To run Crysis at 19x12 on a single gpu

[Lithan]

Ahh I didnt realize you had no AA on. I thought you meant 4x16. Dont know what to tell you, they are running ~3% faster than me with faster ram and more cache. You running totally default High settings?

They're in DX9, you in DX10 maybe?

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Lithan
http://www.joystiq.com/2007/12...-ut3-gets-fragged-too/

It sold <100k copies in the first month of release in the states. For as much press as it got, that's abysmal.

Compare it to D2 which sold 1.5 million copies before release. Yeah, that's low sales.

Have you seen PC game sales lately? This isn't 1998 where PC game sales were much better.

I million copies sold and rising for PC game isn't low sales. That is anything but low. It it currently #3 spot in UK.

Maybe you should make a poll for crysis owners and see just how many of them have 15" monitors. Your insane obsession with trying to convince everyone that the 8800gs is a better card than it is is getting really old.

Maybe not so many people in anandtech with 15" LCD because lot of these are more hardcore enthusiastic users but they do exist. You are telling me there aren't CRT users who play @ 1024x768 if their frame is low? :laugh:

I don't need to convince anyone when websites like EXPREVIEW does it and you trying to convince everyone how so very good your 9600gt. :laugh: Either post your benchmark for very high detail or shut up.

 

[AzN]

I just played DX9 very high detail hack for Crysis on my 8800gs. I easily got 25fps @ 1440x900. Easily playable.

 

[BlizzardOne]

Originally posted by: Lithan
Ahh I didnt realize you had no AA on. I thought you meant 4x16. Dont know what to tell you, they are running ~3% faster than me with faster ram and more cache. You running totally default High settings?

They're in DX9, you in DX10 maybe?

nope, XP Sp2..

C2D X6800 @ 2.93, 4gig of RAM @ DDR800, default high settings, nothing particularly fancy.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: BlizzardOne

Originally posted by: Lithan
How do you figure? Your fps for 8800U 19x12 is right about where you'd expect it to be according to their benches @ 16x12 and 20x15

Uhh no? For a GTX, they're claiming 35.7 and 26.2 fps at 16x12 and 20x15, with 4xAA, I'm getting 25-28 with no AA..

4xAA will put the average framerate in the high teens, pulling maybe the occasional low-20's, at best.

So, yea.. I still think those numbers are somewhat optimistic.

And their C2D is running 600mhz slower to boot.

That's what I think about Techpowerup benchmarks. It's all over the place and kind of high for some benches. A 9600gt does not beat 8800gt or 8800gtx in Crysis at high settings but they say it does. I can't argue with what they say but when I compare with other websites it just doesn't add up.

 

[Lithan]

I dunno then. You aren't taking the first loop results are you? They're skewed due to hard drive access lag.

 

[Lithan]

http://www.neoseeker.com/Artic...lit9600gtsonic/14.html

ddr 833 ram @ 4-4-4... 4.5-6fps slower... apparently @ high detail no AA system memory performance is of some import.

Also their gpu core is 44mhz lower.

Edit: @ their gfx settings I beat them by 1.5fps.

 

[AzN]

That palit card is also overclocked to 700/1750/1000 and slower than stock 8800gt no matter what resolution.

It doesn't use system memory period. It uses vram where 9600gt is beating a 8800gt and GTX @ 1024x768. Are you even aware of this basic information?


Crysis vram usage
1280x1024 high
* NoAA 315MB
* 2xAA 375MB
* 4xAA 440MB
* 8xAA 470MB

1680x1050 high
* NoAA 368MB
* 2xAA 456MB
* 4xAA 535MB

 

[Lithan]

http://s268.photobucket.com/al...view&current=315MB.jpg

Really? Those kids with their crazy fonts these days. I coulda swore that was an 804MB it said. Maybe my eyes are going bad.

Methinks someone's not actually running the settings he thinks he is.

Oh and that's still 1024x768... but I can run 1280x1024 if you really want to try and argue that it uses less ram.

 

[Psynaut]

Originally posted by: Psynaut
I don't know. I have seen the same tests and was never sure why I was able to get playable framerates at 1600X. Just a few days ago I applied the mod everyone has been using and it didn't give me any better frame rates, but it did add some graphical enhancements to the water that were beautiful. From what I understand, some of the DX10 setting were disabled in Crysis even for the highest settings and the mod adds them back. Some people are reporting much better frame rates with the mod though.

I have to run to a meeting , but when I get home later I will fire up crysis and double check all my settings to make certain I am not overlooking something, which if enabled, would slow down my framerates, since to be honest, I just went through the settings when I first installed it, set everything to highest including AA, and then started dropping the resolution until I got to a playable setting.

I will report back later.

