Techpowerup First GTX 280 Review is gone

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Luka_Aveiro

If they wanted to run it with such impressive graphics, it wouldn't be their HPs and Dells to provide hardware to do so. You wanted Crysis graphics to run maxed out on 8500GT? Crytek doesn't make miracles. You have low settings though, use them if your hardware sucks.

---

If the GTX 280, though it beats the 9800GX2, can't run Crysis at 30fps consistently with AA and AF, you have to go back to the developer at some point and giving Crytek a freebie by not complaining to them is making it worse. They're going to sit on their a*ses and wait for hardware to play their games well and release CryEngine 3 to continue this trend. As for how optimizations on the PC helps on the consoles. You can find tons of articles where Crytek is b*tching about how the game would run crappy on the X360 because of its lower tech...and yet:

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/34591.html

:)

Perkam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

If the GTX 280, though it beats the 9800GX2, can't run Crysis at 30fps consistently with AA and AF, you have to go back to the developer at some point and giving Crytek a freebie by not complaining to them is making it worse. They're going to sit on their a*ses and wait for hardware to play their games well and release CryEngine 3 to continue this trend.

---

We still don't know GTX280s REAL Crysis performance, but I guess using XP and custom Cvars, you'll be able to run >30fps with 4xAA "VeryHigh" 1680x1050. We just have to wait for reviews, I bet Mascaras will help us with that, I trust him.
About CE3 and Crytek's philosophy, I confess I admire a team that @ every release brings hardware to their knees, some may see it as bad optimization, I see it as a step forward.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

As for how optimizations on the PC helps on the consoles. You can find tons of articles where Crytek is b*tching about how the game would run crappy on the X360 because of its lower tech...and yet:

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/34591.html

:)

Perkam

---

yap, FC2 seems pretty god for a console game, I am looking forward to a decent review of it and see pros/cons about the game.
Even though FC2 graphics are pretty good, it's clear they are a step behind of Crysis's, you can notice that on several textures and some in-game details.

I cannot tell you why Crytek didn't port Crysis to consoles, maybe their 3 million sales were enough for them, I don't know :p:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/34591.html

---

If you set Crysis to run at the resolution that Far Cry 2 is being rendered in on those consoles (1280x720 tops, though likely an upscale) you will get alot more than 30fps from a 280. Then there's the fact that it's Dunia, not CE2. I see your point but it's hard to compare them properly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xello

If you set Crysis to run at the resolution that Far Cry 2 is being rendered in on those consoles (1270x720 tops, though likely an upscale) you will get alot more than 30fps from a 280. Then there's the fact that it's Dunia, not CE2. I see your point but it's hard to compare them properly.

---

Actually I knew I saw something like this, but couldn't remember where:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Next Generation

Crysis, UT3 Sales Fall Flat
14 December 2007

Research firm NPD Group said that EA and Crytek's critically lauded FPS Crysis sold just 86,633 units last month, following its release on November 13.

A Metacritic average review score of 91 wasn’t enough to overcome the apparent apprehension regarding the game's relatively steep hardware requirements. A PC with a dual core processor, 2GB of RAM and a mid-level DX10 card runs the game at around 30 framers per second average at midrange resolution. [Judging by my own rig.--Ed.]

Midway and Epic Games’ Unreal Tournament 3 for PC fared even worse, selling just 33,995. However, sales will be supplemented by PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 versions. The game launched for PC on November 19, also receiving strong reviews.

The FPS market is crowded to say the least. Crysis and Unreal Tournament 3 launched during a time when BioShock, Halo 3, Call of Duty 4 and The Orange Box have been occupying shelf space.

(Thanks to virtual stock market The simExchange for the additional NPD data.)

---

http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?op...=8352&Itemid=2

Even UT3 is penalized for its high hardware requirements. The need to optimize is fundamental to sales, even though UT3 was able to capitalize on the flexibility of the UE3 engine for X360 and PS3.

Perkam

finally done with benchmarking:

http://img.techpowerup.org/080615/Capture339.gif http://img.techpowerup.org/080615/Capture340.gif http://img.techpowerup.org/080615/Capture341.gif http://img.techpowerup.org/080615/Capture342.gif

do these numbers look better now ? just noticed i have to remove the "..x AF" text

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by W1zzard

finally done with benchmarking:

http://img.techpowerup.org/080615/Capture339.gif http://img.techpowerup.org/080615/Capture340.gif http://img.techpowerup.org/080615/Capture341.gif http://img.techpowerup.org/080615/Capture342.gif

do these numbers look better now ? just noticed i have to remove the "..x AF" text

---

You murdered the numbers :stick: :p:

BTW, your last graph looks retarded. 3870X2 beats 9800X2 but both lose to the 8800GT :eek: 0_o I hate it when Nvidia plays around with drivers like that. (A slower 9800GX2 helps make the GTX 280 more powerful, and a faster 8800GT helps combat the 4850).

Perkam

i think the reason why the 8800 gtx scores so high in the last test is because it has 768 mb memory, all the other cards won't have enough memory at this res so they need to "swap" to main memory. the x2 cards effectively have 512 mb per gpu, so not different to a 512 mb card

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by W1zzard

i think the reason why the 8800 gtx scores so high in the last test is because it has 768 mb memory, all the other cards won't have enough memory at this res so they need to "swap" to main memory. the x2 cards effectively have 512 mb per gpu, so not different to a 512 mb card

---

Nope, score is still retarded X_X Your explanation doesn't explain how a single 112 shader 8800GT with 512MB could beat a 9800GX2 with 512MB per core.

Perkam

Too bad most of the results are pretty much "useless" since the game is not playable with such a low frame rate :P

You could just have a bar which says: "FAIL" :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by perkam

Nope, score is still retarded X_X Your explanation doesn't explain how a single 112 shader 8800GT with 512MB could beat a 9800GX2 with 512MB per core.

Perkam

---

thats a good question indeed. my guess is that something in sli's architecture takes a bigger performance hit from low memory situations.

CF/SLI are crap, that's the reason.

Where did the g92 GTS go? :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STaRGaZeR

CF/SLI are crap, that's the reason.

---

exactly, something that needs looking into if both these companies plan on mostly multi GPU in the future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InputUsername

Where did the g92 GTS go? :(

---

i broke the card yesterday :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by W1zzard

i think the reason why the 8800 gtx scores so high in the last test is because it has 768 mb memory, all the other cards won't have enough memory at this res so they need to "swap" to main memory. the x2 cards effectively have 512 mb per gpu, so not different to a 512 mb card

---

How about using the 1 gb cards ?

8800gt palit's
3870 diamonds's

There are probably a few of them out there

WTF is Crysis? :confused:

:ROTF::rofl:

XFX GTX280 in hands, around USD640 :( don't know how it performs yet.
but at that price the ATI cards look very welcoming :)

W1zzard I e-mailed you about this ages ago... Scores look correct for 16xAF, but AA is definitely not on. Take some screenshots. A 9800GTX should average ~30fps @ 1600x1200 with AA turned off in Crysis.