benchmarking and crysis

Not yet optimized, not all options have been properly added to the beta.. etc etc.

There's a silly thing called NDA that keeps us from getting some Crysis beta benchmarks for the time being, but I am pretty sure that no cards other than SLI GTX/X-fire HD2900 can play it on full at 1920x1200 at what I deem a playable shooter experience (45-60+ fps). Some guys may claim it runs well on their systems, but well to them may be 20-40fps and that is completely unplayable for me :S

in some ways, thats what makes it a good benchmark though isn't it?

If I want it to run bad, doesn't the law of numbing inevitibility (or murphys law if u want) state it will run amazingly well?

Sais who? You're not going to convince me that some guy with a quad core and ultra sli setup is not garenteed to get good framerates on ultra high. I bet a single ultra could do it.

I think the ultra high settings must be related to the Tessalation support ... because current 8800 series don´t support that technology and the next series could be doing it, so its possible to think that the ultra high setting is reserved for that kind of technology and maybe will be supported plus with the Dx10.1 version ...

What do you think?

Regards

Omar

And I am assuming that you program for a living?

http://www.crysissector.com/info/s [...] ements.php
Link to what the CEO of Crytek said about system requirements. (Note: the min. and max. settings are unconfirmed; the ultra-high requirements are from Cevat Yerli himself.)

I am part of the crysis beta and play it on vista on high settings(that is the highest it will let me set them) on a reso of 1680x1050 and it looks Fekking awsome... I also played it on xp at the same settings and reso and I could tell a difference between the 2 versions of directX. The physics part of the explosions were considerably different, along with other various things.

The OP makes a good point though. If Crysis isn't going to tax a machine, what game will be the new system crusher that Oblivion was (is?). I UT3 supposed to bring systems down?

It might be that medium is high and "high" is ultra high.

lol

no i think it s real drugs he used

no, because the CEO has said that they have released no official requirements for the game NON at all. And any that were released were either made up or released by EA, but again the CEO at Crytek said that they have released no requirements for the game and the ones EA released were premature and made up. They have not even finished the game how on earth can they have requirements..

However, from his own mouth, he says that it will take 2 years for this game to come to its full potential. and so your sh1ty unofficial link is bull shi t.

wow, where does it say OFFICIAL?

That's on YOUR OWN LINK from INCRYSIS!

NO ONE from the DEV TEAM has given any ACTUAL CONCRETE OFFICIAL REQUIREMENTS!

I got a link for you!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crysis

Sure the GamesRadar interview says it will pay on Ultra-High, but not at what resolution.
http://www.gamesradar.com/us/pc/ga [...] 1061280027

So Ultra high @ 1024x768 is a possability, but is that really 'Ultra-High', especially when the settings sofar seem to end at 'Max'

Unless he comes out and says something to contradict this interview statement;

Gaming Heaven: Performance, the main question every gamer has. What will be needed to run the game at playable framerates? How about playing with everything maxed? Will current rigs be able to run the game at 1920x1200 without making sacrifices? Do you recommend ATI or Nvidia and have you any performance figures for us for the Nvidia 8800 and ATi 2900?

Cevat: Everything maxed and at that resolution, you will need a seriously high rig of the latest generation available now. Bear in mind we don’t expose, but have built in scaleability for the upcoming 1-2 years. That will be available as hardware catches up. So when I say maxed, its maxed for now.

http://www.driverheaven.net/gaming [...] /index.php

then it's far from a done deal, and if there's more to offer than what will curently be exposed, then what does 'Ultra-High' mean, other than it's still not the absolute maximum which sounds like it's Uber-Fantasma-Wonder-high if Ultra-high is still held back at 'max'.

And sofar all the other links cite other people's estimations and guesses they call 'guidelines', nothing official from Crytek itself.

So from what is on the page and actually supported above, Cevat says that the GTX should play Ultra-high (but no idea of resolution), and that they haven't unlocked everything yet and more is to come (thus Crysis won't even technically play at it's maximum upon release despite having the sliders pushed to 'max').

