Want to play Crysis at 1600x1200 @ 60 fps?

[sticks435]

I know CNET prob isn't the best place for hardware reviews, but they just got the new Falcon in, and they claim it is the first PC to be able to play Crysis at 60fps at 1600x1200 High settings. Make of it what you will.

http://reviews.cnet.com/deskto...65.html?tag=txt%3bpage

 

[pcslookout]

Originally posted by: sticks435
I know CNET prob isn't the best place for hardware reviews, but they just got the new Falcon in, and they claim it is the first PC to be able to play Crysis at 60fps at 1600x1200 High settings. Make of it what you will.

http://reviews.cnet.com/deskto...65.html?tag=txt%3bpage

Interesting but is this with 16x AF as well ? I bet not. I wonder what they get on the ice levels?

I wonder what kind of fps they get with all details on very high with 4x AA and 16x AF? That is what I want to run Crysis at so it has the full DX10 glory! I bet those fps are at least 10 maybe even 20 fps less when very high is turned on with 4x AA and 16 AF. I bet it would not handle the ice levels very well.

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

So...that sort of power will be available to the average consumer in about 2 years, then. And by that time Crysis will seem outdated.

 

[pcslookout]

Originally posted by: ConstipatedVigilante
So...that sort of power will be available to the average consumer in about 2 years, then. And by that time Crysis will seem outdated.

:thumbsup:

I wonder if they were running it in DX9 or DX10 as well sense you can decide to run it either one in Vista.

 

[pcslookout]

It would be interesting to know as well if settings would need to be turned down with the battle of the final boss because I know this takes a huge fp hit on all pcs.

 

[videogames101]

So, my $1400 rig in sig, which can run Crysis at very high 1680x1050 at around 40-50 fps doesn't count?

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

Originally posted by: videogames101
So, my $1400 rig in sig, which can run Crysis at very high 1680x1050 at around 40-50 fps doesn't count?

Your e-peen has been surpassed. But yeah, it really wasn't necessary to pay $8k for that machine. It could be built with $2k, at least a bit after the release of i7 (it'll cost a grand at release, just like Core 2 Quads).

 

[Tempered81]

I think it would do better with 3 GTX280 OC in Tri-SLI than with 4 rv770's - for just about all games

 

[911paramedic]

Pretty sure my rig is running it at 1900x1280 just fine.

 

[pcslookout]

Originally posted by: videogames101
So, my $1400 rig in sig, which can run Crysis at very high 1680x1050 at around 40-50 fps doesn't count?

What resolution, detail settings, AA, and AF please ?

 

[pcslookout]

Originally posted by: 911paramedic
Pretty sure my rig is running it at 1900x1280 just fine.

What detail settings, AA, and AF please ?

 

[CP5670]

It would be interesting to know as well if settings would need to be turned down with the battle of the final boss because I know this takes a huge fp hit on all pcs.

I bet they do. None of these reviews take the last few levels into account, where the performance drops sharply enough that you have to change some settings to maintain acceptable performance. I decreased the resolution to 1024x768 (high/very high mix, DX9, no AA) for those levels on a GTX 280, since the framerate kept going into the 20s during any heavy fight at 1280x960. The boss fight in Warhead had the same issue.

 

[Canai]

I'm lucky... I play on an older HDTV at 1360x768, so I can run Crysis maxed with 24x CFAA and 16x AF at playable fps, average 40-45 FPS.

Of course that's hacked DX9 with the ultra config, so vanilla very high would be faster

 

[pcslookout]

Originally posted by: CP5670

It would be interesting to know as well if settings would need to be turned down with the battle of the final boss because I know this takes a huge fp hit on all pcs.

I bet they do. None of these reviews take the last few levels into account, where the performance drops sharply enough that you have to change some settings to maintain acceptable performance. I decreased the resolution to 1024x768 (high/very high mix, DX9, no AA) for those levels on a GTX 280, since the framerate kept going into the 20s during any heavy fight at 1280x960. The boss fight in Warhead had the same issue.

