Your Crysis performance

[Maziar]

Hi all
Well today i just got Crysis and downloaded the 169.09 driver for XP64 and launched the game
with everything @ high + 16x settings. well i set the resolution to 1680x1050 and the game was playable but it was a bit slow so i set the resolution on 1280x1024 and it ran well but the MAX FPS i got was 30 i think also the gameplay didnt impress me, i like COD4 alot more

 

[plguzman]

I was able to make it playable looking beautiful (no AA tho) @ 1680x1050, and I'm over 20fps at all times. After reading the experts advice in www.incrysis.com I was able to modify the settings using DX9 (very high) but tweaking it to look like DX10. In DX10 I have to sacrifice too much quality to make it playable.

BTW Crysis @ 20+fps (for those who doesn't have the game) is much more playable than other games at twice the fps. I will get COD4 tho.

 

[cb62fcni]

My specs:
Q6600 G0 @3.6
8800GTX @ 630/2000
4GB DDR2 800 1:1
74GB Raptor
Vista 64

At 1280X1024 with everything maxxed and using the older .04 forceware betas I get about 25fps avg as reported by FRAPS. Dropping AA and shaders a notch results in an increase of 10 to 15fps. Pretty awesome game, I was a fan of the original Far Cry and this seems pretty darn similar so far.

 

[stemnin]

One of the earlier missions, i'm lovin' it.

All medium settings unfortunately, 1280x1024, no AA.

Core 2 Quad Q6600
2 GB DDR2 667
500 Gig HDD
BFG 8800GTS 320MB
Vista 32bit (these screens in dx9 mode, seems to give more fps even on medium settings)

You can't see the minimap, but there's about 20 friendlies (including psycho) in the surrounding area getting shelled like madness and jets flying overhead and getting blown up from the AA fire.

Also there are alot of nice touches, like rainbows that form by waterfalls.

 

[rgeist554]

Play with at least 4xAA. It makes the game look MUCH better, even if you do lose a few fps.

Specs in sig. I run at 1280x1024 on all Medium settings, 4x AA / AF w/ 25-35 fps average.

 

[vaker5]

haha i got my old x1300 pci version gpu to run crysis on low with 768mb of ram and a p4 at 2ghz in a dimension 2400.....

 

[vaker5]

it sucked so hard lol!!!

 

[dagoth_ur]

I'm playing at 1400x1050 2xAF everything set to "high" (no way to set lower settings, it looks damn good), while getting about 10 to 20 fps. During firefights, it's even worse.

E2180 @ 3,0 GHz
2x1 GB DDR2 800 MHz 4-4-4 Patriot
MSI 7900 GTO @ GTX
P35-DS3R

..may the god gives me money for 8800

 

[Hatman]

Wasting all your performance on 16x AA is quite stupid.. use something like nhancer to enable 4x MSAA rather then the games in-game AA.

Also, enable the image blurring in nhancer, apparently normal AA doesn't affect the trees n stuff and using high or v.high settings it enables blurring or something.

Just use 4X MSAA with gamma and blurring.

 

[harmattan]

Playing at 1680x1050, no AA, DX10 all "Very High" except shadows, water, and post-processing. Vista x64, forceware 169.09. Getting 20-40FPS, avg. 32. FPS really dips however in the second stage "Retrieval" at the top of the valley. Also, noticed "very high" water severely affects FPS. Tried 1900x1200, but found FPS unplayable.

Was running in x64 mode, but found this entirely unplayable and prone to locking. Running it from the x32bin much better.

 

[fishboi]

Playing at 1680x1050, no AA, DX10 all "Very High" except shadows, water, and post-processing. Vista x64, forceware 169.09. Getting 20-40FPS, avg. 32. FPS really dips however in the second stage "Retrieval" at the top of the valley. Also, noticed "very high" water severely affects FPS. Tried 1900x1200, but found FPS unplayable.

Was running in x64 mode, but found this entirely unplayable and prone to locking. Running it from the x32bin much better.

This game is turning out to be a GD joke. I mean, look at his sig. 30fps, WTF? I probably shouldnt waste my time trying to get this game running in 2007. Bring on next gen cards.

 

[dagoth_ur]

Well, it seems that's a real crisis, trying to play crysis : )

 

[harmattan]

This game is turning out to be a GD joke. I mean, look at his sig. 30fps, WTF? I probably shouldnt waste my time trying to get this game running in 2007. Bring on next gen cards.

Actually, it scales pretty well from what I've experienced. If I set everthing to High in DX9 mode, I can run 40-60 FPS at 1900x1200. At 1650x1050, no AA with some medium settings 60-75 FPS (and it still looks amazing I might add).

