Wow I really dislike this game/demo. Always less than 25FPS on all HIGH with Post-processing set to low. Doesn't even seem to use more than one core? Running my sig with Vista 32bit ult.
Printable View
Wow I really dislike this game/demo. Always less than 25FPS on all HIGH with Post-processing set to low. Doesn't even seem to use more than one core? Running my sig with Vista 32bit ult.
I took some pictures running DX9 and DX10 to compare... not huge differences, but they are noticeable.
http://webpages.charter.net/bliss/
Just downloaded and started playing and the game looks incredible :shocked:
I am running at 1920x1200, with all settings at "High" except objects quality which is set to "Very High", but no AA at all.
I am using 32-bit Vista and the rig components in my sig.
With these settings I am only getting 21-26 FPS as measured by fraps in the jungle. You can see that I have top end gear in my computer too.
If I put the settings any higher the game becomes unplayable!!
no wonder its pc only! i wanna try it just to see how low i need to set the settings
Game effects quality, Post processing quality, and Water quality have very little influence on the performance.(on my second rig i have a 7600gs and i see no difference in FPS when i set these to low or high). i found that Object quality has a huge influence on the performance.
I got physics quality on high on this rig (7600gs, E6300, 2gb) and texture quality too.
It's only running 800×600 tho :rofl: but still, it looks very good.
I didn't expect it to run any better on a 7600gs.
I think it's strange that the high end cards don't perform that much better than most mid-range cards.. i mean, i haven't run this on my 7900gt yet, but the beta ran pretty well on it with most settings maxed out @ 1280×1024. (avg about 25fps i'd say, i haven't seen a 8800gtsdoing MUCH better than this)
Agreed. I am a bit dissapointed that with an 8800 Ultra and Core2Quad @ 3.66 I am not getting better performance.Quote:
Originally Posted by triple_A
However, I am running at 1920x1200 with objects quality at "very high" which is as high as it will go. The 21-26 FPS in the jungle jumps to 28-32 FPS when I am on the beach and to 34-38 FPS inside a building, so the framerates seem very situational.
When I set objects quality down to just "high" I get like +5-6 to all of the framerates listed above.
Turning AA on seems to kill already low framerates...
And if anyone with an 'ultra high-end' (SLI 8800GTX/Ultra, Quad Core etc) rig feels up to the task, could you set the settings to minimum (800x600, low, DX9 etc) and report back with framerates and any interesting information
Cheers.
What about this.......maybe CRYSIS when on max details is too much for any single card setup?
I run CRYSIS at 1600x1200 with mostly medium-high settings and see no lower than 25-26fps....climbing to almost 70fps in some areas.
I have a 6000+ at 3500mhz and a single 8800GTS with 2GB DDR2-1000mhz.
I like heavy games since they encourage me to upgrade my pc, I don't want 130-246fps in CRYSIS like you get with BF2/SF/FEAR maxed.
Anyone tested the game with an 8600? :D
No but my a buddy of mine has an 8500GT 256MB DDR2 and he plays fine at 1024x768 with all settings at low. Ingame he see's between 25-40fps with no AA.Quote:
Originally Posted by fireice2
when it became available for download?
post some links
merci bootup
I guess I won't be able to play this one at 1280x1024 with medium settings. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by SOLDNER-MOFO64
crysis + 8800 ultra + 1080p plasma = :slobber:
dark scenes look great on the plasma
http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/4214/36362237fw7.jpg
what do very high settings do ?
is that for sli/cross ?
i hate how even on medium settings i dont get good FPS
cant get crossfire to work on 2900's
Just replayed the demo and had a lil fun with the cloaking.
Walking up while cloaked to a 2 man patrol. i grabbed one of them and threw him at the other both dead :).
then did the same to another 2 man patrol and grabbed the first and the second started shooting and he made a headshot on the guy i grabbed.
Stil am dissapointed by the physix.
Throwing a small wooden box at a hut and then the hut exploding is a bit much.
On a positive side you do save alot of handgrenades that way.
Apparently the demo is single threaded, or at least that's what I'm hearing. That'd explain a lot.
To maintain a playable framerate (over 30) I have to run Medium settings @ my native res of 1900x1200.
