[Guru3d] Crysis DX11 Benchmarks (AMD vs Nvidia)

[Lonbjerg]

You can't be serious.

You object...but post no data what so ever to back up your objection?

You can't be serious.

 

[Lonbjerg]

So the arguement has shifted from AMD's poor tessellation performance (which was what I proposed initially), to unoptimized drivers, to TWIMTBP sabotage, and now back to AMD's poor tessellation performance in combination with TWIMTBP sabotage to explain why the game runs much slower on AMD hardware

Keyword being "excuses".

 

[Outrage]

A higher res image to show of how wrong they are using tesselation in crysis 2, this object is still just as square looking, they just added lots of triangels on a flat surface, look at the curve, its still built of about 10 squares.

http://www.hardware.fr/medias/screenshots.php?id=IMG0032909

 

[Grooveriding]

:thumbsup: Great points! Sure, C2 looks really good; but we all know it should've looked a lot better considering how much time has gone by. But, we know why it doesn't. Still, I agree with Groove on this one. Crysis 1, even vanilla; and this is my personal opinion, still looks better to me. C2, no matter how hard I try to ignore it, has console written all over it. When I fire up C1 or even Warhead, i'm still impressed. I can't say the same for C2.

Exactly. Crysis 1 has vast open areas, epic view distances and once modded looks a good deal better than Crysis 2 does. The patch went a ways to helping Crytek give Crysis 2 some of the laurels the original had, but considering the first one was released four years ago and the sequel falls short of it at times, it's not saying much for the graphics in Crysis 2 at all.

There is no game that can match some of the scenes from Crysis 1 on my rig. Crysis 2 is a good looking game and is up there with the heavy-weights - Crysis/Warhead, Metro, Stalker, but it's not above the crop.

 

[apoppin]

Exactly. Crysis 1 has vast open areas, epic view distances and once modded looks a good deal better than Crysis 2 does. The patch went a ways to helping Crytek give Crysis 2 some of the laurels the original had, but considering the first one was released four years ago and the sequel falls short of it at times, it's not saying much for the graphics in Crysis 2 at all.

There is no game that can match some of the scenes from Crysis 1 on my rig. Crysis 2 is a good looking game and is up there with the heavy-weights - Crysis/Warhead, Metro, Stalker, but it's not above the crop.

Your mantra = "Crysis 1 *once modded*
- it looks dated without massive modification and FLAT ... flat .. Fugly water in comparison.


And if you use video, even your heavily-modded Crysis barely matches the sequel - if you know where to look. You can only cherry pick screenshots for a short time; enjoy it while you can.
^_^

Once the modders get ahold of Crysis 2, we will spit on the original's graphics

 

[notty22]

Have people checked out this fellows mod ? Looks like some nice screenshots.
http://maldotex.blogspot.com/
http://forums.guru3d.com/showthread.php?t=345551

 

[Firestorm007]

Those mods do look great. The difference in detail is huge. That's some really nice work.

 

[apoppin]

Those mods do look great. The difference in detail is huge. That's some really nice work.

Anyone who thinks CryEngine2 has anything visually over CryEngine3 - or Crysis over Crysis 2 for PC needs their eyes professionally examined.
:whiste:

 

[Grooveriding]

Anyone who thinks CryEngine2 has anything visually over CryEngine3 - or Crysis over Crysis 2 for PC needs their eyes professionally examined.
:whiste:

You need to figure out why you are trying to bang this drum so hard. The fact you 'see' such huge improvements in the second to the degree you claim is what needs to be examined.

 

[Carfax83]

Exactly. Crysis 1 has vast open areas, epic view distances and once modded looks a good deal better than Crysis 2 does.

Mods aside, these reasons seem kind of silly when you consider the fact that Crysis takes place on a fairly large island with mountains, valleys etc, where as Crysis 2 takes place in New York City.

Even so, Crysis 2 still has some very large open areas.

 

[apoppin]

You miss the point, which is, the original with mods looks better and runs better.
****
Exactly. Crysis 1 has vast open areas, epic view distances and once modded looks a good deal better than Crysis 2 does. The patch went a ways to helping Crytek give Crysis 2 some of the laurels the original had, but considering the first one was released four years ago and the sequel falls short of it at times, it's not saying much for the graphics in Crysis 2 at all.

