Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

8800GTS 512MB: Huge Hit With AA in Crysis?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
February 14, 2008 3:14:56 PM

Hey all,
Some of you may remember my thread some time back about problems with an 8800 GT I was having. I returned that card for an 8800 GTS 512MB and most of those problems went away, especially the crashing. I think the GTS is just a higher quality part, imo. Anyway, I do notice something that I find odd. In Crysis without AA I get excellent fps on high settings at 1680x1050, around 40 or higher walking around, upwards of 60 inside buildings. However, turn on AA and watch the fun begin. With 4xAA I am talking about a max of 20 fps outside, with it going so low at times as to go down to 5 fps around many enemies. Now I know Crysis is a very demanding game, but what strikes me as odd is my old 640MB GTS had no problems with AA in Crysis. I could have 4xAA and still get 30 fps with many enemies around. Other games I also notice some problems with AA, in that it seems a little glitchy, though Crysis is by far the worst. My question is, what is the cause of this? Is the new GTS not as good at AA as the old GTS? Is it that the old GTS was better in DX9 than the new GTS? I am really kind of stumped here, so anyway thoughts would be great.

Thanks

(P.S. Does anyone know how Nvidia's DX10 drivers are doing? I have the option of getting a free copy of Vista and wondered if it would be worth it.
February 15, 2008 6:36:22 PM

Anyone have any ideas on this? I am contemplating a fresh os install to deal with all the problems I've had with the G92 line. I have tried a new PSU, new drivers, and I still get stuttery performance, much worse than my old G80 GTS. I want to know if a reinstall might be worth it.
February 15, 2008 7:05:01 PM

Yes, the AA is a problem in Crysis. Keep it off. Doesnt add any visual quality anyway.

I am running Vista w/ the latest nvidia drivers, and it is running fine. I have no way to comare it to your system though.
February 15, 2008 7:18:27 PM

I think I might try a fresh install anyway, the performance with this card is, unusual. I get really good fps, then I start moving around and it stutters like mad, I stop and it goes back to the regular fps. Do you have any problems like this?
a b U Graphics card
February 15, 2008 7:47:36 PM

No single card handles 4xaa at 1680x1050 high in crysis. I can barely manage that with dual 8800GT and actually play 2xaa/16xaf for better framerates. Something seems wrong with your 640MB GTS testing though, are you sure it was all high? maybe hitting a 512MB ram limit with 4xaa? I know the GPU bench at least puts the 640MB GTS below the 8800GT with or without fsaa.
http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=698&p=4

You are talking about actual observed framerates during gaming to which I'll say I have tried one 8800GT with 4xaa/16xaf 16x10 high and no way would I call that playable. SLI 8800GT I felt there was major stuttering with 4xaa in the Assault level (out in the open at the shipyard with the large carrier). I reduced to 2xaa and even then that level gave me the least smooth performance of any other level.

BTW, this is the level that I'm refering to:
http://guides.ign.com/guides/694190/page_8.html
February 15, 2008 7:51:17 PM

On the G80 you have more memory(640v512),higher bus width(320v256),Higher bandwidth(64GB/s v 62.7GB/s) they are the reasons why the G80 is better with AA it has more bandwidth basically.A fresh install can't hurt though.
February 15, 2008 8:37:43 PM

In my OPINION, Crysis is a terrible game to benchmark GPU performance on. It just seems to be so inconsistent. I got tired of it, and now I just play COD4. I can crank the graphics all the way up, and I think they look just as good as Crysis.
February 15, 2008 8:41:18 PM

That is normal.

AA kills bandwidth. It's like blowing up a resolution without having to up the resolution.
February 15, 2008 8:42:05 PM

rallyimprezive said:
In my OPINION, Crysis is a terrible game to benchmark GPU performance on. It just seems to be so inconsistent. I got tired of it, and now I just play COD4. I can crank the graphics all the way up, and I think they look just as good as Crysis.


I don't see inconsistency with Crysis. It just takes a powerful card to run @ higher settings.
February 15, 2008 8:46:23 PM

rallyimprezive said:
Yes, the AA is a problem in Crysis. Keep it off. Doesnt add any visual quality anyway.

I am running Vista w/ the latest nvidia drivers, and it is running fine. I have no way to comare it to your system though.


Of course it adds visual quality. AA just takes a big hit with all games. Most games just can't touch a Geforce 8800gts power however even with AA.
February 15, 2008 8:52:44 PM

marvelous211 said:
I don't see inconsistency with Crysis. It just takes a powerful card to run @ higher settings.


Perhaps I should have been more clear.

