Crysis Demo Performance Analysis

[xlink]

Sad indeed.
It has come to where people would rather have better image quality than uber FPS, but when FPS is that low...

well in CSS i prefer uber image quality. Sure i might have the occasional dip to 50 FPS, but when your median frame rate is 150...

there comes a point where your monitor is the bottleneck

[grimREEFER]

so, if i was to buy an 8800gt and overclock it, could it run well at 1280x1024 with 2xAA 8xAF on very high?

[xlink]

so, if i was to buy an 8800gt and overclock it, could it run well at 1280x1024 with 2xAA 8xAF on very high?

ditch the AA and then probably yes.


FYI AA isn't as needed as you might think. Post image rendering, motion blurring etc. noticeably reduces apparent edge aliasing.

here are some screens
http://www.gamerenders.com/forum/ind...&#entry4005627

most of them are with AA off.

[Soulburner]

so, if i was to buy an 8800gt and overclock it, could it run well at 1280x1024 with 2xAA 8xAF on very high?

No. You would need the medium setting.

As I said before, we'll need next year's hardware to run this one well on high.

Also, I re-ran the GPU bench with 169.01. It gave another 3-4fps average over 163.76 so I am up to 30-31 average through the timedemo.

[theteamaqua]

DX10 feature in DX9!!!

http://blogs.nofrag.com/Scrapy/#article32013
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/show...4&postcount=15

Well , this is a comparative Very high /high in DX9 and two files for to replace the original files and activate Very high in XP, the download include a back up of the original files . Merci Scrapy !!

Very high settings in XP, source this blog - is the same method of the beta - .

To replace the files of C:\Program Files\Electronic Arts\Crytek\Crysis SP Demo\Game\Config\CVarGroups with this files

- #1 rapidshare.com - veryhigh
- #2 megaupload.com - veryhigh

the download include a back up of the original files

of course i tired it , lightning isnt as good as DX10 imo, but sunshafts, parallax mapping is there, pretty much most of the DX10 very high only feature can be had on DX9 XP, and at 1440x900 its playable ~25fps

[iadstudio]

any other downloads of that available?

[theteamaqua]

any other downloads of that available?

what do u mean?? that guy gave 2 dl links .. all of which r free ...

[theteamaqua]

just tried it on XP, it looks pretty damn close to DX10 very high

DX9 tweaked:
http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/7...tweakedsp2.jpg

DX10 very high:
http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/1...eryhighev3.jpg

very very close, DX10 still has better draw distance = more vegetation, and the shadows r a "deeper"

hey free 6fps i aint complaining, plus SLI works a lot better on XP ...

[higgins]

gpu timedemo. 1680x1050 dx9 High, min - 25 max - 40 average -35
6600 3.5, 2x1gb 44412, 8800gtx 675/1500/2000

[kevinbo03]

Didn't do any tests, But is playable on my rig on Low settings @ 1280x1024 0xAA.

I will be getting a 8800GT this holiday, So I should be sailing smoothly then.

[railer]

I was exagerating (sp?) to make a point... The same people who complain about Crysis not running fine at highest settings on current hardware, are probably in the same boat as the people who complained about Far Cry not running fine 3 years ago...
I play Crysis at everything high, except shaders, shadows and textures at medium, 4xaa and 8xAF, 1680x1050, and it runs and looks great... That's what I call very decent settings on a 1 year old GFX-card design, but some people apparently think that anything below the highest possible, is unacceptable from a completely new game.
Also, I doubt anybody was actually using that high a res back in the day, even on their "high-settings" setups..


