeps FPS up.

Next you need to use a very long command to keep the textures on those peaks and cliffs sharp. That command is e_detail_materials_view_dist_xy. It's default value at High OQ is 2048, which keeps even distant peaks that are not near the playing area sharp. I tried 1024 as well but the FPS didn't really raise and the more distant peaks then looked very blurry.

Note that texture streaming needs to be turned off to get max effectiveness out of the detail materials command. You do need an adequate amount of memory to do that without FPS drop though. It helps as well to have adequate VRAM too, esp if you use higher resolutions.

I have 2GB RAM and a 512MB VRAM and I get no FPS drop from turning off texture streaming. Once again the command to turn off texture streaming is r_TexturesStreaming 0 (use r_TexturesStreaming = 0 if you put it in a System.cfg file).

A few facts before I end, I have a P4 3GHz HT Northwood, X1950Pro 512MB AGP, 2GB RAM spec. I am running the game at 1200x900 averaging 30 FPS.

In game settings:

High
Physics Quality
Volumetric Effects Quality
Game Effects Quality
Particles Quality
Water Quality
Sound Quality

Medium
Shadows Quality
Shaders Quality

Low
Post Processing Quality

Custom
Texture Quality (Above High by turning off texture streaming, much sharper peaks/cliffs with no FPS drop)
Objects Quality (Above Low by view distance & detail tweaks {High OQ peaks/cliffs}, 5 FPS gain vs High OQ)

As you can see even mediocre spec can play this game if configured properly. I have no OCing on my hardware. The only slight change I made was removing the fan grilles from the case for better airflow and resetting the GPU fan thresholds via ATI Tool.

The game looks great at these settings and I actually prefer not to use High shaders due to the excessive ambient occlusion lighting that adds a hazey, overcast desaturated look and anything above Low post processing adds lots of blur that I don't like too. You can see some distant textures being drawn into view vs using High Objects Quality but nothing too bad.

Crysis is unique in that it plays very well even at 30 FPS average. The 1200x900 resolution also eliminates most of the jagged edges, which allow for far better FPS than using 1024x768 with High shaders and post processing which enable full AA.

[Sera]

I have been playing with "Pydon's Natural Mod" that can be downloaded here:
http://files.filefront.com/Pydon+Natural+Mod+v10/;9320852;/fileinfo.html/1/1

Many reasons why I like this mod, but here are the screenshots (the first two are because the night is now actually dark, and there's an actual use/need for the NVG, the last 4 really shows the mod in its beauty):

http://img72.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pydon000uw8.jpg
http://img248.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pydon001og2.jpg
http://img142.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pydon002ly4.jpg
http://img301.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pydon003gc4.jpg
http://img70.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pydon004rf8.jpg
http://img229.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pydon005km9.jpg

Again, I am amazed by the visual quality, performance at 2560 * 1600 (0*AA / 8*AF). To me, Crytek has done an excellent job...


Nice pic! Hopefully with the new setup I will be able to play those settings.

Thank you, and I hope that too!


Anyone know when the patch is coming out?

The beta patch has been released to limited users already, so it should be ready for release within in a few weeks. The potential performance gains I hope are significant.

[bobletman]

Wow that is really impressive. Thats a great mod I cant wait to try it. Btw can you tell me what is the code to check your fps in crysis I can never seem to remember it.

[Sera]

Wow that is really impressive. Thats a great mod I cant wait to try it. Btw can you tell me what is the code to check your fps in crysis I can never seem to remember it.

Of course:

r_displayinfo = 1

[bobletman]

Thank you I need to save that to a notepad I always keep forgeting. Btw what profile name do you guys use when playing Crysis I just use bobletman. :)

[Sera]

Thank you I need to save that to a notepad I always keep forgeting. Btw what profile name do you guys use when playing Crysis I just use bobletman. :)

Make an autoexec.cfg with the command (and others if you like), and place that in the root Crysis folder (the one with the Bin32, Game, Tools subfolders).

I usually make a new profile each time I play through the game. My current is PydonDelta. As to my MP name, then I have none, as I don't play MP at all (3G connection sux concerning latency, or least mine do).

[PP Mguire]

Thats really good looking. What exactly does the mod do?

[werty316]

Thats really good looking. What exactly does the mod do?

Short Description
Photorealism and realistic atmospheric effects for Crysis.
Basically it looks like the HDR lighting is on steroids.

[Sera]

Basically it looks like the HDR lighting is on steroids.

HDR + Sunrays on steroids, yeah, nothing realistic about it all, but it looks good to me anyways. There are also some material differences I guess, since the download contains reworked maps. Somebody with better time and skills than myself, should probably take a look at them in the editor.

It has its advantages in terms of a better looking game, and a realistic element like the night is darker and I needed the use NVG at times. But the info is deceptive, and if anything.

Still an excellent mod this early after release of the game.

[Frag Maniac]

I think the only part I'd like is the darker nights. Something right in between the way it is in game and the night lighting the editor has would be just right IMO. As for the HDR and lighting mods I've seen, they all look too unrealistic to be with too much glow and even color alteration in some.

[PP Mguire]

Thanx for the info guys. I might take a look at it when i feel like playing the game.