• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

.

Oubadah said:
Two GTX 780s. Although I might have to take back what I said - they're enough in raw numbers, but there is stutter that I can't seem to get rid of. I'm going to test thoroughly to see if a single 780 will be sufficient.
Click to expand...

with that you may want a 3930K but if you go single then a i7-4770k will be fine
 
Crysis is a big game that's pretty CPU bound. The minimum fps basically scales directly with CPU capability. Also the game only supports dual core, so essentially pure clock speed is the way to go.

CPU_Crysis.png


Based on a rough guess, I'm gonna say you would need a 4770k at about 8GHz to maintain a minimum of 60 fps at 1080 in Crysis 1.

In other words, maybe in 10 years we'll see something that can pull it off.
 
Astrallite said:
Crysis is a big game that's pretty CPU bound. The minimum fps basically scales directly with CPU capability. Also the game only supports dual core, so essentially pure clock speed is the way to go.

CPU_Crysis.png


Based on a rough guess, I'm gonna say you would need a 4770k at about 8GHz to maintain a minimum of 60 fps at 1080 in Crysis 1.

In other words, maybe in 10 years we'll see something that can pull it off.
Click to expand...

I do believe you are exaggerating a bit. I maintain 60+ (minimum is about 65 or something) on all of level one (Island). Thats on GTX 670 SLI and SB 2700K. Granted, it's not the most fps demanding level. I haven't gotten as far as testing the village in level 2. I know that will bring the fps down. But 8Ghz sounds a bit much.
 
Oubadah said:
What a disaster. I have all these other single/dual threaded games that I want to run at 120fps, and I'm hampered by the CPU with them too. For them I have 60Hz/fps to fall back one, but if I can't maintain 60fps, then the next option is all the way down at 30fps. I tried 40fps at 120Hz, which should have been fine, but Crysis didn't like that. I thought 30fps with motion blur might be marginally acceptable, but as my terrible luck would have it, the motion blur causes hitching at that framerate (don't ask me how). FRAPS kept showing the framerate spike to ~35fps every few seconds.
Click to expand...

I'm in almost the same boat as you. 🙂 My 120hz screen wasn't such a great buy that I thought to begin with. Mostly because many games can't keep a steady 120fps because they are CPU limited.
But then I discovered this: http://www.blurbusters.com/zero-motion-blur/lightboost/. 🙂
That made the 120 screen worth the money for me. You don't even need 120fps. A constant 100 is enough. I'm playing Half-Life 2, Trackmania 2, Just Cause 2 and other games at 100hz with a constant 100fps, and there is no more blur than an old CRT screen!!
You should check to see if your screen supports LightBoost. Unfortunately you will probably not have constant 100fps in games like Far Cry 3. I would use vsync at 85hz without LightBoost in that game. Even that is much much smoother (less motion blur) than 60hz. Although, since you have two 780s you might pull off 100fps, I don't know.

Basically you should always make sure the fps stays above the hz (if using vsync), otherwise there will be stuttering. How bad that stuttering is, depends largely on the game. Almost not visible in Just Cause 2, terrible in Far Cry 3 and Crysis one.
 
If I wanted a quad core cpu to overclock I think I would go with a 2600k or the 2700k instead of the Haswell chips. From what I have heard SB is still a little better at overclocking than the Haswells.
 
I had this issue as well. I've seen my Titan utilization drop as low as 65-70% in Crysis at 1440p, where it amazing I can still be CPU limited. If my 2700K can't do it, it'll be a while...

It's annoying because it's also completely directional based. One moment I'll have 65-70% utilization, then I'll turn 90 degrees and be back up 100% or 60+ fps.
 
Crysis was way ahead for its time. Even today you'd need 2 Titans to max out the game at 60+ fps at a high resolution such as 2560x1440.
 
FalseChristian said:
Crysis was way ahead for its time. Even today you'd need 2 Titans to max out the game at 60+ fps at a high resolution such as 2560x1440.
Click to expand...

I think that may be a matter of opinion. You say "ahead of its time" and I say "piss poor optimization". I'm also one of the few who doesn't think it's aged that well in the looks department and has no business being so demanding for what it looks like now. You have to mod it to high heaven to get it to look as good as people claim it looks like.
 
gorcorps said:
I think that may be a matter of opinion. You say "ahead of its time" and I say "piss poor optimization". I'm also one of the few who doesn't think it's aged that well in the looks department and has no business being so demanding for what it looks like now. You have to mod it to high heaven to get it to look as good as people claim it looks like.
Click to expand...

Yeah exactly - John Carmack optimized Quake 3 by recoding certain parts of the code in assembler and it absolutely crushed all of the FPS games in it's genre at the time and for a while afterwards.
 
gorcorps said:
I think that may be a matter of opinion. You say "ahead of its time" and I say "piss poor optimization". I'm also one of the few who doesn't think it's aged that well in the looks department and has no business being so demanding for what it looks like now.
Click to expand...
It was ahead of it's time, I don't see how that can even be debated. Of course games today could look similar to Crysis while performing better, they have had 6 years of progress to work with. It would be rather embarrassing if it after all that time things hadn't improved.
 
Yes the graphics were ahead of its time in that nothing matched its graphics for years afterwards. The game itself wasn't great though, and despite playing through it to the end I still think of it as more a benchmark/graphics demo than a quality game.
 
motsm said:
It was ahead of it's time, I don't see how that can even be debated. Of course games today could look similar to Crysis while performing better, they have had 6 years of progress to work with. It would be rather embarrassing if it after all that time things hadn't improved.
Click to expand...

I don't deny Crysis was way ahead of the game, but his proof of that is that 2 Titans still can't max it out. That isn't proof of being ahead of its time, it's proof of a poorly optimized engine.
 
gorcorps said:
I don't deny Crysis was way ahead of the game, but his proof of that is that 2 Titans still can't max it out. That isn't proof of being ahead of its time, it's proof of a poorly optimized engine.
Click to expand...
I understand what your saying, but I don't think it's all that valid to compare it to modern games. Basically all games ever made are poorly optimized when you compare them to titles released years later. The only reason Crysis stands out is because it was so far ahead of the rest. So yeah, I agree that it's unoptimized compared to a lot of games released now, but that's just how engine technology always works.
 
Crysis was the first game to use SSAO and among the first (possibly the first) to use sub-surface scattering, which is one reason the vegetation and character models looked so great (and continue to look great).

So yes, it was a significant graphical milestone of a game, even if it was / is extremely difficult to run.

And just how many games before, or to date have attempted to render that much dynamic vegetation?

It still looks pretty fantastic, despite the fact that the game never got a decent texture mod (really.....the textures suck and nobody ever came out with a decent replacer).

cryexpand2.jpg


cryexpand1.jpg
 
crysis still demands cpu because it still has room left, not because it's isn't optimized, i still go back using natural mod and it looks better than most games today
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top