Crysis 3 CPU performance test

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

pauldun170

Diamond Member
Sep 26, 2011
9,142
5,089
136
bu-bu-bu-bu no point in HT and we should all stick to i5-3570s right! pfft -- for $100 i'll take some HT please.

Definitely glad I picked up a 2700K back when everyone was claiming "But bro...all you need is a i5 and once you over clock it you'll be set bro!!"

However, I disagree with the $100 part.
I picked mine up for $230 at microcenter.
 
Aug 11, 2008
10,451
642
126
indeed, look at their Crysis 3 MP alpha testing, the 530 is a lot faster, it's a really strange result, I wonder what changed the results so much (the relative performance from these CPUs, even if the SP is really a lot more demanding)...


The image quality settings are different, but yes, even considering that, the results are quite inconsistent.
 

Spjut

Senior member
Apr 9, 2011
931
160
106
Sure, the i7 2600k is above the i5 2500k, and the i7 930 is above the i5 750. But the difference ain't that big, 6 FPS difference in minimum and 2 FPS difference in average between the i5 2500k and i7 2600k.
The i5 2500k also has the disadvantage of being clocked a whole 100 mhz lower:biggrin:
 

inf64

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2011
3,883
4,666
136
3770K @ 4GHz would be 12+ FPS faster than the 8350 while using 900 less watts.
I bet it would be 120fps faster than 8350 while using 1.2KWatts less.

On the serious note, from perf/$ POV and given the application optimization trends, AMD's solutions start to look better and better with every new game/app. What's also interesting, given how decent PD performs, is how well will SR core perform when you count in the optimizations that game devs will put into future console/PC games(sharing same AMD hardware) and supposed IPC increase in ST/MT workloads that SR core should be bringing. Not so doomish and gloomish for AMD any more ;).

PS Opteron 6300 review done by AT. Very good performance,almost gets a recommendation by Johan :D. Nice gains over BD in both IPC,performance(IPC+clock) and perf./watt(lower power draw) fronts. Leverages same platform for lower total system cost.
 
Last edited:

Jacky60

Golden Member
Jan 3, 2010
1,123
0
0
Seems Piledriver might just start coming into it's own. I'd like to see it at max stable overclock compared to similarly overclocked Intel models.
 

grimpr

Golden Member
Aug 21, 2007
1,095
7
81
I bet it would be 120fps faster than 8350 while using 1.2KWatts less.

On the serious note, from perf/$ POV and given the application optimization trends, AMD's solutions start to look better and better with every new game/app. What's also interesting, given how decent PD performs, is how well will SR core perform when you count in the optimizations that game devs will put into future console/PC games(sharing same AMD hardware) and supposed IPC increase in ST/MT workloads that SR core should be bringing. Not so doomish and gloomish for AMD any more ;).

This is so important it seems like a strategic advantage for AMD...quote "The company now gives a lot more freedom to game developers compared to the PS3 days and even compared to what Microsoft allegedly gives with the Xbox Next. Sony is reportedly encouraging PS4 “Orbis” coders to “get closer to the metal” than is currently possible on Durango. The generally liberal approach will let talented game developers to create beautifully-looking games." from Xbitlabs http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/multim...ry_Bandwidth_Cloud_Technologies_4K_Video.html
 

boxleitnerb

Platinum Member
Nov 1, 2011
2,605
6
81
Doesn't fit the picture. For example, the i5-760 is only 10% slower than the 1100T despite the latter having 50% more threads.

Btw, let's see when the first people come in here complaining the benchmarks were not done in 1080p+AA :D
I guess they will keep quiet since it's AMD that is doing quite well for a change...
 
Last edited:

Face2Face

Diamond Member
Jun 6, 2001
4,100
215
106
I am glad Crytek decided to utilize so many threads for this game. This is great news for AMD FX owners even the Thuban 6 core is doing pretty well.
 

BallaTheFeared

Diamond Member
Nov 15, 2010
8,115
0
71
Definitely glad I picked up a 2700K back when everyone was claiming "But bro...all you need is a i5 and once you over clock it you'll be set bro!!"

However, I disagree with the $100 part.
I picked mine up for $230 at microcenter.

