Crysis 2 being re-designed for GTX580

[Manicdan]

That's a single data point

one data point for one game from one review, thats the best way to decide to:
spend over 1000$,
on just a pair of video cards,
to keep for less than a year....

right?

[Rai]

one data point for one game from one review, thats the best way to decide to:
spend over 1000$,
on just a pair of video cards,
to keep for less than a year....

right?

Absolutely it is! Let's hope that Anand's rig didn't have a lil hd access or something that may have caused a blip on the radar.

[s1nykuL]

Sporting team gives $2m to ball manufacturer to produce a ball that is optimised for use on that teams own playing surface and optimised for maximum performance when used with that teams own footwear/bats/sticks/clubs.

How long would the above scenario last before some kind of litigation was initiated?

TWIMTBP stinks always has always will. It doesn't matter if it is Nvidia, AMD, The New York Mets or Manchester United who are doing the bribing.

[Dimitriman]

Why a game developer would do this, i have no idea. Will this cause them to lose 2 mill in revenue? I dont know, but i know that i will not be paying for this game as i got ATI. Perhaps alot of other ATI people will also not pay for this, making the revenue for the game less. Would be fun to have a parallel universe where the developer didnt take the 2 mil, and compare the 2 end results hehe.

When I bought my 3870 and played crysis everytime i saw that TWIMTBP logo is just gave a slight lol and carried on playing the game exactly as its meant to be played without any problems.

[Bigchrome]

Not sure if someone has mentioned it yet, but this close to launch there's no way they'll rework ANYTHING. The money is for bundling the game with their new cards etc, guaranteed.

[jaredpace]

http://www.news4it.it/images/stories...580A_copia.jpg

Even on Nvidia's own PR slide, the 5870 is faster than the 480 in crysis. Get tired of seeing carfax defend a 480's performance in every thread

[Sesto Sento]

YAAAAAYYYYYY!!!!!

Let's go back to 10 FPS gaming, and this with the NEW GTX580 LOL...

Hell, even 4 years after the release of Crysis, you can't run the game on a GTX480 with everything on max quality @ 2560 with aceptable frame rate....

[[XC] hipno650]

Yes, Crysis was developed on 8800GTX's. What were the other options again? That's right, crap.

I loled so hard from that, so true. I will have to say though it's pretty obvious who in this thread owns both a 5870 and a GTX 480 and has used them both when playing crysis. those who own both know that the difference between the 5870 performance and the GTX 480 performance is much much bigger then people think or than the graphs say. I was straight up disappointed with my 5870 in Crysis, my GTX 480 on the other hand is totally amazing and runs like a dream.

Cayman will need to be almost twice as fast as the 5870 in Crysis to keep up with the GTX 580 if the rumored numbers are true. needless to say it will be interesting to see what happens. What I am really interested to see is when games with the using the Uniengine come out because it fly's on nvidia compared to ATI (maybe cayman will change that)

I also never noticed that graph's Crysis warhead performance for the GTX 480, graph must be a fake considering I have tested it myself and thats not the case.

[MrMojoZ]

Get tired of seeing carfax defend a 480's performance in every thread

As long as he isn't spamming AMD threads with rhetoric, nothing to worry about.

[StAndrew]

They are just adding more tessellation for users with a GTX580. Im sure users with lesser hardware will be able to turn it off. I dont think this is an unfair play by Nvidia as it doesnt affect ATI's cards. If ATI wants to play in this ball field, they'll just have to increase their tessellation prowess.

For those that equate this to PhyX, you are so off. This isnt limited to Nvidia cards.

[Eastcoasthandle]

Yes, Crysis was developed on 8800GTX's. What were the other options again? That's right, crap.

I don't think the answer is so simple. As to regard of performance I recall the 8800GTX taking a nice hit if MSAA was used. However, performance is not really relevant here. The issue is whether or not it's true that they are going specifically code Crysis 2 for 580 or not. Well, my posts shows that if we look at history Crysis was for the 8800 GTX. I still think we need confirmation from the developers to see if this is true or not. However, if it is true it wouldn't surprise me .