C2D E6850 @ 3.6 / 2GB DDR2 @ 1000 5-5-5-15 / 8800GTS 640
It's a slideshow on high. Looks like we'll need next year's hardware for this one.
that could explain tons! like the reason that the high end card guys are getting crappy FPS. being a cpu bottle neck not a GPU one. i have a G15 so i will report back once the demo is done downloading on how much of my second core it uses.Quote:
Originally Posted by NickS
only 13 hours to go:(
To me, the game isn't fun :/ Well, back to screwing around in CS Source fun maps.
________
Buy extreme vaporizer
It is using both cores for me:Quote:
Originally Posted by Knight
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y26...Untitled-2.jpg
I'm running Vista Ultimate 32-bit and with a 7900GT, 3GHz X2, and ~3GB RAM I get 50-80FPS with everything on low and 1152x864 res. I think it still looks pretty good.
What's frustrating to me is that it takes a lot of shots to down the enemies, and when you shoot them it doesn't seem to affect them and they still shoot really accurately. Also, when in armor mode it only takes like 3 shots then it's gone so I usually just leave strength mode on since it eliminates recoil for your gun. The AI is good with lots of flanking and coordinated attacks.
Gure3D has a fast and easy download.
Additional Comments: This thing takes forever to install!!!!
At what reso?? I have a GTX, but I found that running everything medium, no AA @ 1680x1050 Im getting 30-60fps but mainly around 40-50 which Im pretty happy with. I def. wasnt expecting this game to run maxed out at high res with high levels of AA\AF with current hardware no matter how optimized people said it was.Quote:
Originally Posted by darkorb
Anyone try running Farcry totally maxed with their GTS/GTXs?? I tried running it at 1680x1050 all High settings + HDR 16QxAA and 16xAF and was getting like 15-20fps :p: So Crysis at medium with no AA 30-60fps Im happy with :D
8800 ultra sli @ 650~700/2200 + quad @ 3.6+GHz might have a shot @ playing this game all very high @ 1680x1050 no aa DX10 .....
DX10 very high performs like crap on a stock GTX, also nv's SLI performance under vista = about 50% more than single card .... thats imo one of nv's biggest weakness, SLI under vista performs horribly (at least for 8800 SLIs, ppl with 7x00 SLI says its fine ...)
a stock GTS 640 (or even 320) + dual core X2, or C2D ~2.4GHz + 2GB RAM can play this @ 1280x1024 all high DX9 and still get~30fps, but to jumo from high to very high the performance drop is huge, like more than half,
btw jsut saw this on nv news
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=101089
create a file name "autoexec.cfg"
and then put what ever config u want in it , such as :
r_sunshafts = 1
in "autoexec.cfg"
and put "autoexec.cfg" under :
C:\Program Files\Electronic Arts\Crytek\Crysis SP Demo\Game\Config
should make game look better, sunshaft suppose to be a very high only, but u can have that in DX9, high
anyway with autoexec u can edit any config command u want, as if u put it under game.cfg or anywhere else it erase it after u close the program
Would there be any diff between a stock GTS and the one in my sig?Quote:
Originally Posted by theteamaqua
u pretty much have a stock GTX, but if VRAM usage is more than like 350MB u will get slowdownQuote:
Originally Posted by Raptor22
something like this:
http://www.beyond3d.com/content/news/349
only happens to 320 users
but u have a pentium d ... and 820 ...
1280x1024 all high should be easy 30+fps when running,
@ 1440 it eats about ~350 to 400, and 1680 it eats about ~400 to 450, no AA, @ 1680 4xAA i was getting ~600
low 20s @ fraps
all settings @ high 1920x1080
msi 8800 ultra
quad @ 3.4
2GB ram
winxp
I played it to the end; only really enjoyable at mostly Low settings; kind of a disappointment, given my specs.