Various levels, environments, number of enemies, proximity to water, complexity of terrain and the like, all drastically affect the frame rate, more than most games.

marvelous211 said:
Of course it adds visual quality. AA just takes a big hit with all games. Most games just can't touch a Geforce 8800gts power however even with AA.


Again, I will provide a deeper explaination of what I mean.

Sure 4xAA removes the jaggies, but at higher resolutions with high graphics settings, the AA is difficult to notice, and the performance hit is significantly greater than the increase in visual quality.

Edit: To further clarify and simplify. And visual quality provided by AA is more than cancelled out by the serious hit in frame rates.

unless you just like a good slideshow.
February 15, 2008 9:03:15 PM

rallyimprezive said:
Perhaps I should have been more clear.

Various levels, environments, number of enemies, proximity to water, complexity of terrain and the like, all drastically affect the frame rate, more than most games.



It's also the most graphic rich PC game out currently. What is your point?



Again, I will provide a deeper explaination of what I mean.

Sure 4xAA removes the jaggies, but at higher resolutions with high graphics settings, the AA is difficult to notice, and the performance hit is significantly greater than the increase in visual quality.

Edit: To further clarify and simplify. And visual quality provided by AA is more than cancelled out by the serious hit in frame rates.

unless you just like a good slideshow. said:

Again, I will provide a deeper explaination of what I mean.

Sure 4xAA removes the jaggies, but at higher resolutions with high graphics settings, the AA is difficult to notice, and the performance hit is significantly greater than the increase in visual quality.

Edit: To further clarify and simplify. And visual quality provided by AA is more than cancelled out by the serious hit in frame rates.

unless you just like a good slideshow.


WTF? You said AA doesn't add any visual quality. But it does add visual quality. It removes jaggies.

Having AA is your choice but I'm not going to argue about how you think jaggies is unimportant to YOU. That is your opinion. I also don't care for jaggies that much either because it kills bandwidth but I'm not going to ponder how AA doesn't add any visual quality.
February 15, 2008 9:05:11 PM

marvelous211 said:
It's also the most graphic rich PC game out currently. What is your point?




WTF? You said AA doesn't add any visual quality. But it does add visual quality. It removes jaggies.

Having AA is your choice but I'm not going to argue about how you think jaggies is unimportant to YOU. That is your opinion. I also don't care for jaggies that much either because it kills bandwidth but I'm not going to ponder how AA doesn't add any visual quality.



What you are really doing is Trolling. Im out. No time for arguing opinion or how yours is better.
February 15, 2008 9:12:35 PM

rallyimprezive said:
What you are really doing is Trolling. Im out. No time for arguing opinion how yours is better.


LOL. Okay. You say AA makes no visual difference and crysis performance is inconsistent. :sarcastic:  I disagree with that stupendous statement.

If you can't back up what you say don't say anything at all. Simple enough?
February 15, 2008 9:18:52 PM

Guys, please don't turn this into an opinion war, I am asking for help, not a debate on AA. I'd rather not have this thread locked.

As for the fact that Crysis is a poor game to benchmark, I agree. However, it's not just Crysis. Company of Heroes has the same problem. AA doesn't affect the problem in CoH, on or off I still get the stuttering and the subsequent revving up of performance. I swapped back in the old card and the prob went away. I have reinstalled all drivers and such, but I am not sure if it's working. I do know that some people on other forums have reported the same problem, and I figure a fresh install can't hurt. Basically I am confused because I am getting worse performance than what I had with my old card. The only other option, as I checked the PSU and it's not the prob, might be my mobo and if it doesn't like PCIE 2.0, but I don't see why that should be a problem.
February 15, 2008 9:24:58 PM

damnit, here I am responding anyway.

I will try to squeeze this concept into your fcking skull one more time. Then im moving on.

FSAA - YES, there is a visual difference. But when I (ME)(NOT YOU) compare that EXTREMELY slight (small, tiny, little) difference in visual quality to the drastic (large, big, noticable) decrease in FPS (frames per second), I (ME, NOT YOU) DO NOT think that it is worth it. You simply gain more visual appeal through smooth FPS than you do from AA and low FPS. Got it?

Inconsistent - Have you ever heard people discuss that the FPS varies wildly in different parts of the game? This is what I am talking about. Are you capable of understanding that?
February 15, 2008 9:26:47 PM

murphy82nd said:
Guys, please don't turn this into an opinion war, I am asking for help, not a debate on AA. I'd rather not have this thread locked.