[Carfax]

Somehow with Fermi failing in every other department, minimums are now all the rage with certain users. That's a single data point, you need graphs like HardOCP to check how badly each card is fluctuating. If the 5870 had very low minimums time and again that would drag the average down. Graphs will show the minimum as well as the overall trend in fps which is a lot more useful than a single data point. It also really depends on which review you sight, here the 5870 is ahead.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/N..._Fermi/10.html

I posted a HardOCP link, and this is what the reviewer said:

You can see that we were really pushing these video cards very hard in this game with these framerates, but I have to say that GTX 480 SLI was the most playable, you could really feel the difference. In fact, I would say that 2X AA at 2560x1600 with all Enthusiast settings is playable on GTX 480 SLI here, but not on the Radeon HD 5870 CrossFireX.

Looking at the graph, the 5870 Crossfire set up plunges below the 30 FPS mark an inordinate amount of times.

Even on Nvidia's own PR slide, the 5870 is faster than the 480 in crysis. Get tired of seeing carfax defend a 480's performance in every thread

Correcting a false assumption and defending the 480s performance aren't the same thing..

I loled so hard from that, so true. I will have to say though it's pretty obvious who in this thread owns both a 5870 and a GTX 480 and has used them both when playing crysis. those who own both know that the difference between the 5870 performance and the GTX 480 performance is much much bigger then people think or than the graphs say. I was straight up disappointed with my 5870 in Crysis, my GTX 480 on the other hand is totally amazing and runs like a dream.

Exactly! Gameplay experience with the 480 in Crysis is just much better than the 5870 no doubt about it.

I also never noticed that graph's Crysis warhead performance for the GTX 480, graph must be a fake considering I have tested it myself and thats not the case.

HardOCP typically gives the most accurate results when it comes to benchmarks, as you can see the entire range of results over a specific period of time rather than just a mere snapshot.

I wish more reviewers used their method.

[MythSquare]

AMD and nVidia need to rethink their market strategies and stop making vga for consoles. Who cares it's gonna be the same road for Crysis 2 as for Crysis.

[Rai]

I posted a HardOCP link, and this is what the reviewer said:



Looking at the graph, the 5870 Crossfire set up plunges below the 30 FPS mark an inordinate amount of times.



Correcting a false assumption and defending the 480s performance aren't the same thing..



Exactly! Gameplay experience with the 480 in Crysis is just much better than the 5870 no doubt about it.



HardOCP typically gives the most accurate results when it comes to benchmarks, as you can see the entire range of results over a specific period of time rather than just a mere snapshot.

I wish more reviewers used their method.

I don't care for multi gpu setups, so your link to HardOCP regarding GTX 480 SLI is a non-factor to me. Unfortunately they didn't bench Crysis in single gpu mode in their GTX 480 review, so I'll stick to techpowerup.

Also noticed the default Nvidia driver settings make Crysis look like junk on my 8800 GT compared to my 1900 xtx, very blurry and drab, I'm not sure if things have improved or not.

I love how some Nvidia users state it's unfair to compare the GTX 480 to the 5970 b/c they are at different price points. Yet, it's okay to compare GTX 480 SLI to 5870 CFX or a 5970 even though they are in completely different price segments, especially when you factor in likely psu/case upgrades needed for the 480 SLI setup.

My last few cards have been 5870, GTX 470, GTX 460. I'm hoping the 6900 series delivers, as the 580 just seems what the 480 was supposed to be a year ago.

[[XC] hipno650]

AMD and nVidia need to rethink their market strategies and stop making vga for consoles. Who cares it's gonna be the same road for Crysis 2 as for Crysis.

sad thing is they make crazy amounts of money off of consoles. look how many consoles are sold compared to high end PC graphics cards... granted if they stopped sale would increase but not enough to make up for the loss. If only, then PC gaming would be a great place full of great games but instead we get......ports

[Rai]

sad thing is they make crazy amounts of money off of consoles. look how many consoles are sold compared to high end PC graphics cards... granted if they stopped sale would increase but not enough to make up for the loss. If only, then PC gaming would be a great place full of great games but instead we get......ports

I don't think they make all that much money, I think they just sell the design off

I'm sure it's important, but I think Nvidia was charging MS for each chip in the xbox 1, and it cost MS a lot more going that way so they switched to ATI for the 360. I'm not 100% sure though.

