Crysis 3 Alpha (Multi-player testing) CPU and GPU Preliminary Performance - GameGPU

[Haserath]

It'll be interesting to see some pics. When is the release date, or has it not been announced yet?

[frozentundra123456]

Originally Posted by SPBHM

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/880-...rma-ii-oa.html

Crysis 2 have over 20% gain for the 8350

Even with a 20% increase, it would still be below any quad intel. Any dual core, even the i3 is starting to suffer in the newer games though.

[RussianSensation]

Originally Posted by SPBHM

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/880-...rma-ii-oa.html

Crysis 2 have over 20% gain for the 8350

That's impressive. However, i5-2500K is 56% faster than 8150. Next year, Intel will have Haswell. I am pretty sure Intel CPUs will have a substantial lead in this game, although if you look at GPU benchmarks at VHQ, it makes no difference as the game will be 99.9% GPU limited in the foreseeable future. Unless you can afford GTX790 SLI, the FX8350 CPU limitation would not really be a factor I bet at vhq.

Originally Posted by Haserath

It'll be interesting to see some pics. When is the release date, or has it not been announced yet?

February 2013 supposedly.

[tviceman]

It is weird seeing the gtx680 closing the gap so significantly when moving up from 1080p to 1440p. Looks like a driver bug. Still though, the 7970GE is strong. The benchmarks indicate it is going to bring everything to it's knee's like Crysis 1 did when it first came out.

[VulgarDisplay]

Originally Posted by tviceman

It is weird seeing the gtx680 closing the gap so significantly when moving up from 1080p to 1440p. Looks like a driver bug. Still though, the 7970GE is strong. The benchmarks indicate it is going to bring everything to it's knee's like Crysis 1 did when it first came out.

It's kinda hard to say really how demanding the game is going to be on Very High without being able to see the actual settings. Very High Quality could have some crazy AA setting like 8xSSAA or something which would bring all these cards to their knees.

Or maybe it's a whole new level of flat surface tesselation added on Very High quality and there will be no visual difference to high quality for tesselation. Perhaps someone who got in the beta could clarify what the different graphics options are, but they would probably violate some NDA.

[SPBHM]

Originally Posted by RussianSensation

That's impressive. However, i5-2500K is 56% faster than 8150. Next year, Intel will have Haswell. I am pretty sure Intel CPUs will have a substantial lead in this game, although if you look at GPU benchmarks at VHQ, it makes no difference as the game will be 99.9% GPU limited in the foreseeable future. Unless you can afford GTX790 SLI, the FX8350 CPU limitation would not really be a factor I bet at vhq.



February 2013 supposedly.

the thing is, you don't need to play in very high, the game looks decent even in low, and it's pretty easy on the GPU in low... so even with a 7850 or lower the CPU can make a difference in low-medium, if you are aiming for super smooth or responsive gameplay...


but I expect the 8350 to be significantly faster than the 8150, considering the difference in Crysis 2 at least...

but still, maybe the final game will be easier on the CPU or something...

[brandon888]

some people said few weeks ago ...." GTX 660 TI is overkill for 1080P " .... LMAO ....

[MTDEW]

Originally Posted by brandon888

some people said few weeks ago ...." GTX 660 TI is overkill for 1080P " .... LMAO ....

It's probably that Top Secret Tessellated Toad Tech killing performance...LOL

This info confirms my decision to wait for the the next generation of GPU's b4 upgrading since i don't think the current gen GPUs were enough of a performance leap from last gen to justify upgrading, especially the lower end like the 660ti.

Although AMD and their new performance bundle looks tempting along with those massive 7950 overclocks everyone keeps posting here.
But it still looks like you'd need two of those cards for this game.
I need to learn to stay out of AT VC&G, it makes me "think" i need to upgrade more often than i actually do.

[moonbogg]

Look at that 3930k beat the 2600k even at 200mhz less. That makes me happy. Too bad it won't matter without two GTX870's.

[aaksheytalwar]

This is my experience with a relatively average Internet connection:

1080p
Everything V High/on except
Shading High
Shadows High
Water High
Post Processing High
I get avg 70s and 80s.

With the same settings and 1440p I get avg mid 50s to low 60s.

1080p is smoother but 1440p is playable as well.

Then at 1080p with high Rez textures off and everything V High
Except
Shading at High
And maybe 0-1 thing at high
I get avg 80+ as well.

So basically the next gen cards will manage 1080p maxed out at 50+ fps hopefully. Especially once paired with haswell.

[aaksheytalwar]

Originally Posted by MTDEW

It's probably that Top Secret Tessellated Toad Tech killing performance...LOL

This info confirms my decision to wait for the the next generation of GPU's b4 upgrading since i don't think the current gen GPUs were enough of a performance leap from last gen to justify upgrading, especially the lower end like the 660ti.

Although AMD and their new performance bundle looks tempting along with those massive 7950 overclocks everyone keeps posting here.
But it still looks like you'd need two of those cards for this game.
I need to learn to stay out of AT VC&G, it makes me "think" i need to upgrade more often than i actually do.

In the most recent games, especially with Tess and/or AA. A 7970 stock comes close to twice the performance of a 6950 unlocked. At least 65-90% faster where it really counts.