Seems pretty straight forward, and while it may or may not offer far tougher settings in the final SP release, it's use as a benchmark will likely depend alot on how it uses the available hardware, because as we saw with the difference between COH DX10 and Bioshock DX10, not all games are useful as tests of their relative impacts, and no two games act the same. So even if it's kicking out 150fps @ 1920x1200, it may still have alot to offer as a benchmark. Oblivion isn't a good benchmark just because it makes system come to a crawl, it's how and what systems that it does that (to) that matters most. If Crysis is wicked optimized and runs smooth as silk it doesn't make it less relevant than Oblivion, because it's more 'current' and more in line with the current gaming scene, not last year's.

Anywho, even if it does run at 300 fps, to me it'll be a more important benchmark than the original FartCry, D3, HL2, BF2 etc because I won't play them much anymore, however I will likely play Crysis more than all 4 combined, and also likely games based on it. That's my thinking on it's utility.

A general guideline from what...4 websites? Oh and a Google Search of "Crysis System Requirements" turns up countless more. But I'm sure they must all be wrong?

On another note, people have been able to scale requirements for games before an official release. that and it's pretty hard to beat this quote, which I've already posted...

Please...read that carefully before you repost...(Seeing as those are peopel from the Crytek team)

Well, provide your evidence, until you do, stfu and read what the entire Crysis coverage sites are posting. Please, it'll save you and you're sanity just a bit more before you decide to flip the sh*t once more.

like i have stated a billion times;crysis_mp beta is capped at medium settings. you CAN change the resolution but the the video options such as "eye candy"(high or even ultra high settings). only those that are in the developing team have the access to such settings. Crysis IS playable on current high end cards but with low fps. remeber when F.E.A.R 1st came out?? yeah welll.. enuff said

lol

its true, Crytek themselves have not released any official, guaranteed irrefutable specs, however they are a lot of likely specs

Can you provide some proof? I know that Beta 1 was capped to low settings but since then, it's been lifted. Now why would Crytek, when they released beta 1 lock the settings then, but not lock the settings now? Just prove your statement please.


EDIT: By the way I think that this game will be at the top of the used benchmarking games for a long time. This game stresses everything, GPU mem, high textures, extreme shader, cpu speed and core count and will probably be one of the first games to require us to use more than 2Gb of sys mem (Not counting SupCom)

Why no counting supcom? Sumcom was around for like a year now and it hasnt been used.

Cant just say "this thing is unique, except that other thing just like it" supcom uses 4cores too.

for the hell of it?

I got and played the Crysis Beta last night (through my SLI club membership). The graphics are overall quite dissapointing, maybe its all the hype but I was expecting something better after seeing all those lush screenshots. At 1920x1200 with all the eyecandy maxed it doesnt run smoothly at all even though I have 2 8800GTX's in SLI, a core 2 extreme and am not using AA. When running around there are large areas where the textures take literally seconds to load and until they do everything in covered in yellow wallpaper that has "compiling shader program" printed on it. Maybe this is because its a beta but it seems like a serious issue.

But theres one reason I absolutely wont ever by Crysis...
It has this REALLY ANNOYING blur effect every time you turn everything goes artificially blurry. Its massively intrusive and really overdone and totally ruins the game by preventing you getting a good bead on someone while turning at the same time. Furthermore as far as I can see its not optional so you can't turn it off and just have non-blurry graphics. I don't know if they thought that effect added realism but it really doesn't. At least its certainly not how the world appears to me when I turn around in real life.

The worst thing is that after playing for a few minutes that overdone blurring causes a strong sense of nausea literally.
I remember a few years ago there seemed to be a few FPS games that made me feel sortof dizzy and sick after playing it for about 30 minutes, while some games never caused a problem. The original Doom game was one of the worst, but I could play unreal tournament all day with no problem. I never did figure out exactly what caused it or why, and haven't experienced that feeling for years now, except last night I got it again with Crysis after only about 10 minutes of playing because of that stupid artificial blurry effect.

Overall my opinion is that Crysis is massive dissapointment. Thats one title I won't be buying.

With all the videos and trailers we've/ive seen, what the hell were they playing it on then? The resolution is definately more than 720p on the videos, and the framerates are definately more than 50. I do beleive crysis wont live up to its reputation, the graphics wont be THAT amazing, unless they actaully DO look like the screenshots and videos.

Yes, Cervat has said this in several interviews! I think he said simple patches or updates will release the features! Likely DX10.1 and whatever that entails, and the engine can likely go higher reso as it is, but the current HW cant handle it.

Booyah!