It's the DX10 (Very High) effects that kill. I haven't tried to emulate DX10 effects in DX9 yet, but hear that improves things. Also Vista doesn't help... I actually expected worse. I mean, look at the game... you can't expect something that looks this good to run at high iQ levels/res to smoothly on mid-range or older cards. Finally, after owning the same system for a year, there's a game that tests it. The devs did a great job imo (albeit they did lie their butts off that there would be Quad Core and x64 improvements.)

But yeah, can't wait to see how good Crysis looks and runs on next gen cards.

 

[Hatman]

WHY are you running it at very high? You even bothered to look at image comparisons compared to performance benches?

The joke on you I'm afraid mate. The reason it's performing badly is because you didn't do your homework.


Just to make it worse you are using DX10 on it...

 

[paq7512]

Crysis plays around 30FPS on my system, but I like COD4 better.

 

[truehighroller]

My is smooth as I need it be with 1280x1074 with no AA and I am getting 45 average. I have a AsusEAX1900XTX and a GA-P35-DQ6 with 2Gbs of Crucial ballistix tracer DDR2 1066 @ 1180 and E4400 @ 3.2~ Ghz= 9x 355. Two Western digital drives Raid0.

 

[harmattan]

WHY are you running it at very high? You even bothered to look at image comparisons compared to performance benches?

The joke on you I'm afraid mate. The reason it's performing badly is because you didn't do your homework.


Just to make it worse you are using DX10 on it...

As opposed to previously released DX10-touted games that had little-no improvements in iQ over DX9 (Bioshock, Lost Planet etc.), Crysis DX10 (very high) effects are significantly better than DX9 (high). To my eyes, the difference is night and day. All those screenshot comparisons and low-res videos you see online btwn Crisis "High" vs. "Very High" really doesn't demonstrate how good DX10 looks in motion on a quality monitor.

And I wouldn't say 32 avg. FPS is "performing badly", and it's definitely better imo than playing at 60 FPS with much lower quality iQ.

 

[Heyyou27]

As opposed to previously released DX10-touted games that had little-no improvements in iQ over DX9 (Bioshock, Lost Planet etc.), Crysis DX10 (very high) effects are significantly better than DX9 (high). To my eyes, the difference is night and day. All those screenshot comparisons and low-res videos you see online btwn Crisis "High" vs. "Very High" really doesn't demonstrate how good DX10 looks in motion on a quality monitor.

And I wouldn't say 32 avg. FPS is "performing badly", and it's definitely better imo than playing at 60 FPS with much lower quality iQ.

Too bad these "DX10 effects" are easily enabled in Windows XP with a few simple config edits; I've run Crysis on Vista x64 and Windows XP on Very High and they look identical, aside from the XP version running considerably better.

 

[harmattan]

Too bad these "DX10 effects" are easily enabled in Windows XP with a few simple config edits; I've run Crysis on Vista x64 and Windows XP on Very High and they look identical, aside from the XP version running considerably better.

Have heard this, but haven't had time to fiddle yet. Have a link to the config edits? Thx

Question: with the config edits in place, are you running the game from the x32 or x64 bin?

 

[El_Hefe]

X2 6000 3.0Ghz
Asus m2n-Sli deluxe
2 Gb Gskill ram
BFG 8800GT

All settings on high, don't have fraps, but everything runs smooth

 

[Heyyou27]

My version of XP is 32-bit so I had to run it from bin32, but on Vista I ran the x64 version. You can edit it yourself, or simply download and replace the original CVars group with these.
http://www.fileplanet.com/181939/180000/fileinfo/Crysis-DX9-Very-High-Modification

 

[Hatman]

Erm.. the single player on low settings on XP has night and day too.. You only need DX10 for night and day in multi-player modes.

From what I've seen, DX9 high looks better then DX10 very high, thats all I'm saying.

Plus its like twice as fast.

 

[Down-In-Albion]

I'm getting an average 30 FPS with a E6750 (not OC'ed) and a 7900GT on Medium Settings with Textures and Physics turned High?

Maybe the E6750 and 7900GT were meant for eachother :3

Would turning down some High settings and maybe even to Low to try achieve some AA?, would it be worth it?

 

[snyderm]

I dont own crysis yet, as it hasn't reached my local walmart store yet, but I was wondering what you guys would think this runs at on my system. Should this system be good enough to get a decent performance (playable, enjoyable)?

Core2duo 6400 (slight overclock to 2.5ghz)
2 gigs ddr2 667
Windows XP
EVGA 7950gt KO
17" LCD (highest resolution 1280 x 1024)

I so desperately want to get an 8800gt, but the most I want to pay for one is 289 (Hopefully EVGA). Everytime I see one in stock, I check my bank account, get ready to order and... whoops, sold out.

 

[vegie]

my setup

x2 4000 @ 2.9ghz
2 gig ddr 800
x1950 pro
win xp

all my settings are on high except shaders and shadows which are on med.... 45 max 28 avg 24 low...... 1024-768 res......im very happy with my x1950 pro... might try a vcore mod though.....