As for the fact that Crysis is a poor game to benchmark, I agree. However, it's not just Crysis. Company of Heroes has the same problem. AA doesn't affect the problem in CoH, on or off I still get the stuttering and the subsequent revving up of performance. I swapped back in the old card and the prob went away. I have reinstalled all drivers and such, but I am not sure if it's working. I do know that some people on other forums have reported the same problem, and I figure a fresh install can't hurt. Basically I am confused because I am getting worse performance than what I had with my old card. The only other option, as I checked the PSU and it's not the prob, might be my mobo and if it doesn't like PCIE 2.0, but I don't see why that should be a problem.


It's not an opinion war. The guy gave his opinion about AA. I gave facts. He calls me a troll and says it's an opinion argument. :pt1cable: 

How is Crysis inconsistent? I will explain to you in best of my knowledge why you think it's inconsistent.

February 15, 2008 9:30:38 PM

I think my performance with it is inconsistent due to my current problem.
February 15, 2008 9:30:52 PM

rallyimprezive said:
damnit, here I am responding anyway.

I will try to squeeze this concept into your fcking skull one more time. Then im moving on.

FSAA - YES, there is a visual difference. But when I (ME)(NOT YOU) compare that EXTREMELY slight (small, tiny, little) difference in visual quality to the drastic (large, big, noticable) decrease in FPS (frames per second), I (ME, NOT YOU) DO NOT think that it is worth it. You simply gain more visual appeal through smooth FPS than you do from AA and low FPS. Got it?

Inconsistent - Have you ever heard people discuss that the FPS varies wildly in different parts of the game? This is what I am talking about. Are you capable of understanding that?


Now you say it makes a visual difference? :pt1cable:  Way to change what you said originally. How convenient of you. :sarcastic: 

Again how AA takes performance hit has nothing to do with what you said originally. Never said I didn't agree with that doesn't mean it doesn't make visual difference.

All games varies wildly depending on what is going on the screen. Do you understand that? :sleep:  You thought games stay constant 60fps. LOL
February 15, 2008 9:34:42 PM

murphy82nd said:
I think my performance with it is inconsistent due to my current problem.


I don't think you are having any problems at all. Crysis is just a video card killer. AA is out of the question because it kills much needed bandwidth. Unless you want to compromise your settings for disappearing jaggies.
February 15, 2008 9:35:07 PM

pauldh said:
SLI 8800GT I felt there was major stuttering with 4xaa in the Assault level (out in the open at the shipyard with the large carrier). I reduced to 2xaa and even then that level gave me the least smooth performance of any other level.



It's funny you mention that because I had the hardest time with the same level. I thought it should have been smoother with all the static buildings and the ship taking up much of the screen. I thought the worst performance would have been the woods where the enemy is on the other side of the river and you have to run through the woods.
February 15, 2008 9:37:06 PM

No, I have not changed what I said. When I try to further clarify my statement, you just keepin attacking it like a defense lawyer in a high profile DUI case. I cant win, and you wont listen. So game over.

You are welcome to be crowned the winner. Congrats.
February 15, 2008 9:37:38 PM

If you had read one of my responses, you would have seen that I had mentioned that it is not just Crysis.
February 15, 2008 9:43:43 PM

murphy82nd said:
If you had read one of my responses, you would have seen that I had mentioned that it is not just Crysis.



Oops. It was a long post and I probably have ADD. Missed that.

I agree that its odd that your GTS 640MB did better.

The benchmarks I have seen between the G80 GTS and G92 GTS always place the G92 ver. well ahead, in any game.

If you dont have a problem with installin the OS again, id go with Vista, see what you think. Kill two birds with one stone. You get a clean OS install, and you get to try DX10.

February 15, 2008 9:49:51 PM

murphy82nd said:
If you had read one of my responses, you would have seen that I had mentioned that it is not just Crysis.


Oh really? I only saw you mention crysis.
February 15, 2008 9:52:04 PM

rallyimprezive said:
No, I have not changed what I said. When I try to further clarify my statement, you just keepin attacking it like a defense lawyer in a high profile DUI case. I cant win, and you wont listen. So game over.

You are welcome to be crowned the winner. Congrats.


Exactly you can't win cause you changed what you said and gave up. :D 

TKO for Marvelous :lol: 
February 15, 2008 9:57:35 PM

marvelous211 said:
Exactly you can't win cause you changed what you said and gave up. :D 

TKO for Marvelous :lol: 



*sigh* Sure ok yea uh-huh whatever.
February 15, 2008 10:45:26 PM

rallyimprezive said:
*sigh* Sure ok yea uh-huh whatever.


You already crowned me. :hello: 

I'm the champion. :sol: 
February 15, 2008 11:34:59 PM

MSAA is incompatible with the edge AA effect that CryENGINE2 employs to make foliage look better. MSAA+Crysis=massive fail on any current hardware. With the loss of edgeAA the IQ advantage isn't significant enough to justify the performance loss.