I wasn't talking about image quality/performance, but pure image-quality compared to what people expect of their hardware... And when Far Cry came out, it sure as hell didn't have better quality/performance ratios than Crysis does now... Unreal 3 is "old" news by now, it's had over a year to mature and get optimized through its lifetime... CryEninge 2.0 hasn't been used in other games, and once again, I put forward my claim that Crysis' graphics are more intense on the level called "realism"... UT3 looks very bland in my eyes, compared to Crysis, it's very "mono-chromatic"... It just doesn't look as great to me...
Call of Duty 4: Sucky/non-existing water-effects so far, and the enviroments are a lot smaller, allowing for more detail/square-foot of level... And even then, some of the effects are terrible (RPG smoke-trail, the exploding building at the end)
Try making maps as open and large as Crysis in any other game, and I'll almost gaurantee you, they'll run worse than Crysis ...
And if you don't think Crysis' got some of the greatest graphics ever, I urge to you watch the starting cut-scene a few more times... That's right, that briefing on the plane is done IN-GAME!
Even Half-Life 2 doesn't have as detailed characters



People, IMHO, expect way too much from their hardware... Everybody who complain about the game not being optimized, need to look at the game properly.. It's amazingly detailed, the lighting-effects are fantastic, and the graphics in general are excellent..
But all this comes at a price, a price which appearantly surprises most people, even though we've all seen the screenshots..
Some people need to realise what their hardware's capable of.

Best Regards

I got to agree with you here. People expect to much from their hardware. I ran 1152x864 4xaa Medium shaders and shadows and some effects Med also. Texture was high. It did 30fps and did drop to 25 but i find it quite playable for SP. Om my CRT at 120Hz refresh it still looked great.

This game is just a bit early for the existing hardware. Few years ago FEAR was also unplayable at hig res and all max settings. It did change....

And man the suit offer a new type of gameplay. It was fun running past AI into the bushes with speed mode then select invisible mode and take them out. Id call this gameplay interesting, not everything is in completing objectives. Man and it does look so real and good even on settings i played. MP DM/TDM could be fun on small map or large one with 64 players

Cant wait until something 2x the power of GTX comes out. Hardware thats out does not make this game justice,

[Brother Esau]

I dpn't know about that with F.E.A.R being unplayable as I bought it when it first came out and beat on it unmercifully with my Alienware laptop and never had a issue ever with game play!

[Cold Fussion]

Is sli working for anyone in this demo?

[tam2]

Go back three years, I see something similar... What was it called? Wasn't it?
Oh yeah, I remember now, Far Cry...
Same thing back then, people complaining left and right that they couldn't play it on their 9800XT's and 5950U's.... Then along comes the GF6 and X800, and whoppedido, everybody's happy again...

Anybody calling this game badly programmed, need to look at the game, and actually get realistic about what their computers are capable of...
Show me ONE SINGLE game which has better, more intense graphics, and then show me how that runs on your system...
For somebody's sake, this game looks like it came out of a goddamn 3dMark... What were you expecting, Quake3-like frames per second?
I might sound like a fan-boy right here, but I have only two more words to say to the people complaining: Get... Real...

Best Regards

It ran fine for me on GF2 GTS, all settings low @800x600, but that was perfectly fine for me in terms of PRICE/PERFORMANCE
And with crysis, today's GF2GTS are 79XX series??? Man, thats just aint right :|
But yes, the minimal requirements of these days games increase so damn fast

-tam2-

[tiro_uspsss]

It ran fine for me on GF2 GTS, all settings low @800x600, but that was perfectly fine for me in terms of PRICE/PERFORMANCE
And with crysis, today's GF2GTS are 79XX series??? Man, thats just aint right :|
But yes, the minimal requirements of these days games increase so damn fast

-tam2-

if ur satisfied running a DX9(b, then c) game on a..DX7/8 card(?)... thats soo ewww i'm almost speechless (admittedly i *tried* to play FC on a 9250 - so i know how crap it looks on a pre-DX9 gpu)...

[kevinbo03]

Hey Hey, Watch it there. I remember when games broke the 256-color barrier!

Now lets wait for someone to come brag about they're commodore gaming days.

[flopper]

I like that even those at xtreme cant run the game well at high.
Maybe they aint so xtreme after all

I also like even more that a game comes out that pushes the hardware, games havent done that in a long time.
I sit with one year old hardware, no wonder it runs slow.

[Hornet331]

*raises hand*
Believe it or not, some of us actually don't care that much about multi-player shooters ...
If the multi's nice, fine, bonus-points... But I want.. Scratch that, NEED my single-player... Making multi-player only games is a bad excuse for not being able to write a proper story
The only multi-player I find great, is co-op story mode... Ironically

QFE !

that whole trent to (massive) multiplayer everything often kills the stroy behind a game.

