• 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 CPU performance test

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Sherlockwing said:
I call 2 FPS a large margin partially because the difference in cost, so I should rephrased that as "a large margin in performance/$" as some would consider a $300+ CPU losing to a competitor's $200 chip by any margin an embarrassing defeat.
Click to expand...

That makes the FX 8350 stand out. If this trend continous the FX can become the gamers choice once again.
 
Arrrggh .. wanted to play this game .. but aging C9450 & gtx580 (1.5G edition) .. even if reducing screen to say 720p.. might still be out of steam!
 
Gikaseixas said:
Your card is still a beast. Grab one of those MC deals if you're close to one (say a 2500k or FX 6300) and you'll be able to play @720... i think 🙂
Click to expand...

goddamnit, if hadnt been delayed haswell would almost be upon us .. coulda waited for that .. think im gonna run with my chances here..
 
I noticed something else very interesting about the chart, the more cores/threaded processors have less percentage change between average and min.
 
AtenRa said:
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.
Click to expand...


My i5 750 uses about 75% max when clocked to 3800, I don't think I'd notice much difference if I left it a stock tbh but then my 560TI is the limiting factor. Can still play it reasonable well on with everything Very high and medium SMAA.

This is definitely the most CPU intensive multicore game I've seen so far.
 
Last edited:
Is there any word on how many threads this game can actually bring to bear? More than 4, pretty obviously, but how many more?
 
it seems like there is a lot of variation,

f1-3.jpg



under heavier action:
f2-3.jpg


http://pclab.pl/art52489-9.html
 
Sort of to be expected I guess. But what my take from Crysis 3 CPU scaling and other similar scaling was not FX8350 vs i5-3570K / i7-3770K, but rather that AMD's FX6300 and even FX4300 perform well against i3 especially since i3 and below do not overclock.

I know, AT forums is all full of enthusiast with big pockets and everyone buys top-end Intel CPUs plus top-end GPUs here, but for people on a budget the lower end FX's processors do have at least a niche. Problem is, the halo effect is an incredible power marketing tool and people tend to jump to conclusions: just because i7-3930K or some Xeon is the fastest doesn't make a Celeron good for gaming (although the IB Celerons are very good for power usage), ditto Titan's crown shouldn't say anything about HD7850 vs GTX660 etc.
 
In the for whatever it's worth department, here's a snippet of Fraps data I saved last night from playing first person Crysis 3 at the end of the first scene:
Frames, Time (ms), Min, Max, Avg
145frames
4836ms
29Min
31Max
29.983Average

That is on my 8350 @4.6Ghz with a EVGA670 FTW and settings on High ( 3rd machine in my sig below).
Game is demanding but fun and very playable at those rates..
 
"8 core" is actually 8 thread in case of FX8xxx. It has 4 FP "units",same as i5 and i7 😉. Both designs can run two threads per fp unit(or core in intel's case).
 
OK for rig 2 below I ran a shorter segment. Here3 is the data.
Frames 54
Time 1687 ms
Min 31
Max 33
Avg 32.009

That's the EXACT same video card with settings on high and 2500k @4.5Ghz. BTW this was played on an Achieve Shimian 27" at 2560x1440
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top