There is no game that can match some of the scenes from Crysis 1 on my rig. Crysis 2 is a good looking game and is up there with the heavy-weights - Crysis/Warhead, Metro, Stalker, but it's not above the crop.
*****
Originally Posted by Grooveriding
You miss the point, which is, the original with modslooks better and runs better.
***********
Originally Posted by Grooveriding
I don't think many people are running this puppy maxed out and getting 60fps solid with this patch. I certainly don't, but Crysis 1 modded and texture enhanced is a solid 60fps for me and looks a lot better than DX11 Crysis 2.
***************
Originally Posted by Grooveriding
I will bust out some of my modded Crysis 1 screenshots in a bit! Crysis 2 has nothing near as nice as some of the shots I have from the first one.
*****

You're the poster-boy for '07 graphics with heavy modification. i believe you need to have your eyes examined if you really believe Crysis is visually better than Crysis 2.

 

[Grooveriding]

You're the poster-boy for '07 graphics with heavy modification. i believe you need to have your eyes examined if you really believe Crysis is visually better than Crysis 2.

Go ahead and share with us some example screenshots that you think make Crysis 2 look so much better than the original. It is one thing to say, but lets see it.

I'll gladly counter with examples that look much better from the original game.

 

[apoppin]

Go ahead and share with us some example screenshots that you think make Crysis 2 look so much better than the original. It is one thing to say, but lets see it.

I'll gladly counter with examples that look much better from the original game.

Screenshots simply don't do Crysis 2 justice. You have to appreciate the differences in-game or in a video.

And i'll repeat myself like you do - it is unfair to compare a modded and mature game with an unmodded game that is still being patched or to compare performance with one that new drivers are still being written for. Give it a little more time and there will soon be no comparison.

 

[scooterlibby]

I don't have a dog in the GPU fight. In regards to the graphics, I think the DX11 + High res patch looks pretty fabulous. Been a long time since I played the original Crysis (with the natural mod, I believe), but Crysis 2 with the patch does look better to me. Not sure why people are hyperventilating on this subjective point of contention.

 

[AnandThenMan]

And i'll repeat myself like you do - it is unfair to compare a modded and mature game with an unmodded game that is still being patched or to compare performance with one that new drivers are still being written for. Give it a little more time and there will soon be no comparison.

It's not unfair at all, we don't play games in the future. We compare what's available now.

 

[Grooveriding]

Screenshots simply don't do Crysis 2 justice. You have to appreciate the differences in-game or in a video.

And i'll repeat myself like you do - it is unfair to compare a modded and mature game with an unmodded game that is still being patched or to compare performance with one that new drivers are still being written for. Give it a little more time and there will soon be no comparison.

So you have no examples, just commentary ? Screenshots are perfectly fine.

This logic just does not add up. They've released the texture pack and DX11. What more is going to come ? A super-texture pack ? Super DX11 ? The work is done, we have the finished PC product.

 

[apoppin]

Screenshots are perfectly fine.

. . . What more is going to come ? ...

No, they aren't. Every reviewer says the stills absolutely do the game no justice and i tend to agree.

patch number 2 and further optimization ... haven't you been paying attention to what the devs said?

And then the modders will take over from there; we just have a taste of it posted here with a modder's high-texture pack. Clearly there is a lot more that can be done visually with Crysis 2 on CryEngine 3 than can be done on CryEngine 2 and the original Crysis.
You can argue with that logic if you like; the devs not only made Crysis 2 cross-platform, they surpassed the original in every way.
.. i'll check back in later. Work calls i got to get back to pla, evaluating Dungeon Siege III in S3D (it's not bad for the top-down view). However, i thought they fixed the camera controls in the patch; evidently not
:'(

 

[Pantalaimon]

patch number 2 and further optimization ... haven't you been paying attention to what the devs said?

Patch number2? I thought this past patch is a 'gift' for which we PC players should bow before the devs and be grateful for and there's no other gifts for PC players.