To the OP, you are most likely running out of VRAM running 1680x1050 + 4xMSAA. The 640MB GTS obviously has more memory, which is why it doesn't tank at said settings like the 512MB GTS does. Not that it matters as neither card will offer playable framerates at those settings.
February 15, 2008 11:40:18 PM

homerdog said:
To the OP, you are most likely running out of VRAM running 1680x1050 + 4xMSAA. The 640MB GTS obviously has more memory, which is why it doesn't tank at said settings like the 512MB GTS does. Not that it matters as neither card will offer playable framerates at those settings.

I don't think it tanks on the 512MB 8800GTS at that setting.
February 15, 2008 11:42:57 PM

marvelous211 said:
You already crowned me. :hello: 

I'm the champion. :sol: 

*Hails marvelous211 as Queen of the day*
February 15, 2008 11:49:32 PM

Evilonigiri said:
*Hails marvelous211 as Queen of the day*


Thank you thank you. You shouldn't have. :lol: 
February 15, 2008 11:52:44 PM

OP few questions:

1. Are you running the 169.25 drivers?
2. Are you running Crysis w/ the latest patch?
3. Did you completely uninstall drivers before installing the new cards?
3a. Did you use a 3rd party driver cleaner?
4. Did/do you OC anything?
5. Did you try kicking the computer?
February 15, 2008 11:54:02 PM

Evilonigiri said:
I don't think it tanks on the 512MB 8800GTS at that setting.


That makes me wonder. Is there a program that can monitor VRAM usage?
February 15, 2008 11:57:41 PM

rallyimprezive said:
That makes me wonder. Is there a program that can monitor VRAM usage?

No, but take a look here: http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTQ0NiwzLCxoZW5...

It's a 1GB 8800GT vs a 512MB 8800GT and basically it shows that 1GB is pointless because the 8800GT isn't powerful enough to take advantage of it.
February 16, 2008 1:08:04 PM

I'd say Crysis @ 1680x1050 with 4xAA is pushing the limits of a 512MB framebuffer. Look here

I do agree that more VRAM would be pointless though as the g92 isn't powerful enough to make use of it.
February 16, 2008 3:04:35 PM

homerdog said:
I'd say Crysis @ 1680x1050 with 4xAA is pushing the limits of a 512MB framebuffer. Look here

I do agree that more VRAM would be pointless though as the g92 isn't powerful enough to make use of it.

Thanks for the link.

In any case, 512MB is still the sweet spot for videocards atm.
a b U Graphics card
February 16, 2008 3:23:52 PM

homerdog said:
I'd say Crysis @ 1680x1050 with 4xAA is pushing the limits of a 512MB framebuffer. Look here

I do agree that more VRAM would be pointless though as the g92 isn't powerful enough to make use of it.

Thx for the link. Based on that though, It's not pointless when it comes to SLI G92 though that does have the raw power for 16x10 4xaa.
February 16, 2008 3:33:57 PM

For me, crysis looks ugly without AA, doesnt show off all those nie shadow effects if there are just squares.

I sacrificed a bit of image quality to turn on AA, thats just me though.

Think it adds huge depth to the quality.
February 16, 2008 5:42:27 PM

pauldh said:
Thx for the link. Based on that though, It's not pointless when it comes to SLI G92 though that does have the raw power for 16x10 4xaa.

Good point. I tend to forget that SLI is a viable option now that 2 g92s > 1 GTX/Ultra.

I should have stated that >512MB is unnecessary for a single g92.

Switching gears here, I wonder how the OP is doing. Was the card faulty or were Crysis and CoH just raping it?
February 16, 2008 6:10:10 PM

I am attempting a fresh OC install today, I will let you guys know how it goes. I don't think it is the card, but we will find out soon.
February 17, 2008 3:24:37 AM

So I have good news, and I have bad news. The good news is that the new OS install fixed the stuttering, which is a great relief. However, now I am getting something odd, that idk how to deal with.

I installed a fresh copy of Vista Business. I had XP before and had no problems, but I had Vista around and figured it'd be worth a try. So far I have had no problems, but I do get something weird. Vista keep resetting my overclock. I have an overclock on my processor from 2.0 ghz to 3.0 ghz. This overclock had no problems working in XP what so ever and was mor than stable. I check the bios on boot, all settings are correct for the overclock, with EIST and C1E disabled, and then I boot up. However, once Vista starts all the clock settings for the CPU are reverted to normal as from checking cpu-z. When I restart and check the bios again, the overclock settings are still there and cpu control is enabled! The bios is allowing the overclock, but vista is stopping it.