OK, I was completely full of sh*t. After a little experimentation I see that apparently Crysis will boot you to the menu screen if your GPU can't handle your settings and then reset them for you to a more suitable level. I am not sure what what setting I can play this at at 1650X res, but it certainly isn't very high or high. Sorry for the bad info.

*edit: but for whatever its worth the game is still pretty at lower settings.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Lithan
http://s268.photobucket.com/al...view&current=315MB.jpg

Really? Those kids with their crazy fonts these days. I coulda swore that was an 804MB it said. Maybe my eyes are going bad.

Oh and that's still 1024x768... but I can run 1280x1024 if you really want to try and argue that it uses less ram.

That isn't vram usage. :laugh: Was that even logic or self absorbed emotion?

Methinks someone's not actually running the settings he thinks he is.

Perhaps someone doesn't even know what he is talking about? :light:

 

[Lithan]

Originally posted by: Azn


That isn't vram usage. :laugh: Was that even logic or self absorbed emotion?

Originally posted by: Azn
It doesn't use system memory period. It uses vram where 9600gt is beating a 8800gt and GTX @ 1024x768. Are you even aware of this basic information?

You said that system ram isnt used when benching. Seriously, stop lying and playing dumb and admit you are wrong for once. You said no system ram. I proved system ram was used and now you're just pretending that you said what I did and vice versa. Are you five years old?

 

[taltamir]

please delete

 

[bigsnyder]

Unless your using HardOCP's method, then all of these benches are useless! :laugh:

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Lithan
You said that system ram isnt used when benching. Seriously, stop lying and playing dumb and admit you are wrong for once. You said no system ram. I proved system ram was used and now you're just pretending that you said what I did and vice versa. Are you five years old?

That is storing gaming level in to the the PC. You were talking about how system memory slows it down with the results of Techpowerup and Neoseeker's article. We are talking vram with video cards. How the hell is system ram going to slow it down when it doesn't use more than 512mb of vram? That's why I don't trust techpowerup benches. It's all over the place. 9600gt beating a 8800gt and gtx? Yeah RIGHT!!! I don't care about their numbers because system could vary but if the benchmarks doesn't scale properly they are doing something wrong.

I already posted the info about how much vram it uses for Crysis previous page. If your vram runs out. It's going to texture thrash which faster memory may have performance impact which isn't the case since it doesn't use system ram to play 1024x768 high detail with Crysis. Just because you try to push your non-educated argument doesn't make it right or making any sense. :light:


Stop Lying? Playing dumb? Are you five years old? Pretending? :laugh:

You argue and then change the subject into something else. That is the whole basis of your arguments. Not a single thing that comes out of you makes any sense. You seem slow to me.

Originally posted by: Lithan
http://www.neoseeker.com/Artic...lit9600gtsonic/14.html

ddr 833 ram @ 4-4-4... 4.5-6fps slower... apparently @ high detail no AA system memory performance is of some import.

Also their gpu core is 44mhz lower.

Edit: @ their gfx settings I beat them by 1.5fps.

 

[batmang]

I like medium quality with 1680x1050, because I like 50fps.

http://jmbat.com/media/phenomo...0_at_2point4_11004.jpg

I got around 35-40fps in 1440x900 in HIGH quality which was damn awesome playing through the first time. I gave up on very high because it just KILLS my machine. I gotta enjoy playing the game lol. so the sweet spot for most single cards is going to be 1440x900 in high or very high if you have a beefy enough machine. 30-40fps is the sweet spot for Crysis IMO. To the OP, I'd go with a 8800 GTS or 9800GTX.

 

[themisfit610]

Get an 8800gts, and use modded crysis config files on XP.

DX9 on XP is very fast. You can get the equivalent of almost all "very high" settings (no AA obviously) cranked up with no problem. I have an 8800gt, and played the whole game like this at 1920x1200 and loved it! It was a little slower than I would have liked at a few places, but was always playable. And VERY pretty!!!

I'm very picky about crappy frame rates. While this wasn't like playing Half Life 2 or anything silky like that, it was very playable!

Vista (DX9 or DX10) FTL in Crysis.

Also, don't underestimate the importance of your CPU. I couldn't get playable frame rates at all low settings with my old CPU (3800+ X2). When I went to the Q6600 @ 3 GHz.. well..

~MiSfit

 

[Lithan]

Originally posted by: Azn

That is storing gaming level in to the the PC. You were talking about how system memory slows it down with the results of Techpowerup and Neoseeker's article. We are talking vram with video cards. How the hell is system ram going to slow it down when it doesn't use more than 512mb of vram? That's why I don't trust techpowerup benches. It's all over the place. 9600gt beating a 8800gt and gtx? Yeah RIGHT!!! I don't care about their numbers because system could vary but if the benchmarks doesn't scale properly they are doing something wrong.

