Crysis FPS not what I expected?

Did ya try turning Catalyst A.I off/up to advanced?

how much ram have u got and did u disable Q-Fan and that other power saving feature (i forget what it's called... CoolnQuiet??)

Vsync on/off/triple buffering?

Resolution?

Latest Catalyst driver?

  GL

I gotta be honest man...I really have no idea what you just said lol. I have 6 gb ram, Vsync I believe was not on, resolution I tried on 2048x1152 and 1920x1080. I do have the latest catalyst driver too. I don't know what you mean by turning catalyst A.I off/up to advanced or by disabling the Q-fan.

Your GPU is the bottleneck
It's a good card, but Crysis is a hell of a system hog.. especially at max settings.
Turn off shadows and it'll improve the FPS by alot.

FFXIV benchmark is good at telling you if your CPU is a bottleneck or not... On low settings, your score should be 25%-100% better than on high settings, indicating the GPU as the bottle neck. If the scores are the same on low and high, then it would be the CPU

Yeah the FFXIV benchmark was roughly 4100 for both low and high. So my processor would be the bottleneck then?

It would appear so..
High settings is very GPU based while low settings is very CPU based.
On high, your GPU is going to go as fast as the processor will allow, which is 4100. Most people get a much much higher score on low than high, since low goes more by processor, and most peoples processors aren't bottlenecking the GPU, the processor is able to push a higher score. If the GPU was the bottleneck, then your low score would still be higher.

Hope that makes sense...
Your 920 is very overclockable... I'm also on a 920, and I have it at 4.0ghz which is pretty insane. You can lower your ram clock to 1333 and then up your bclk to 160, putting the CPU at 3.3ghz~ pretty easily. Most people will go to 3.5 and 3.8 though

If you're going to OC it, make sure to download:
Prime95 (cpu stress test)
HWmonitor (watch temps, dont go above 80c, 75c perferrably, by the cores)
CPU-Z (to see the current stats on the CPU)

Oh, sorry, I am assuming you have 1600mhz ram...
If its 1333, then go down to 1066. if its 2000, then go down to 1600

As you increase the bclk, the ram speed will go back up in speed

+1
There's a reason why Crysis is one of Toms top games for benchmarking... it's brutal.

I was assuming that you were testing on a 920 right now, but you're actually on a phenom processor. That explains the suprise when I originally said that the GPU is the bottle neck. In this case, yeah the 920 will make things run faster... Currently the Phenom is the bottleneck... not the 920 that you don't even have yet... so ignore all that overclocking stuff I was talking about.

Those aren't really surprising results, as mentioned Crysis isn't very nice on hardware.

The only card that can play decent FPS fully maxed would probably be the HD 5970.

[/b]

switching to an i7-920 wont magically give you 40fps @ 2560x1600 (is this your resolution? you said highest) + 8xAA/16xAF with a 5870.

if you'd be more than willing to put your e-peen aside and tweak the visual settings to enjoy the game, its more than possible with your current setup

imo, putting the e-peen aside is more for women to do. If you're hardcore, you should be able to sit in your computer seat, turn on the power, and electrify your body with the power of Crysis at high settings!

Turning down settings is like compensating for something else that isn't performing up to expectations!


I'm just kidding   Had to get that out.... I agree with running the programs settings down until the game is clean and smooth. Crysis is a bad choice in seeing if you got your moneys worth on a PC. It would take $4000 dollars in todays money to get that game running on high-everything as smooth and clean as possible, and if you're doing that much then obviously your hobby is building high end computers.... or spending way too much on prebuilt ones.

Pretty easy, a single 5870 at High (not Very High) should easily run it with 4xAA as my single 5850 could.

I now have CF 5850s and the game runs well at Very High 2xAA, but then Crysis Warhead runs even better at Enthusiast (Very High) 4xAA. Original Crysis just wasn't put together very well.

Mainly due to a badly coded engine that got some nice fixes in Warhead.

Maybe Crysis 2 will have a decent engine.

I wasn't running that much resolution. 1920x1080. Here's my results in the bench at Very High, but like I said, a single 5850 at High ran ~50fps all the time, at worst 35 and often 60.
Also, the cards are at 875/1200 on stock volts for these tests.

Replacing your CPU and motherboard with an i7 920 setup at stock speeds won't make the kind of difference you want, especially at a resolution of 1080p or above. Take of AA and AF then see what kind of frame rates you get. If they are still too low for you then overclock your CPU. If you want AA and AF back then look into adding another 5870 to run in CF, if your board and PSU allow, or upgrading to a 5970, if your case and PSU allow  .

Aha sorry guys, I probably should have mentioned this earlier.

My computer is getting replaced because I've had some problems with the graphics card. My screen keeps messing up and I've tried just about everything under the sun to fix it but to no avail. I've called Dell and they've offered to replace my model with a new model but instead of the 1055T processor, I'll be getting the I7 920.

The only reason I'm testing Crysis is because this desktop is probably my first real desktop capable of playing games on decent settings, so I just wanted to see what crysis was like. Even playing it on medium-high settings is more than acceptable for me, but I just thought with the 1055T CPU and 5870 GPU I could get better results, but you guys have made it clear that the game is too much of a system hog to really get decent frames with, with just a single graphics card.

Thanks for the info though guys, I was hoping it would be the CPU and not the GPU.

Ok, but you responded to my post where I was telling him, in other words, to turn down the settings and it'll run well. Because as we've all pointed out, a single 5870 isn't going to cut the cheese at max. And he said he tried it at 2048x1152 and 1920x1080, so I was just basing off that, he can run at a "normal" res of 1920x1080 which is still awesome, and lower the settings to High and it will run fine.

patch crysis
check you,r memory usage
and check you 5870 if it is going to the max clock 850core and 1200mem

GL  

OK, you're running a dell mobo? That's one of your problems right there. Don't expect a dramatic performance gain by replacing the processor. Dell mobos run up to 30% slower than other mobos. The most recent dell I benchmarked, about a month ago, was about 20% slower than it should have been ( the cpu ).

I would agree except that in SOME of their higher end PCs, XPS ones and such, Dell has companies like Asus and Foxconn make them their mobos which are not half bad. I recently took apart a Dell slimline that was using a case design by Asus (built my granparents on using the Asus barebone) and a Foxconn cheapie borard. But my friends XPS has a pretty nice Asus proprietary mobo.

Not as nice as the real Asus mobos, but not as bad as the cheapo ones either.

Hi
If u put the settings to ultra but switch the anti aliasing off then u will have playable frames. try it

Really...? Crysis is badly coded...? You can play crysis at 20fps and it feels smooth...as if its 40 in other games. How many games can do that? In addition, name one other game that can achieve crysis's realism....It is just simple ahead of its time and it going to take time for hardware to catch up.

In addition, there are different views on what maxing out crysis really is. Some think that making everything max out in the game is all. However outside of the game you can go into for example Nvidia control panel and add a bunch of more graphics options that make the game look even better. You can also add a mode for "Ultra" settings I believe. And 4 GTX 480's or FX5800's should handle crysis pretty well at 1080p, maybe a bit over probably.