Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Crysis Warhead 20-30 FPS at Intensive Scenes GTX 560 Ti

Last response: in Video Games
Share
July 29, 2011 12:37:35 AM

I was wondering if it's normal to be getting around 20-30 fps during intensive laser shooting on the airport map or in general with this set up:

GPU: GTX 560 ti OC to 950 mhz Graphics clock + 2149 MHz Memory clock
CPU: Q9550 OC to 3.4Ghz
6 Gigs of DDR2 800mhz ram

I don't know if it's normal or not, but no matter what graphics setting i put my game at it always seems to go down to atleast 20 fps during intensive scenes with the aliens shooting there lasers. Also the real big guy gets me down real low at about 20 fps or so when he shoots his beam at me. This happens at all three settings regardless of AA, it's the same 20-30 fps range.
July 29, 2011 9:37:55 AM

Yup, pretty normal unless your running an SLI/ Xfire setup with the 580/ 6990's. It happens with me as well. If you're running a heavy-a** antivirus, try disabling that while playing the game and also try disabling any other background programmes that may be running.

That apart, as long as you are getting a steady 30FPS, you should be fine!
July 29, 2011 10:42:19 AM

What's the temps of your overclocked GPU during these intensive scenes? It may be overheating, and overclocking it just making it worse. I'm playing with a GTX460 Cyclone (slight OC), C2Q Q8400 OC to 3.2GHz and 3GB RAM and I can max the thing without any lags at any places. Try to drop the OC (specially the Memory OC, it has no cooler) and try again.
Related resources
July 29, 2011 2:43:55 PM

20-30 FPS on a GTX 560 Ti for Crysis Warhead seems a bit too low, even at intensive areas. Have you got any background apps running while playing the game ?Since you have OC'd your GPU, it may be overheating. Download HWMonitor and check the temps.
http://www.cpuid.com/softwares/hwmonitor.html
As Toxxyc said, turn down your overclock a bit and see if your FPS gets a bit higher. If it still happens, then put everything back at stock to reduce the chances of having any sorts of damage on your video card.
July 29, 2011 7:41:30 PM

I've downclocked my overclock to factory set and I still get around 20-30 at the airfield level. I've checked my temps and they were at 55 throughout that scene with the gigantic alien dude. Also my GPU was only 50-60% used. I've also closed all my background tasks before playing.

I honestly have no idea what could cause such low framerate. I mean I get really good FPS in other games like Bad Company 2. At max settings I average at about 70 and it never goes below 50. In Far Cry 2 maxed I Average 80 and never go below 50. I mean IDK maybe it is normal?
July 30, 2011 2:54:46 AM

your cpu is a bottleneck in this case it just doesnt have the grunt needed to process the scene propperly. no matter what rez or settings you run at. basicaly to rase your fps you would need more mhz on the cpu or switch over to a neph/sandy part.
i have a 5870 which benches roughly the same as yours but because my cpu is stronger i dont get the drop below 30fps at max settings with x2 fsaa on most levels. even when it does drop below its like 27 minimum...
July 30, 2011 3:12:34 AM

I think that game only uses 2 cores and is just too much for any CPU at times.
July 30, 2011 7:13:38 AM

The CPU isn't that bad. Since the OP has also OC'd it too. To be sure:

@OP, when you play the game press Esc and and then Alt+Tab out of the game. Then open task manager and check your CPU usage. If it's hitting about 100%, then we can be sure if it's CPU bottleneck for this game.
July 30, 2011 8:48:35 AM

Gman450 said:
The CPU isn't that bad. Since the OP has also OC'd it too. To be sure:

@OP, when you play the game press Esc and and then Alt+Tab out of the game. Then open task manager and check your CPU usage. If it's hitting about 100%, then we can be sure if it's CPU bottleneck for this game.



I played for a few minutes during the 20-30 fps intense scenes. I alt tab'd to check my CPU usage and it was at around 55%.
July 30, 2011 8:55:33 AM

Then it's okay. You're CPU is not bottlenecking your GPU while playing that game.
Have you tried re-installing the game ?
Tried defragging your hard drive ? Cleaned your registry ? Checked for any sorts of malware ?
July 30, 2011 5:59:25 PM

crysis is one of those games that is both GPU and CPU intensive, but tends to run best with a high frequency cpu.
December 19, 2012 4:37:54 AM

first things first overclocking a processer to 3.4gig when its a 2.8 is nice but it doesent mean its as strong as a actuall 3.4 gig processor like the i7 2600k.

hi i just checked how much your CPU is worth in the CPU bench marks dont listen to these idiots... about its not a bottle neck let me CONFIRM IT IS A BOTTLE NECK!!!.....