You dont have to do all that, if you change the settings in sys_spec_PostProcessing.cfg in the Cvar Groups folder it stays after you close\reopen the game, and even works with Medium settings not just HighQuote:
Originally Posted by theteamaqua
well like i said u can put any command u want under autoexec.cfg ... the sunshafts was just an example
this is what they said
finding all that command under cvargroup folder will be pretty time consumingCode:r_DepthOfField=1
r_MotionBlur=3
r_sunshafts=1
r_UseEdgeAA=1
r_Flares=1
r_Coronas=1
r_colorgrading=1
r_GlowScreenMultiplier = 0.2
sys_spec_Quality=4
e_sky_type=1
e_sky_update_rate=1
r_DetailTextures=1
r_DetailNumLayers=2
r_DetailDistance=8
r_HDRRendering=2
r_SSAO=1
r_SSAO_quality=2
r_SSAO_radius=2
r_refraction=1
e_ram_maps=1
sys_flash_edgeaa=1
e_vegetation_use_terrain_color=1
e_terrain_ao=1
e_terrain_normal_map=1
e_max_entity_lights=16
r_UsePom=1
r_EnvTexUpdateInterval=0.05
r_TexturesFilteringQuality=0
r_HairSortingQuality = 1
r_FillLights = 14
e_particles_lights = 1
i_lighteffects = 1
g_ragdollMinTime = 15.0
g_ragdollUnseenTime = 2
g_ragdollDistance = 40.0
g_battleDust_enable = 1
e_obj_quality=4
e_proc_vegetation=1
ca_useDecals=1
e_decals_allow_game_decals=1
e_decals_life_time_scale=2
e_lod_ratio=6
e_lod_min=0
e_lods=1
e_view_dist_ratio_detail=30
e_view_dist_ratio_vegetation=45
e_vegetation_min_size=0
i_rejecteffects=1
e_vegetation_bending=2
sys_flash_curve_tess_error=2
e_view_dist_ratio=60
e_max_view_dst_spec_lerp=1
e_vegetation_sprites_distance_custom_ratio_min=1
e_vegetation_sprites_distance_ratio=1.5
e_detail_materials_view_dist_xy=2048
e_detail_materials_view_dist_z=128
es_DebrisLifetimeScale=1
e_cbuffer_resolution=256
e_dissolve=1
ca_DrawFaceAttachments=1
ca_AttachmentCullingRation=200
e_terrain_occlusion_culling_max_dist=200
r_WaterRefractions=1
r_WaterReflections=1
r_WaterUpdateFactor=0.05
e_water_tesselation_amount=10
e_water_tesselation_swath_width=10
r_WaterUpdateDistance=0.2
r_WaterCaustics=1
r_WaterReflectionsQuality=4
e_water_ocean_fft=1
q_ShaderWater=2
r_WaterReflectionsMinVisiblePixelsUpdate = 0.05
r_Beams=3
r_BeamsDistFactor=0.05
r_BeamsMaxSlices=200
e_Clouds=1
r_CloudsUpdateAlways=1
e_shadows = 1
r_ShadowBlur=3
e_shadows_max_texture_size=1024
r_ShadowJittering=2.5
e_gsm_lods_num=5
e_gsm_range=3
e_shadows_cast_view_dist_ratio=0.8
r_ShadowsMaskResolution=0
e_shadows_on_alpha_blended=1
e_shadows_from_terrain_in_all_lods=1
e_gsm_cache = 0
e_cull_veg_activation=50
g_joint_breaking=1
g_tree_cut_reuse_dist=0
p_max_MC_iters=6000
e_phys_foliage=2
es_MaxPhysDist=200
es_MaxPhysDistInvisible=25
e_phys_ocean_cell=0.5
e_foliage_wind_activation_dist=25
g_breakage_particles_limit=250
p_max_object_splashes=3
p_splash_dist0=7
p_splash_dist1=30
p_splash_force0=10
p_splash_force1=100
p_splash_vel0=4.5
p_splash_vel1=10
v_vehicle_quality=4
p_max_substeps_large_group=5
p_num_bodies_large_group=100
e_particles_quality=4
e_particles_lod=1
e_particles_max_emitter_draw_screen=32
r_UseSoftParticles=1
e_water_ocean_soft_particles= 1
e_particles_object_collisions=1
I just played it.
8800GTX at stock.
Q6600 at stock.
Windows XP 32bit.
DX9.
1600x1200.
Everything on high.
4xAA = 20-25FPS.
0xAA = 27-32FPS.
The ending was a kick in the nuts.
I wanted there to be more, but it was just a pre-release demo.
Vehicles now have 2 views.
While you are driving the vehicle, you can control the weapon.
I was shocked, vegetation wasn't as breakable as I thought.
But that was just DirectX9. I am going to try DX10 later.