[Syn.]

You've got that from playing the intro level which we all know is there in most games just to get you used to controls, movement etc. Dare i say the word 'premature'?

Wait till you've completed it on 'delta' and have been through the zero-g levels and all, you may just think its quite good.

Yes i got that from playing the first level in the game yes. No i would not consider it premature no. I recently played the original HL and that had more complex gameplay then this game. So yea stone age.

This might sound a bit fan-boy-ish (again), but I feel that's untrue ...
The gameplay isn't in your objectives... Objectives are a means to an end, telling the story, giving you something to go by...
It's what happens in between, that makes the game...

So, by your account, in the "stone age", they had

a) large, open enviroments, which allows you to approach the situation in any way you want (some ways are better than others, but nothing's forced)

b) the ability to adapt your gear to the situation at hand, including a suit which supplies you with 4 different abillities, which further enhances the amount of options at your disposal

c) an advanced physics system which allows you to use litteraly everything in sight as weapons or distractions (HL2 did it, but not to the same extent)

d) AI which actually acts in a "human" and believable way


What I'm trying to say is, you focus too much on objectives (too much ET:QW and BF-series I believe, which isn't even a proper excuse), and too little on what goes on in between...

I don't know what you defines as "present-day" gameplay, but if it's along the lines of BF2, then I can duplicate you post to this:

go to flag a
capture flag a
hold flag a
repeat on flags b through z

Once again, you have to look at what's in between, and that's where the fun is...

Best Regards

First of all games like BF2 are nothing but MP games and are designed in such way so you cant bring them in here. The present day gameplay is HL2:EP2, BioShock etc.

a) Yea you got open environment but they only give you an illusion that you have to choice, they set the waypoints for you the one if you follow will give you deeper storyline if u go your own way u get basic plot points. That is not an open choice environment.

b) Modes like Max armour and Max speed are replacements for armour supply and adrenaline pills. Gun setup is a replacement for having multiple weapons in the game. Plus these modes run out very quickly making them very annoying to use.

c) Physics, sure its got nice physics but its considered to be more effect physics then gameplay physics. That's what HL2 games use, do i need to explain further?

d) AI, still very stupid if you ask me. First thing, they shout "there he is" when they see me, there is who, i am elite solider wearing some kind of biomechanical suit i look more like it then he, plus how do they know i aint a she? Plus they dont know what and who and why.
Besides that when i entered one of the camps i shoot one guy who shouted me out, soon as i killed him others shouted false alarm. Yea false alarm they where standing next to his dead body, maybe the AI is so advance that they thought he was sleeping.


Nope trust me i choose my words carefully, nice graphics, stone age gameplay.

[tam2]

Well, then i guess im lucky for being un-extreme, and ended up loving far cry

-tam2-

[Decami]

I in no way see how some people could call this terrible game play. I was just playing it and 4 enemies spotted me so hid behind a rock. I waited for energy to get to full. Turned on maximum speed. I then charged them and got to them before they could even fire 2 rounds. I immediatly turned on maximum strength grabbed one by the throat and knocked another out with my other hand. I then threw the guy in my hand at the 3rd knocking him dead and quickly yanked out my shotgun and blasted the other in the face.

The entire sequence took no more than 5 seconds to do. It was uttery fantastic and fun. Yeah HF gameplay is awesome. But it is also linear. This game is in no way "stone age" gameplay. IF your looking for some kind of FPS gameplay that doesnt require you to go to certain places, do an objective, kill while doing it (which is super fun in this particular game) to win the game. My suggestion is quit playing FPSs.

[RaZz!]

Well so far it seems to run okay on even old lethargic systems (albeit at crapola settings) & okay on a reasonably high end system (minus the BSOD's when I try to use SLI.