[Dainas]

Oh they do make money....Nvidia made enough money off its console chips to make enemies of Microsoft and Sony. You do have to admire nvidia for admitting the PS3 RSX was outdated crap on launch thanks to the G80.

[gojirasan]

This is great news if true. I am eagerly anticipating Crysis 2. This should really be in the "duh" category. Nvidia and ATI should have been working closely with developers to encourage them to make the graphics as advanced as they are willing to. At least enough to make life difficult for their fastest cards. Crysis 1 was probably my favorite FPS ever. And it was at least partly the immersive graphics that made it so. That in combination with being heavily story-based with a pretty decent story. Crysis 2 even has a genuine novelist doing the writing. So I don't exactly expect it to suck. I have been concerned with the level of graphics however. From what I have seen so far the graphics don't seem much better than in Crysis at high settings. And they could even end up being worse like Crysis: Warhead was. Cel-shaded shyte for the toddlers.

I would like to think that this pre-Christmas gift from our good friends at Nvidia (it is quite obvious that this thread is utterly dominated by Nvidia fanboys) might encourage Crytek to put a bit more effort into some kind of uber-realistic mode that will make Crysis 1 look like Doom. Now it's time for AMD to step up to the plate and donate to Crytek as well. Game graphics have been stalled since Crysis. The truth is that AMD and Nvidia should *both* be ponying up to encourage more advanced game graphics. As of now I have no reason to upgrade from my GTX280. AMD, please help give me a reason. Go ahead and double that measly Nvidia donation.

[Amorphous]

It really was that simple for the original Crysis. There wasn't an even remotely competitive GPU for the 8800GTX from AMD until after the 9800GTX was also launched.

If by, "specifically code Crysis 2 for 580" you mean, "enable extreme levels of tessellation," I certainly hope so. Crytek isn't going to rip apart their engine and make it only work on NVIDIA. $2M, if that's really how much NVIDIA gave them, isn't worth it.

The big focus of TWIMTBP improvements are adding features like PhysX, good SLI scaling (2-way to 4-way) and 3D Vision/3D Vision Surround support. Better access to the game means NVIDIA can have a stronger driver when the game launches. That's most likely NVIDIA's big focus here; if Crysis 2 becomes the benchmarking standard like its predecessor was, then they're going to want to make sure they can be extremely competitive.

All this article does is pave the way for fanboys to cry foul if NVIDIA comes out on top in Crysis 2. Even if the reason that NVIDIA is on top is because of NVIDIA's tessellation engine.

I'm really tired of crappy console ports. If it takes NVIDIA pumping money into a company to make that happen, I'm not going to demonize NVIDIA. They're trying to increase demand for their GPUs. I doubt AMD would do the same, even if they could afford it. That's not their corporate culture.


Amorphous

I don't think the answer is so simple. As to regard of performance I recall the 8800GTX taking a nice hit if MSAA was used. However, performance is not really relevant here. The issue is whether or not it's true that they are going specifically code Crysis 2 for 580 or not. Well, my posts shows that if we look at history Crysis was for the 8800 GTX. I still think we need confirmation from the developers to see if this is true or not. However, if it is true it wouldn't surprise me .

[zanzabar]

great just what we needed, now crysis 2 will be just as terrable as the original was for using hardware if its based on the imaginary specs of what a card should be able to do. i just hope that since it was almost done for the pc a while ago that it wont be to badly ruined.

@Amorphous, TWIMTBP is not to get features in games its to make it them not on other things, what games can u mention that have TWIMTBP that run at more than playable on NV and work properly on ati, i betting that u will look at what came out and then u will see that the last major titles were batmanAA that had pshyX items added to make it not playable and having no global MSAA implementation, or darkest of days that works for no1, AOC that ran like crap on everything, borderlands that has ati optimization disabled and NV optimization forced in a config file that the adv user could not find, metro 2033 that has dummy cashe to need more than 1GB of vram and it uses static textures over random geometry to play to the fermis lack of rops. do u really want that crap thats optimized what 1 card should be able to do or to play to its strengths so the next time a new card is out u dont get more frames u just get the same crap, just the original. the only TWIMTBP that worked was BC2 since it was sponsored by amd, NV and intel so no1 got anything in but logos.

now if they add some effects that is one thing but this makes it sound like they are ripping the game apart or setting the configs to be broken. and most games sell about 750k units that are in the mid range of PC sales (retail and online) so 2mil and the guarantied orders for promos to give with cards is alot of money for little extra work.

