CRYSIS 2 AND 3

HI

crysis 2 and 3 have almost the same grfx or crysis 3 is not much better than 2 , but the question is : why crysis 2 runs fine with gtx 560 on ultra but crysis 3 doesn't even gtx 680 can't ????
7 answers Last reply
More about crysis
  1. Really? Cause I remember my GTX 570 not being able to handle anything above medium/high in Crysis 2.. And a 680 can run about the same, med/high at a steady 60fps in Crysis 3. And it's just the way games work, requirements keep going up every year.. :p And if you want better performance, try turning down your AA, its a real killer
  2. i ran crysis 2 on ultra with 190x1080 on my gtx 560 and i got 40+ fps
  3. Well yea, a GTX 680 should be able to run Crysis 3 max at 40+ fps. Just not a steady 60+ :p
  4. I'm currently near the end (I hope - terrible plot) of Crysis2 with the DX11 patch and the hires textures on ultra @ 1920x1200 - framerate good always on a 660Ti.

    Crysis 3 though is meant to be horrible to systems - just like the first one. Last time out with C2 Crytek where whined at for not making a tough to run game, so now you've got what you asked for...
  5. I didn't think Crysis 2 looked great at all (didn't look bad but nothing massive compared to 1) but I have not seem 3 so cannot compare.
  6. simon12 said:
    I didn't think Crysis 2 looked great at all (didn't look bad but nothing massive compared to 1) but I have not seem 3 so cannot compare.


    Crysis 3 does look significantly better than Crysis 3 on Very High imo (the equivalent of Ultra on Crysis 2, they "normalized" the texture levels, i.e. low, med, high, very high rather than high, very high, extreme, ultra).
  7. So the answer to your question is that Crysis 3 looks significantly better than Crysis 2.
    It is much higher res textures and dynamic lighting.
    It is much more demanding than Crysis 2.
Ask a new question

Read More

PC gaming Gtx Crysis Video Games