your processor q9550 churns out a bench mark of 3000ish in benchmark points for the same price u can buy a 2600k i7 which churns out 8000 points more than double your processor power so yes your processor is complete trash... i hate all these people talking like they know stuff and they dnt even have the facts/stats of the processors to prove it
December 19, 2012 4:47:27 AM

Gman450 said:
Then it's okay. You're CPU is not bottlenecking your GPU while playing that game.
Have you tried re-installing the game ?
Tried defragging your hard drive ? Cleaned your registry ? Checked for any sorts of malware ?

im sorry but with your setup i wouldn't be willing to take your advice lol. if it was my comp messin up and just so you know your wrong about the cpu/task manager thing.

now go check cpu bench marks ull see his CPU is like terribad... 3000 points.... for crysis u need i7's if u want it running 60fps with full effects maxed out and above even with my i7 2600k which is over clocked to 4600MHZ and my 6990 Gpu i still get slight frame stutters/not often but i do get them and your trying to make out that that his terribad CPu will be fine lol ok please learn more about pc's before giving advice on stuff you know nothing about....

i know im being mean but seriously... if u dnt know how to help then dnt comment....
December 19, 2012 4:51:06 AM

tesqui said:
I've downclocked my overclock to factory set and I still get around 20-30 at the airfield level. I've checked my temps and they were at 55 throughout that scene with the gigantic alien dude. Also my GPU was only 50-60% used. I've also closed all my background tasks before playing.

I honestly have no idea what could cause such low framerate. I mean I get really good FPS in other games like Bad Company 2. At max settings I average at about 70 and it never goes below 50. In Far Cry 2 maxed I Average 80 and never go below 50. I mean IDK maybe it is normal?

its not normal.... its your cpu i have overclocked 4600MHZ i7 and i still get some slow 45- 50fps and at some heavy area's and thats with a 6990 ati radeon OCed its your CPU... change it for a i7 2600k i promise it wont disapoint
December 19, 2012 7:25:39 AM

ikameozero, you're wrong. Q9550 is at most 20% slower than i7-2600 at same clock speed. The benchmark you're checking is rubbish. Q9550 @ 3.4 GHz should not bottleneck a GTX 560 Ti.

Anyway, @OP:

What is eating up the CPU? 55% seems excessive and I cannot imagine crysis warhead taking that much CPU.

Open up Resource Monitor (it's windows 7 program), CPU tab before starting the game. Then play the game until it lags, minimize the game and sort the processes list in Resource Monitor by "Average CPU". You'll see what's eating it up (the few top processes).

Furthermore, check temperatures. Overheating can easily degrade performance. Use HWMonitor for that.

http://www.cpuid.com/softwares/hwmonitor.html

Make sure to report back maximum temperatures you're getting during lag!
December 19, 2012 7:48:21 AM

your rite most of the time it wont bottleneck a Q9550 but you have to take into account the threading performance. the 560ti is very near what that quad core can handle on 4 threads but on 2 or less threads the gpu will overwhelm it by about 5% per core or 10%total.
i ran into this problem when i had an amd 4600x2 paired with an 8800gt it was bottlenecking the cpu by 7% i switched up to the amd 6000x2 and the system was perfectly balanced.
your estimate of the 2600k is a little off in this respect. the q9550 was about 15% stronger than the amd 6000x2 and was roughly 20% weaker per clock than the intel i7 920 which in itself is about 20% weaker than the 2600k these are legitimate numbers not pulled out the air at random. so the 2600k would be roughly 40% more efficient over all per cycle per clock... i know it seems a lot but the dye shrinks. higher transistor count and higher work load per cycle does mean dramatic improvements.
the i7 was a major step over the core 2 but sandy bridge was just as big a step over the original i7, ivy on the other hand is only a small bump over the sandy of about 4%.
but i digress...
what i was getting at with my original post is that on a single thread the q core 2 quad comes up just a little shy of the required cpu power to run a 560ti on a per thread basis. crysis uses 2 threads for the main program and will only use a 3rd if the audio cant be handled in hardware by a sound card. so in real terms it only uses 2 threads and this is what caused the 560 ti to bottleneck slightly...
the good news is that a slight oc on the cpu would solve the problem as its only a mild bottleneck. 10% or so (300mhz) should be enough to counter any issues.
December 19, 2012 7:54:34 AM

Well, he seems to have overclocked by 600 MHz. I don't buy it's bottleneck.
December 19, 2012 12:52:10 PM

@600 mhz there should be no issue unless his memory has been auto down clocked or his pci-e timings have been thrown of by a bad northbridge oc.
!