I never had this problem in XP. Does anyone know how to fix it?

I also have two questions:
When I install a new OS do I need to reinstall the bios?
Does Vista require more voltage for an overclock?
a b U Graphics card
February 17, 2008 5:01:57 AM

Sounds like Vistas power management is utilizing Intel Speedstep. It's probably set to balanced and is downclocking to save power. Go into power options in control panel and set it to performance or max performance mode.

For OC'in you may want to just turn speedstep off in your bios.


edit: BTW, glad to here your stuttering is gone! :) 

February 17, 2008 1:44:57 PM

pauldh said:
For OC'in you may want to just turn speedstep off in your bios.

That's what I'd do.
a b U Graphics card
February 17, 2008 2:39:59 PM

^ same here.
February 17, 2008 6:44:13 PM

murphy82nd said:
Hey all,
Some of you may remember my thread some time back about problems with an 8800 GT I was having. I returned that card for an 8800 GTS 512MB and most of those problems went away, especially the crashing. I think the GTS is just a higher quality part, imo. Anyway, I do notice something that I find odd. In Crysis without AA I get excellent fps on high settings at 1680x1050, around 40 or higher walking around, upwards of 60 inside buildings. However, turn on AA and watch the fun begin. With 4xAA I am talking about a max of 20 fps outside, with it going so low at times as to go down to 5 fps around many enemies. Now I know Crysis is a very demanding game, but what strikes me as odd is my old 640MB GTS had no problems with AA in Crysis. I could have 4xAA and still get 30 fps with many enemies around. Other games I also notice some problems with AA, in that it seems a little glitchy, though Crysis is by far the worst. My question is, what is the cause of this? Is the new GTS not as good at AA as the old GTS? Is it that the old GTS was better in DX9 than the new GTS? I am really kind of stumped here, so anyway thoughts would be great.

Thanks

(P.S. Does anyone know how Nvidia's DX10 drivers are doing? I have the option of getting a free copy of Vista and wondered if it would be worth it.


Its crysis, its a system killer, ...what else did you expect?
February 17, 2008 7:13:28 PM

marvelous211 said:
LOL. Okay. You say AA makes no visual difference and crysis performance is inconsistent. :sarcastic:  I disagree with that stupendous statement.

If you can't back up what you say don't say anything at all. Simple enough?



Wrong word. Stupendous is a good thing, its like "holy sh!t this cake is STUPENDOUS!"

Anyway, for frick sake yeah he said AA didnt add picture quality but it was in reference to Crysis, in which case due to the drop in frames it isnt WORTH having AA on. I can understand that...why cant you?

Stop being a douchebag and focus on the OP topic, this isnt about who made an overly simplified statement. I'm sitting here reading your posts and I got so frustrated that I decided to make this post, if anything to shut you up and your little fanboi too.
February 17, 2008 7:25:57 PM

eric54 said:
Wrong word. Stupendous is a good thing, its like "holy sh!t this cake is STUPENDOUS!"

Anyway, for frick sake yeah he said AA didnt add picture quality but it was in reference to Crysis, in which case due to the drop in frames it isnt WORTH having AA on. I can understand that...why cant you?

Stop being a douchebag and focus on the OP topic, this isnt about who made an overly simplified statement. I'm sitting here reading your posts and I got so frustrated that I decided to make this post, if anything to shut you up and your little fanboi too.


douchebag is not 1 word.

I was just correcting what he said prior. It doesn't matter what game it is. AA makes a difference in image quality. Stop being a righteous prick.

Fanboi? Fanboi of what? Run along go back to what you are good at. Name calling and flocking to take sides because you have can't tell difference between AA and AF.
February 17, 2008 7:54:53 PM

It's NOT speedstep, that's what C1E and EIST are in the bios. I already have those disabled guys, this is not the first time I overclocked a CPU. In addition, speedstep only affects multipliers, not fsb. My fsb and my multiplier are being reduced to default.
February 27, 2008 11:02:46 AM

rallyimprezive said:
In my OPINION, Crysis is a terrible game to benchmark GPU performance on. It just seems to be so inconsistent. I got tired of it, and now I just play COD4. I can crank the graphics all the way up, and I think they look just as good as Crysis.


you know what? I TOTALLY agree with you, I a brandnew pc, that handles crysis pretty well, yet I don't like the game at all, it is sort of clumsy and too demanding, I prefer COD4 10 times as much as crysis, even splinter cell double agents is 10 times better than crysis..

just cause its a new game that juices most GPU, doesn't mean that its quality is comparable to its requirements.
!