• 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.

Crysis 3 beta needs at least three 680's to max out with > 60fps

Status
Not open for further replies.
7

7970

Junior Member
I'm running 680 sli lightning and on airport i got like 55-65 fps with txaa*4 or msaa*8 with all very high settings of course, without external tweaks

The beta needs at least tri-680 to get a constant 60fps, scaling is very good, my friend with 3*680 gtx @1080p and all very high settings + all max AA:

8x MSAA: ~94 FPS
2dt4x3a.jpg

Max (4x?) TSAA: ~87 FPS
34i66av.jpg

SMAA MGPU: ~137 FPS
34ytvft.jpg


I can't imagine the scaling with quad 680 or 2*690 gtx if someone can run some benchs with all very high settings + txaa*4 and msaa*8 at same spot (airport)
And it's without any tweaks from http://www.mycrysis.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=56955&hilit=680 or mods so i can't imagine the config needed to max out with all these tweaks

ps: my friend got 680's 4gb versions and you can notice 2200 of vram with 8*msaa @1080p :awe:
 
VulgarDisplay said:
I mean those screenshots look like crap...

Is it the TXAA? All I see is blurry garbage.
Click to expand...

I have no idea how the OP thinks TXAA 4x looks the best. From his own screenshots TXAA looks the worst -- blurs the entire picture and can't resolve aliasing issues well. I highlighted the areas where TXAA completely fails at resolving aliasing areas that SMAA resolves without problems:

txaa4x.jpg


SMAA looks the best to me in all of those areas, doesn't have the blur filter over your eyes and ironically performs the fastest.

Regarding the game, the graphics are good but not next generation in the slightest. The vegetation looks somewhat bland and the color palette is not to my liking. At least from the posted screenshots, the textures also looked washed out. I hope this is just because of excessive motion blur in the settings. Even with MSAA, the game has a 'blurry' look to it.
 
Last edited:
Would multi-GPU SMAA be possible to implement on a driver level? If so, I would love to see Nvidia put it in their drivers.
 
I can't wait for the good 'ole Red Vs Green back and forth to get going around this new Crysis.

(not the petty fanboism part of it, of course, but rather the sane comparison between competing cards.)

Should make for some interesting benchmarks. 🙂
 
They all look pretty good to me.....How anyone has the time to go looking for jaggies while playing is beyond me?
 
I think the OP's pics suffer from compression of the hosting kind. IMO, C3 is definitely graphically superior to C2. There was at least one odd lower quality texture in every area, for the most part. That is not distracting me in CIII.
I don't understand, why everyone has not tried the beta first hand, while they can. You can't base judgement on others screenshots, even 'official' ones.
 
notty22 said:
I think the OP's pics suffer from compression of the hosting kind. IMO, C3 is definitely graphically superior to C2. There was at least one odd lower quality texture in every area, for the most part. That is not distracting me in CIII.
I don't understand, why everyone has not tried the beta first hand, while they can. You can't base judgement on others screenshots, even 'official' ones.
Click to expand...

Umm...because maybe many of us cannot afford a system that can handle it🙁
 
Remobz said:
Umm...because maybe many of us cannot afford a system that can handle it🙁
Click to expand...
Ok, I don't see you judging it either🙂. With a single gtx 460 on medium, no AA, I saw very playable fps in low count mp servers. I started playing at 3:30am, right after it came online. Even on medium, it looks pretty good. After I got SLI going I went to high, no AA. For the same fps.
 
SolMiester said:
They all look pretty good to me.....How anyone has the time to go looking for jaggies while playing is beyond me?
Click to expand...

In this case the SMAA resolves jaggies better, without the inherent blur of TXAA, and performance from OP's graphs is 57% faster. That's a win-win for SMAA over TXAA.
 
VulgarDisplay said:
Honestly those have probably been doctored in photoshop.
Click to expand...
Honestly I don't think so.
Most screen grab programs can capture in various formats.
I tried importing them here, and they lost quality. Maybe it's with the small, click for large size algorithm here, but I flipped back and forth from the imported to the linked .png and they had lost sharpness.

edit: It might be the way I have my browser set up also, I just realized that.
Where in the forum view, I have the zoom up slightly and the actual .png full screen, I don't.

screenshot-3.png
 
Last edited:
If any game takes 3 680SLI's to max out, it better look a lot better than this one. Also, I'm sick of AA and high resolution being part of 'maxing a game out'.

I want more detailed textures, longer draw distances, more interaction with objects, waving grass, rippling water, realistic movement. Who cares about TXSXMS16XAA?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top