Wow on a GTX 280! :Q having to go all the way down to 1024x768 with no AA, and DX9 just to play the last few levels of Crysis on high to very high detail settings Oh my god that sucks.

The only thing I am confused about is how could you use anything on very high if you were using DX9 instead of DX10 ?

I would be so angry if I would of bought a GTX 280 and couldn't play the whole game of Crysis at 1680x1050 with all details on very high in DX10. I would prefer to have 4x AA and 16x AF enabled as well but if it could not handle it I would be ok with it off I guess. I guess I need to wait another year or maybe two so their is a graphics card that comes out that can play the whole Crysis game at 1680x1050 (including the last few levels with the boss) at 30 fps minimum at all times with all details on very high in DX10. Also 4x AA and 16x AF.

 

[pcslookout]

Originally posted by: Canai
I'm lucky... I play on an older HDTV at 1360x768, so I can run Crysis maxed with 24x CFAA and 16x AF at playable fps, average 40-45 FPS.

Of course that's hacked DX9 with the ultra config, so vanilla very high would be faster

So what kind of fps do you get on the last few levels of Crysis with the boss and during the ice levels ?

 

[Canai]

Originally posted by: pcslookout

Originally posted by: Canai
I'm lucky... I play on an older HDTV at 1360x768, so I can run Crysis maxed with 24x CFAA and 16x AF at playable fps, average 40-45 FPS.

Of course that's hacked DX9 with the ultra config, so vanilla very high would be faster

So what kind of fps do you get on the last few levels of Crysis with the boss and during the ice levels ?

Oh come now, who plays those levels more than once? :laugh:

 

[MustangSVT]

meh I dont understand why people want to play that in max settings.

with my overclocked 8800gs and optimized settings, I played it through perfectly fine. and it looked amazing.

 

[pcslookout]

Originally posted by: Canai

Originally posted by: pcslookout

Originally posted by: Canai
I'm lucky... I play on an older HDTV at 1360x768, so I can run Crysis maxed with 24x CFAA and 16x AF at playable fps, average 40-45 FPS.

Of course that's hacked DX9 with the ultra config, so vanilla very high would be faster

So what kind of fps do you get on the last few levels of Crysis with the boss and during the ice levels ?

Oh come now, who plays those levels more than once? :laugh:

Ah ha. I would if I enjoyed the game. I refuse to play the game until I can play the whole thing at the same detail settings. I waiting for the perfect high end ATI or Nvidia graphics card for that. If not even the GTX 280 can do it right now it is hopeless at this point in time.

 

[pcslookout]

Originally posted by: MustangSVT
meh I dont understand why people want to play that in max settings.

with my overclocked 8800gs and optimized settings, I played it through perfectly fine. and it looked amazing.

DirectX 9 or DirectX 10 ?

 

[CottonRabbit]

Originally posted by: pcslookout
Wow on a GTX 280! :Q having to go all the way down to 1024x768 with no AA, and DX9 just to play the last few levels of Crysis on high to very high detail settings Oh my god that sucks.

Eh, I'll just say this is not the case with everyone...

 

[Cabages]

I wouldnt pay $1 to play Crysis at 2560x1600 @ 75 FPS

 

[CP5670]

Originally posted by: pcslookout
Wow on a GTX 280! :Q having to go all the way down to 1024x768 with no AA, and DX9 just to play the last few levels of Crysis on high to very high detail settings Oh my god that sucks.

The only thing I am confused about is how could you use anything on very high if you were using DX9 instead of DX10 ?

I would be so angry if I would of bought a GTX 280 and couldn't play the whole game of Crysis at 1680x1050 with all details on very high in DX10. I would prefer to have 4x AA and 16x AF enabled as well but if it could not handle it I would be ok with it off I guess. I guess I need to wait another year or maybe two so their is a graphics card that comes out that can play the whole Crysis game at 1680x1050 (including the last few levels with the boss) at 30 fps minimum at all times with all details on very high in DX10. Also 4x AA and 16x AF.