[CryHavoc]

I can play crysis 2 at 1920 with the dx11 and tesellation packs using a core2 duo E8500 with 4gb of ram and an MSI Twin Frozr 6870 just fine and very playable.

Crysis 3 with graphics set to high on the rig above is unplayable
set to medium, its barely playable
set to low graphics, its only tolerable.

Crysis 3 will make anyone with an older system like mine, who wants to play it, upgrade to much better hardware.

Thusly, I have a core I5-3750k and an asus z77 pro board on the way from newegg.
Hopefully my trusty 6870 will be able to take advantage of the better mobo/cpu/8gb of ram and keep me from having to upgrade my vid card

[biostud]

A 2.8Ghz i5-760 slaughtering a 3.6Ghz 8150...

[CryHavoc]

Originally Posted by Haserath

It'll be interesting to see some pics. When is the release date, or has it not been announced yet?

They sent out emails to "select" Origin members with a code to be able to download the closed beta.

I just downloaded and installed it on Sunday.
Its a GPU AND CPU monster.

[toyota]

Originally Posted by CryHavoc

I can play crysis 2 at 1920 with the dx11 and tesellation packs using a core2 duo E8500 with 4gb of ram and an MSI Twin Frozr 6870 just fine and very playable.

Crysis 3 with graphics set to high on the rig above is unplayable
set to medium, its barely playable
set to low graphics, its only tolerable.

Crysis 3 will make anyone with an older system like mine, who wants to play it, upgrade to much better hardware.

Thusly, I have a core I5-3750k and an asus z77 pro board on the way from newegg.
Hopefully my trusty 6870 will be able to take advantage of the better mobo/cpu/8gb of ram and keep me from having to upgrade my vid card

sorry but I do not believe that. my E8500 even at 3.8 was pegged in that game even a notch below max settings. and my oced gtx560 se is almost as fast as your 6870 and in no way shape or form is Crysis 2 fully playable on max DX11 settings and high res texture pack at 1920x1080. even my oced gtx570 would drop into the 30s in many spots on those settings.

[Skurge]

Crossfire is working for me.

I haven't actually run Fraps, but at 6020x1080 and medium settings, It's compeltely playable. Haven't had any slow downs, pretty sure it's over 60FPS. Very high is unplayable obviously, I haven't tried medium yet.

[Jacky60]

Good news APART from wtf happened to 6990 performance-it's being beaten by single 6950 and 560 gtx?

[aaksheytalwar]

Is the beta smoother/faster?

[Silverforce11]

Originally Posted by blastingcap

Just because a game runs like crap doesn't mean it looks good. Like Grand Theft Auto's horrific performance on PCs.

For Crysis 3: If you turn down the settings to get 95% of the image quality, do you double your framerate? If so, that just means the max settings are resource hogs.

This. But reviews will emphasize the max settings for the next 5 years or so heh.

BF3 high vs ultra, hardly any difference. Graphics get diminishing returns really quick when textures are maxed.

[Shakabutt]

Lol at the people crying SLI 780's and other extraterestrial performance machine.

Dudes the game looks identical and in some cases even worse than Crysis 2 .... where exactly is the visual advantage for such shoddy perfoamance huh ?

I think its either an unoptimized alpha (most likely) or they did a shit job at coding their game wich seems unlikelly since its the same damn engine like crysis 2 .... and again after playing it it looks no better to me than crysis 2, it actually looks worse...but maybe thats the shit job the art departament did on it.

[boxleitnerb]

This alpha is not about graphics, it's about testing the multiplayer infrastructure (servers etc.). The trailers look 1000x better than what is in the alpha.

[Skurge]

I found the lighting to be the best part though. Really good.

[Silverforce11]

Originally Posted by Skurge

I found the lighting to be the best part though. Really good.

Which is not obvious at all in screenshots.

[brandon888]

how thsi game on same engine like cryisis 2 has will be such a hog ???? it's like compare BF3 to MOH .... both use same engine and run mostly similar ... but this ? wtf is this ? same engine and 200% more demanding ? if it will have to be cry engine 4.0 that's different story ;/

my prediction .... just 20-25% more demanding then crysis 2 ... + TXAA which have to be faster ( and is faster) Then msaa

[MTDEW]

Originally Posted by aaksheytalwar

In the most recent games, especially with Tess and/or AA. A 7970 stock comes close to twice the performance of a 6950 unlocked. At least 65-90% faster where it really counts.

I guess that is my bad for not being more clear.
I'm running two unlocked/OCed 6950's in x-fire (basically two 6970's...see sig)
So upgrading to a 7950/7970 isn't worth it for me, so i decided to skip this generation.
Although as i admitted it is hard not to.

I have a 2500k @ 4.6ghz/ 16bg ram / GTX 470 pc here too that needs a GPU upgrade...LOL
But she never seems to care if i enable AA or not on her rig, so I'm trying to wait and upgrade my rig and give her my old GPU's.
Instead of wasting money upgrading both pc's GPU's.

Now someone looking to build a new pc, its a no-brainer to grab a current gen card especially with the recent AMD price/performance deals.