EDIT:
On 32-bit Windows XP, I saw a 60% load on 2 cores, 30% load on the other 2.
one thing i have noticed form the screen shots is the amount of vegetation. never before have we seen any game with so much grass and tree detail. also if you look you can see the leaves on the trees that are way off in the distance. and the shadows form the trees are outstanding as well. lots of people are saying that this game is poorly optimized but i think it is well optimized. the reason for the low performance is we have never seen anything this detailed and this much vegetation before.
this game makes halo 3 looks like 2/3 year old game
does halo 3 even have better graphics than farcry patch 1.4 (which has HDR ) :rofl:
Ouch :( Only about 5 fps more than my 8800GTS @ 621/1000Quote:
Originally Posted by NapalmV5
these ppl loves to show their huge e-penis
http://ve3d.ign.com/articles/news/35...someness/p1/c2
Quote:
ItBurn replied to zwaffleVE's post
Oct 27 2007, 11:23 AM
It's not a slideshow. It runs at a solid 30+ fps with everything at very high for me with my 600$ videocard.
You want something about gameplay? It's pure fun and the replay value is insane.
bullcrap, someone at nvnews with a ultra @ 650, Q6600 @ 3.4 was getting ~17fps on very high DX10 @ 1680x1050 , i got about the same framerate here except with Q6600 3.5, GTS 650 @ 1440 very high, i guess 17fps is called playableQuote:
Robert "Apache" Howarth
Oct 26 2007, 9:19 PM
Its playable in tourist setting (strolling around the lush tropical island without much lag), but combat is another story unless its a small fire fight. :)
thats all very high, 8x AA, 8x AF, etc
Don't think this has been posted here...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Draxx
same settings as above
i didnt include that no AA but AF @ 16
all settings @ high 1920x1080
msi 8800 ultra (660/2300)
quad @ 3.4
2GB ram
winxp
169.01 beta
http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/9163/19539131ik9.jpg
depends on scenes
i noticed some parts @ 40+ fps standing still but walking/running drops @ low 30
the low 20s i posted above, were @ vegetation walking/running, 25-27 standing still
not really playable when it gets into action
^gpu, cpu below
http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/4945/39453797fk0.jpg
loved the game!!!! the fact that you can mostly destroy and manipulate EVERY SINGLE OBJECT is awesome! lol
loved the phisics, i was messing up with all the enemies's barracs and trees in the game, pretty nice!
i can run here about 25-30 fps, with all on very high and 1280x960 and 4X or 2X AA. It has been running pretty smoothly.
Great game, best i have ever seen. :up:
Same here. Artifacts all over the screen when overclocked and 1280x1024, with 1024x768 is good.Quote:
Originally Posted by WrigleyVillain
Somebody please test the demo on Q6600 stock + 2x R600 1 GB GDDR4 + last driver + RAM@1066mhz I realy like to know how CF dose in this game(fps)... not to mention the Quality of image of R600series (512bit and 1 GB GDDR4) ...
Can someone fiddle with the advanced video settings and find the best settings with most minimal affect on visuals ?
Frankly, I'm disappointed no one has done this yet...what are you guys doing with physics on in MP ?? Shooting trees while getting fragged?
Perkam
Yeah I took the time to tweak the settings to get the best balance of IQ and performance, though its gonna be different for every card obviously. The screenshot is the settings I use, 1680x1050 No AA or AF, 163.75 drivers..........gives me 30-60fps, but usually around 30-40 which is good enough for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by perkam
BTW, in the MP *beta* all the physics\interaction were disabled so no breaking things or picking stuff up, but we'll see if thats the case in the retail MP :p:
Surprisingly it runs ok on medium on the x1950pro as well. Just hovers around 25-30fps.Quote:
Originally Posted by Soulburner
Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by G4h4o8s6T
I average 37 on the gpu bench at 1280x800 no AA high which is definitley decent but that res looks like crap on my native 1920X1200 LCD. Going back to my CRT to test further/actually play.
providing you run it under vista with DX10. AFAIK all the destructable environment(s).....(well the majority of the landscape/vegetation)....are/is only possible with dx10 as a lot of the load is removed from the server and it makes such play possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by G4h4o8s6T
Just ran the bench and got 42fps avg. with the settings above, very playable at those framerates(atleast for me :p: )Quote:
Originally Posted by WrigleyVillain
Hi.I've got some weird problems running crysis demo.
System specs --->> A64-3000,7600gs,1GB DDRII 667.