[B-Shot]

The 480 is almost 2x the price of a 5870 but where is the almost 2x performance or am I missing something duno if I want to spend that much to play Crysis, as for the 580 they can keep the game and add a yearly rebate for the light bill and then I might consider.

[SiliconDoc]

Somehow with Fermi failing in every other department, minimums are now all the rage with certain users. That's a single data point, you need graphs like HardOCP to check how badly each card is fluctuating. If the 5870 had very low minimums time and again that would drag the average down. Graphs will show the minimum as well as the overall trend in fps which is a lot more useful than a single data point. It also really depends on which review you sight, here the 5870 is ahead.

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/N..._Fermi/10.html

Yeah, those are very old Nvidia drivers in that review, not the 260's that are the post 400 series release drivers that show the real performance.

test setup page from your link :

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/N...0_Fermi/5.html

NVIDIA: 195.62
ATI: Catalyst 9.12
GTX 480: 197.17
Also added HD 5870 w/ Catalyst 10.3 WHQL

So you have cat 10.3 and an old nvidia driver that is 30% less than the current one, or far less than current 258.xx and upward.

Nice try, but no cigar. ATI loses, and loses badly, as the other poster noted.

[kuroikenshi]

I love how some Nvidia users state it's unfair to compare the GTX 480 to the 5970 b/c they are at different price points. Yet, it's okay to compare GTX 480 SLI to 5870 CFX or a 5970 even though they are in completely different price segments, especially when you factor in likely psu/case upgrades needed for the 480 SLI setup.

I though you also had to warn the power company that you're gonna be running Fermi.... expect rolling blackouts

[Rai]

Yeah, those are very old Nvidia drivers in that review, not the 260's that are the post 400 series release drivers that show the real performance.

test setup page from your link :

http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/N...0_Fermi/5.html

NVIDIA: 195.62
ATI: Catalyst 9.12
GTX 480: 197.17
Also added HD 5870 w/ Catalyst 10.3 WHQL

So you have cat 10.3 and an old nvidia driver that is 30% less than the current one, or a few less than current 258.xx and upward.

Nice try, but no cigar. ATI loses, and loses badly, as the other poster noted.

That's the review of the card when it was FIRST released, what other driver were they going to use, a mythical future driver with wheels?

Yes I'm 100% sure the GTX 480 is now exactly 30% in every single game.

Also you just proved my point, why are you even comparing a GTX 480 to a 5870? They're at different price points. Wow the more expensive, louder, power sucking card is faster, go figure!

[SiliconDoc]

That's the review of the card when it was FIRST released, what other driver were they going to use, a mythical future driver with wheels?

Yes I'm 100% sure the GTX 480 is now exactly 30% in every single game.

Also you just proved my point, why are you even comparing a GTX 480 to a 5870? They're at different price points. Wow the more expensive, louder, power sucking card is faster, go figure!

Look, you provided the stupid link as "proof" the 5870 is faster, oblivious to the drivers used, as in "it all depends on which bench review you look at". NO, IT DOESN'T is the point.
I pointed out your huge mistake.

Next time, if you don't realize it's a "release" review with non official drivers, and that drivers have been massively improved in the new official 400 series release (256.xx or 258.xx and beyond - etc.), why don't expect anything different in reply from me, or anyone else who knows what they're doing.

Since you sent out bad information, it needed to be corrected.


Next:
"Proved your point" about why are "you" ( as in me? I just got here, and replied to you, I didn't compare the two, YOU DID, and claimed the 5870 was faster !) comparing 5870 and 480 ?

LOL - Now you know 5870 loses badly, so now it's unfair to compare them. Got it.
Just a moment before you proclaimed 5870 faster than 480.

LOL - Nice talking to you.