Yes, a GTX 280 certainly cannot play the entire game at decent framerates without dropping settings somewhere. The same applies to Crysis Warhead. I have a CRT and often changed the resolution between levels but you would have to play around with the detail settings on LCDs and find a lower end combination for the intense levels.

I think when people say that such and such settings are smooth in this game, they don't consider the last few levels. It doesn't matter if you are getting 45fps most of the time if it's consistently falling to 25-30fps in intense fights, which is the typical situation during the big outdoor alien assaults.

You can activate any of the very high settings manually in the config files, as they aren't actually related to DX10. I had most settings on high, except for the texture sizes, sunbeams, water effects and parallax mapping, which were on very high. This combination seems to provide most of the quality of very high while giving much better performance.

Overall, I liked the game a lot despite the poor performance, but it could be a long time before we get a card that truly shines with this engine.

 

[pcslookout]

Originally posted by: CottonRabbit

Originally posted by: pcslookout
Wow on a GTX 280! :Q having to go all the way down to 1024x768 with no AA, and DX9 just to play the last few levels of Crysis on high to very high detail settings Oh my god that sucks.

Eh, I'll just say this is not the case with everyone...

Explain please?

 

[pcslookout]

Originally posted by: CP5670

Originally posted by: pcslookout
Wow on a GTX 280! :Q having to go all the way down to 1024x768 with no AA, and DX9 just to play the last few levels of Crysis on high to very high detail settings Oh my god that sucks.

The only thing I am confused about is how could you use anything on very high if you were using DX9 instead of DX10 ?

I would be so angry if I would of bought a GTX 280 and couldn't play the whole game of Crysis at 1680x1050 with all details on very high in DX10. I would prefer to have 4x AA and 16x AF enabled as well but if it could not handle it I would be ok with it off I guess. I guess I need to wait another year or maybe two so their is a graphics card that comes out that can play the whole Crysis game at 1680x1050 (including the last few levels with the boss) at 30 fps minimum at all times with all details on very high in DX10. Also 4x AA and 16x AF.

Yes, a GTX 280 certainly cannot play the entire game at decent framerates without dropping settings somewhere. The same applies to Crysis Warhead. I have a CRT and often changed the resolution between levels but you would have to play around with the detail settings on LCDs and find a lower end combination for the intense levels.

I think when people say that such and such settings are smooth in this game, they don't consider the last few levels. It doesn't matter if you are getting 45fps most of the time if it's consistently falling to 25-30fps in intense fights, which is the typical situation during the big outdoor alien assaults.

You can activate any of the very high settings manually in the config files, as they aren't actually related to DX10. I had most settings on high, except for the texture sizes, sunbeams, water effects and parallax mapping, which were on very high. This combination seems to provide most of the quality of very high while giving much better performance.

Overall, I liked the game a lot despite the poor performance, but it could be a long time before we get a card that truly shines with this engine.

That is what I was afraid of.

 

[pcslookout]

Originally posted by: Cabages
I wouldnt pay $1 to play Crysis at 2560x1600 @ 75 FPS

Thats why I won't have to if I decide to wait 2 to 5 years until I play Crysis so the high end that can play Crysis at 2560x1600 with all details on very high in DX10 in maybe a year or year 1/2 maybe from now will be the standard speed for mid level cheaper video cards by then. Like the Geforce 8800 GT is now. Remember when to get that kind of performance you had to pay out of the nose for a Geforce 8800 GTX ? I doubt this though unless nvidia can really do another huge speed bump like with the 8800 series did when they first came out.

Though if it does at least I know I can play Crysis instead of at 2560x1600 at 1680x1050 with all details on very high in DX10 and use the extra buffer of speed instead for 4x AA 16x AF.

That all depends if that 75 fps at 2560x1600 was average or maximum frame rates though. It will be a very long time for us to ever have minimum frame rates of 75 fps on any video card. All video cards at this moment no matter how powerful they are have minimum frame rates of at least 20 something the key is for how long.