Considering a 7970 can only get 37 fps @ 1080 /w 4xMSAA, and 690 only 58, I'm not really sure you should be using this as an example.

12% more performance at stock for 33% more $, the case is not strong in this one.
 
Last edited:

sm625

Diamond Member
May 6, 2011
8,172
137
106
Doesn't fit the picture. For example, the i5-760 is only 10% slower than the 1100T despite the latter having 50% more threads.

Not to mention an i5-760 @ 2.8GHz is a colossal laughable waste of computing power. It dont take nothin to boost that clockspeed by 15%. The 1100T on the other hand I doubt can go any higher without upgrading the cooler.
 

SPBHM

Diamond Member
Sep 12, 2012
5,059
413
126
looking at the other result, it seems the game really loves more than 4 cores/threads, piledriver looks pretty good in terms of performance per $ for this game, the 6300 looks like a clear winner here,

i3 looks quite weak, even the significantly lower clocked C2Q have better minimum FPS,

still, the difference from the MP alpha to this is a little bit surprising, I suppose the MP maps are to simplified or something.
 

SlowSpyder

Lifer
Jan 12, 2005
17,305
1,001
126
Wasn't this game supposed to melt my PC? It looks like I could easily get 40+FPS with my five year old motherboard, almost three year old processor, and an over a year old video card.
 

AtenRa

Lifer
Feb 2, 2009
14,003
3,362
136
Not to mention an i5-760 @ 2.8GHz is a colossal laughable waste of computing power. It dont take nothin to boost that clockspeed by 15%. The 1100T on the other hand I doubt can go any higher without upgrading the cooler.

Depends on the game, the i5-760 may be working at 90-100% when the Phenom X6 1100T only at 40-50%. So you could OC the Phenom and not the i5 with the default cooler.
 

inf64

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2011
3,883
4,666
136
Good job Crytek! This is what good code optimization can accomplish. It might be a glimpse into the future when games are in question. Especially given how both next gen consoles will have multicore AMD x86 chips inside(with AMD GPU too). They stroke a gold mine with both next gen console deals IMO(from code optimization POV).
 

grimpr

Golden Member
Aug 21, 2007
1,095
7
81
Good job Crytek! This is what good code optimization can accomplish. It might be a glimpse into the future when games are in question. Especially given how both next gen consoles will have multicore AMD x86 chips inside(with AMD GPU too). They stroke a gold mine with both next gen console deals IMO(from code optimization POV).

Come on now thats ridiculous, havent you seen the Starcraft 2 benchmarks? :biggrin:
 

pauldun170

Diamond Member
Sep 26, 2011
9,142
5,089
136
Considering a 7970 can only get 37 fps @ 1080 /w 4xMSAA, and 690 only 58, I'm not really sure you should be using this as an example.

12% more performance at stock for 33% more $, the case is not strong in this one.


I also use it for other things that are happier with core counts.
(Development, VM's loaded with app servers and dbs)

I wasn't upfront about that.
Let just say the % more than work out in my case...especially for the price I paid.
 

FlanK3r

Senior member
Sep 15, 2009
321
84
101
PCtuning (but only Beta multiplayer)
1680_cpu_medium.png
 

ChronoReverse

Platinum Member
Mar 4, 2004
2,562
31
91
I'm glad there's a Core 2 Quad in one of the tables. Looks like per-core, even the i5 is significantly faster. I guess my plan to upgrade to Haswell won't be too terrible an idea =)
 

inf64

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2011
3,883
4,666
136
Wow look at the 2C/4T i3 :oops:
It just shows that recommending i3 for 2013+ "low budget gamer rigs" is getting absurd. This thing should not be recommended to people who want to game on the budget and want intel cpu inside. Lowest QC i5 at the minimum should be recommended and this trend of optimizing newer games for multicore is just starting.
 

BallaTheFeared

Diamond Member
Nov 15, 2010
8,115
0
71
I also use it for other things that are happier with core counts.
(Development, VM's loaded with app servers and dbs)

I wasn't upfront about that.
Let just say the % more than work out in my case...especially for the price I paid.

Well sir, that changes things! :p

The only bad purchase is the one you're unhappy with!