Umm are you serious? You actually think that system memory doesnt affect low res gaming?

And well, you just saw the screenshot that shows me getting ~3% less performance than they did, so if you want to pretend that their results aren't reasonable, well then you're beyond help.

The reason the 9600gt is winning is because you've chosen settings so skewed that gfx power differences between recent gpu's are almost irrelevant. And like every reviewer finds, the 8800gt @ low settings performs almost identically to a 9600gt, and only stretches its legs @ higher settings (which you apparently ignore because the 8800gs gets shredded at them).

 

[batmang]

Originally posted by: themisfit610
Get an 8800gts, and use modded crysis config files on XP.

DX9 on XP is very fast. You can get the equivalent of almost all "very high" settings (no AA obviously) cranked up with no problem. I have an 8800gt, and played the whole game like this at 1920x1200 and loved it! It was a little slower than I would have liked at a few places, but was always playable. And VERY pretty!!!

I'm very picky about crappy frame rates. While this wasn't like playing Half Life 2 or anything silky like that, it was very playable!

Vista (DX9 or DX10) FTL in Crysis.

Also, don't underestimate the importance of your CPU. I couldn't get playable frame rates at all low settings with my old CPU (3800+ X2). When I went to the Q6600 @ 3 GHz.. well..

~MiSfit

Where are the modded Crysis files? Linkage!

 

[themisfit610]

I dont have them anymore.. I played Crysis a few months ago and did a reformat, and havent bothered with it since. There was a thread about this awhile back on AT. The results are stupid cool.

http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?p=5543071

This looks familiar..

Do it!

Note that I definitely disabled AA, and may have disabled part or all of motion blur, I cant remember.

 

[Tempered81]

i also used the modded crysis files on xp dx9 with dx10 hack

twice as fast as vista 50 fps veryhigh at 1280x1024 on a 4.2ghz e8400 w/ 740mhz 8800gt

 

[themisfit610]

twice as fast as vista 50 fps veryhigh at 1280x1024 on a 4.2ghz e8400 w/ 740mhz 8800gt

QFT!

Though it's not a DX10 hack. It just enables running the game's higher settings on DX9. Shows that DX10 is really just marketing at this point! Sure, it might not run exactly the same under DX9, but it's faster and looks great so who gives a crap?

~Misfit

 

[n7]

The OP asked which single GPU card to get for the best performance @ 1920x1200 in Crysis regardless of price.

Answer would be 9800 GTX or 8800 GTS overclocked, or 8800 Ultra/GTX (if AA is desired).

The off topic bickering about 9600 GTs & 8800 GTs & etc. is not really revelevant to this thread.
Please either keep this on topic, or start a new thread.
Thanx guys.

n7
Memory/Storage/Video Mod

 

[bushwickbill]

I am in the same boat. Just got my 24 inch 1920*1200 LCD and my 8800GTS SC 320Mb Overclocked at 648/1620/900 card juts can't push Crysis worth a dam!!
I want a new GPU under 250 bucks that will better my GPU, But it looks as though my only option is a 8800 GT which will get me maybe 5 more FPS
Need to save some more loot.

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Lithan

Originally posted by: Azn

That is storing gaming level in to the the PC. You were talking about how system memory slows it down with the results of Techpowerup and Neoseeker's article. We are talking vram with video cards. How the hell is system ram going to slow it down when it doesn't use more than 512mb of vram? That's why I don't trust techpowerup benches. It's all over the place. 9600gt beating a 8800gt and gtx? Yeah RIGHT!!! I don't care about their numbers because system could vary but if the benchmarks doesn't scale properly they are doing something wrong.

Umm are you serious? You actually think that system memory doesnt affect low res gaming?

And well, you just saw the screenshot that shows me getting ~3% less performance than they did, so if you want to pretend that their results aren't reasonable, well then you're beyond help.

The reason the 9600gt is winning is because you've chosen settings so skewed that gfx power differences between recent gpu's are almost irrelevant. And like every reviewer finds, the 8800gt @ low settings performs almost identically to a 9600gt, and only stretches its legs @ higher settings (which you apparently ignore because the 8800gs gets shredded at them).

Now what does 8800gs outperforming 9600gt in crysis have anything to do with it? :laugh:

http://www.tweaktown.com/revie...arks_crysis/index.html

http://www.hardwarezone.com.my...008/2501/CrysisA_1.gif

That is what I'm talking about. Were we not talking about crysis benchmarks where 9600gt beating 8800gt and 8800gtx in techpowerup article? Then you change it to something that has no relevance like system memory or how your 9600gt is so much faster at everything.

Like I already mentioned. System setup could vary so I could care less about how many fps they are getting for each card. But when they use the same system as their test bed and isn't scaling properly I don't trust their benchmarks.