1024X768,low details.
Just downloaded new drivers 163.71.Card is not overclocked and in full load doesn't pass 50C.
Here are the screenshots.
http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u...2-12-41-06.jpg
http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u...2-11-57-23.jpg
http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u...2-11-46-28.jpg
Any ideas what is wrong??!
Make sure drivers are set to 'application controlled'. It might help as it did a similar thing to me on the beta and that fixed it.
Thank you.It works fine now. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by del_fuego
Some screenshots from me.
As said 1024X768,low details.
http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u...3-11-39-45.jpg
http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u...3-20-54-53.jpg
http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u...3-16-03-18.jpg
http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u...3-51-41-67.jpg
http://i167.photobucket.com/albums/u...3-28-15-37.jpg
Thats great, glad i could help you out. I play at the same res but with most stuff on medium and a few settings on high (7900GTO), it looks ok but i'm now obviously looking to upgrade!
Happy playing.
Im limited by my minuscule amount of RAM as of now... my cores only get up to about 40% and all settings are on low.... it doesn't even work on medium... im thinking about just getting a 4GB set and get it over with... :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by del_fuego
I hear you, been thinking about going to 4Gb (from 2Gb) for a while now, not that i'm sure all that isnt needed right now for most of my apps but i guess it cant hurt to be prepared for the future considering the dirt-cheap price of ram at the moment.
Well i dunno what ppl are complaining about. Setting shaders and a couple of other stuff to middle(textures on high) i can run it fine on 1680x1050 on my outdated hardware. It looks damn good too. The engine might be demanding but it seems to me it scales very well if you lower the settings a bit. Reminds of the Quake3 engine really in that respect. I played Jedi Academy on a 16MB TNT1 card and a Celeron @ 1.2Ghz. As some ppl already mentioned the density of the foliage is amazing and facial animations are the best i've seen in any game to date. Gameplay is also great imo although i cannot see this being a good MP game.
Yeah multiplayer may be just a big tropical island sandbox with kids running around blowing each other up. Doesn't mean that can't be fun though ;)
Yep, agree, no complaints here although there does seem to be alot of whingers who cant run it at there natural res on thier gargantuan monitors. Very happy playing at a lower res, saves me having to spend a fortune on sli etc too.
There should be alot of choice as far as MP goes when the likes of Obsidean Edge 2 and other mods are released. But i have to say the replay value seems great, i've played the demo a few times now and not once have the enemy ai done the same things or used the same tactics as my previous goes. Great.
Yeah, ur lucky, I only have 1GB right now... :down: :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by del_fuego
Yep, an extra gig in combination with your GTS and you'd be good to go i reckon, if i win the lottery this week i'll hook you up!
:up:
Ouch, the Tualatin Celerons are very capable cpus... their architecture is so much better than netburst that it beat all P4s up until the P4B. Ive OCed my Celeron from 1200MHz to 1546MHz, paired with a 6200LE unlocked to 4pp, 3vp, it still makes for a great backup gaming pc during upgrades. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by BrowncoatGR
:rofl:Quote:
Originally Posted by del_fuego
Thanks man! I am going to laugh so hard if you win the lottery this week... :D :ROTF: :ROTF: :clap: :up:
Not as hard as my bank manager will! Keep your fingers crossed for me buddy.
:)
Trust me, I am... :DQuote:
Originally Posted by del_fuego
Laters,
Conner
I think I'm going to wait for the price to go down before I buy this game. The graphics are good but it's just another FPS game.
I would like to win the lottery.
Anyone know or notice a difference between "High" detail in XP vs Vista? I'm curious as to whether or not "Very High" for each category spits out a DX10 hardware feature. Also, it'd be interesting to see if there's any difference in XP vs Vista for DX9 mode and "High" detail.
There shouldn't be a difference between High in XP and Vista, unless its DX10. As well Very High is reserved for DX10 but suppositly you can hack it in for DX9 cards, probably they advise against it because it demands even more power but if you got the card to power it why not, looks cooler like the waves if you activate the very high shader.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jodiuh
Whats amazing in Very high is the Parallex map occlusion OMFG that there makes the game look striaght realistic as hell. You can hack some thing, but some features are DX10 only that wont run in DX9, like the longer draw distance and deeper shadows.Quote:
Originally Posted by deathman20