 

[Pantalaimon]

BTW, here's a link to an article on IGN from March 2, where a Crytek representative says that Crysis 2 will have DX11. So, the claim, that the DX11 patch is a 'gift' for which PC players should be grateful is bollocks.

http://uk.pc.ign.com/articles/115/1153248p1.html

They promised DX11, and they damn well needed to have it done, or it would have meant reneging on their promise.

 

[cusideabelincoln]

but post no data what so ever to back up your objection?

Exactly.

 

[Gryz]

They promised DX11, and they damn well needed to have it done, or it would have meant reneging on their promise.

It's very simple.
The game gets released on day X.
On day X+1 the first reviews start to pop up.
On day X+2 you read a few reviews, and figure out if the game is worth the money.
On day X+3 you go to a shop and buy the game. Or you order it, and it arrives on day X+5.
Within a week of release, you can play the game.

Kids are impatient these day. It's so bad, they can't even wait to buy a game on the day of release. No, they have to "have" it even earlier. So they pre-order stuff weeks, months, maybe years before release. If you buy something blind, it's your own fault if it's not gonna be exactly what you expected.

It has nothing to do with technics. It has nothing to do with promises. It's impatient people who can't wait. Who buy based on semi-random expectations. And then get disappointed.

 

[WelshBloke]

No, they aren't. Every reviewer says the stills absolutely do the game no justice and i tend to agree.

...

Personally I think the game looks worse in motion than in stills.

The blur is horrible and everything is weirdly sluggish like you're under water.

 

[RussianSensation]

You can argue with that logic if you like; the devs not only made Crysis 2 cross-platform, they surpassed the original in every way.

In every way? The debate may continue about graphics, but the physics engine in Crysis 1 blows Crysis 2 away. The environments and objects in Crysis 2 aren't destructible in the way that they are in Crysis 1. Do trees react to bullet fire the same way as in Crysis 1? Do plants realistically react as the character passes them? Watch this video. <--- These things aren't affected by DX11/High-rez texture pack in Crysis 2.

Either way, when Crysis 1 came out, it stood alone. You can't say that Crysis 2 is by far the best looking game on the PC now. In other words, Crysis 2 is just now a part of 3-4 other good looking games. And also we shouldn't even have a debate that Crysis 2 is better looking than Crysis 1 is. It should be obvious, but yet it isn't. In terms of graphical "wow" factor, at best Crysis 2 looks like an Expansion pack to Crysis 1 that came out 12 months later, but it's been more than 4 years since Crysis 1 came out...and even if Crysis 2 does indeed look better, it's only marginally at best.

I'll give you an example of graphical progress between sequels. Unreal Tournament 2004 came out March 16, 2004. Unreal Tournament III came out November 19, 2007. That's about 3.5 years apart, or less time difference than between Crysis 1 and Crysis 2.

Now look at the huge difference in graphics:
UT2004
vs.
UT3

Crysis 2 just meets expectations for what a good looking game should look like in 2010-2011, but in no way shape or form does it smell like a next generation game.

This looks next gen to me. :thumbsup:

 

[Pantalaimon]

It's very simple.
The game gets released on day X.
On day X+1 the first reviews start to pop up.
On day X+2 you read a few reviews, and figure out if the game is worth the money.
On day X+3 you go to a shop and buy the game. Or you order it, and it arrives on day X+5.
Within a week of release, you can play the game.

Kids are impatient these day. It's so bad, they can't even wait to buy a game on the day of release. No, they have to "have" it even earlier. So they pre-order stuff weeks, months, maybe years before release. If you buy something blind, it's your own fault if it's not gonna be exactly what you expected.

It has nothing to do with technics. It has nothing to do with promises. It's impatient people who can't wait. Who buy based on semi-random expectations. And then get disappointed.

If you note the date of the IGN article, it's dated before the launch date of the game by about 3 weeks. So, before the launch of the game, Crytek's representative says, 'Crysis 2 will support DirectX 11 but we'll talk more about that in the future. There's an announcement coming soon about that.' That's a promise if I ever saw one.

 

[Red Hawk]

This looks next gen to me. thumbsup:

I doubt anyone is going to bother pushing Unreal Engine like that in the near future though. Maybe when the next console generation comes out.