X2 3800+ (stock)
2GB PC3200 2-3-3-5
7800GT 500/1200
XP 32
800x600 @ low = ~30fps
800x600 @ medium = ~20fps

QX6700 @ 3.2GHz
4GB PC6400 4-4-4-12
8800GTS 640MB 600/2000
Vista 64
1280x1024 @ high = ~35fps

Not that impressed so far but i'll buy the game if just to play some half decent Mods & online.

you consider 30fps on a midrange system on low settings (800x600) and 35fps (1280x1024) on a highend machine "okay"?

imo, this isn't "okay", because most of the gamers don't even have the second system you mentioned. so almost 99% of all gamers have to play crysis with less than 30 fps. pretty disappointing, isn't it? :/

[Decami]

a) Yea you got open environment but they only give you an illusion that you have to choice, they set the waypoints for you the one if you follow will give you deeper storyline if u go your own way u get basic plot points. That is not an open choice environment.

b) Modes like Max armour and Max speed are replacements for armour supply and adrenaline pills. Gun setup is a replacement for having multiple weapons in the game. Plus these modes run out very quickly making them very annoying to use.

c) Physics, sure its got nice physics but its considered to be more effect physics then gameplay physics. That's what HL2 games use, do i need to explain further?

d) AI, still very stupid if you ask me. First thing, they shout "there he is" when they see me, there is who, i am elite solider wearing some kind of biomechanical suit i look more like it then he, plus how do they know i aint a she? Plus they dont know what and who and why.
Besides that when i entered one of the camps i shoot one guy who shouted me out, soon as i killed him others shouted false alarm. Yea false alarm they where standing next to his dead body, maybe the AI is so advance that they thought he was sleeping.


Nope trust me i choose my words carefully, nice graphics, stone age gameplay.

a) If you want complete open ended go anywhere and the story follows gameplay. play an RPG not a FPS.

b) They in a way are kind of a replacement to that, yes. But used more efficiently in my opinion. instead having to find refill vials you have these abilities to switch back and forth on the fly with whenever you want. But you have to plan your attack cause these abilites dont last forever and share the same energy.

c) this games physics is hardly comparable to HF. Could you collapse a building with enemies in it, in HF. yeah, didnt think so.

d) I dont know where to start here. AI is very smart. Yeah they stupid shout out. But this game wasnt made to exactly interpret real life in no way. They pic cover smart and usually stay in it. They throw grenades when they should. and are damn good at aiming and moving based on where you move. second. It says in the beginning of the demo that they didnt want the Koreans to get a hold of the suits. So maybe they know about them. Third, if you saw a special opps soldier in a suite and you wanted to tell your buddies hes there. Your saying your first reaction to his gender wouldnt be a "he"
The same innicident that happened to you happened to me. Except they didnt say false alarm, they took cover and started fring at me. Maybe glitch? idk.

[Hornet331]

d) AI, still very stupid if you ask me. First thing, they shout "there he is" when they see me, there is who, i am elite solider wearing some kind of biomechanical suit i look more like it then he, plus how do they know i aint a she? Plus they dont know what and who and why.

you cant be a femal without d cups sized tits.

especial in computer games.

[zakelwe]

Yes i got that from playing the first level in the game yes. No i would not consider it premature no. I recently played the original HL and that had more complex gameplay then this game. So yea stone age.

Well in that case Valve have really screwed up with HL2 Episode 1 and 2 because it's just one long interactive cut scene. You listen to Alex, you go to the lever and pull it, you listen to Alex, you go to the button and push it, you listen to Alex, you have to go and get her tampons, you listen to Alex and then you ask Alex whether she will shut up for a minute so you can actually shoot something in a firefight that is not too scripted. She says no and tells you to go and get the energy barrier down ....

As for people complaining about the graphics this is very similar to Far Cry as said. Someone said " But Far Cry played well on my 9700" yeah well that was a top card then and people complaining now seem to have last generation graphics cards and cpu'd and forget they can turn the settings down.

I think this is just a lot of people complaining they cannot run at High at their LCD's natural resolution I think people have been too spoiled for the last year with games, the hardware beat up the software but now the tables are turned and people are blabbing.

I have an 8800U at 650/2200/1750 and I have had to go down to 1280x960 from 1920x1200 and therefore have to make a sacrifice, however I know when I play it in 3 years time at full whack it will still look good. Especially as they tend to make it better looking over time as well a la Far Cry.

The actual effects are stunning, the explosions and lighting effects really good. The actual map is huge too, think of the small rooms in Bioshock for comparison.

Regards

Andy