Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

GTX 560Ti for Crysis 3...

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
February 20, 2013 8:30:20 AM

worried about my GPU... i dont know if my palit GTX 560ti 2GB will run on Crysis 3... haven't bought the game yet... my resolution is 1920X1200...

my specs:

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/Ew0P

More about : gtx 560ti crysis

a b U Graphics card
February 20, 2013 9:00:16 AM

it'll run it for sure but don't expect to max out all the detail/resolution with AA and AF...
February 20, 2013 9:05:58 AM

With that processor GTX 560 TI will maxed it out but the FPS wont be that great !
Related resources
a b U Graphics card
February 20, 2013 12:08:56 PM

I dont see the 560ti doing so well with crysis 3 honestly bt then again i dont know how much optimized the final is
a b U Graphics card
February 20, 2013 12:20:22 PM

Without question the game will run as it is way above minimum specs but you won't be able to max the game.
February 20, 2013 7:21:05 PM

so then what card should i aim to get? is 670 enough?
a b U Graphics card
February 20, 2013 7:54:12 PM

hentaiboi_ said:
so then what card should i aim to get? is 670 enough?


As for me i played the crysis 3 beta i cant speak for the final version but i had to turn some settings down and i own the 660ti. Im getting the 780 for sure. I know drivers will get better as the game ages but i do want a faster gtx
a c 132 U Graphics card
February 20, 2013 7:56:27 PM

A 670 will be able to max the game not constant 60 FPS min but it can handle it sure. I was getting max frames over 100 and avg frames around 60 FPS with the BETA. With time the drivers will be more optimized for it from both AMD/Nvidia.
a b U Graphics card
February 21, 2013 6:00:49 AM

More settings have unlocked since beta. A 670 fair pretty well. Obviously it's the best we can do at this time unless your getting a dual GPU.

To be honest dropping some settings doesn't really hurt the look as the differences are minimal.
February 21, 2013 12:36:17 PM

Dude you'll be able to run it. With my i7-3770k and a 660ti I was getting around 40-60 FPS in the demo, maxed settings, 1080p.

You'll definitely need to tweak it, turn a few things down, but you know that already since I'm sure you've had to do so before with that card. Don't expect maxed settings at 60fps, but you'll definitely be able to run it on a playable, enjoyable level.
a c 132 U Graphics card
February 21, 2013 6:54:49 PM

^ That is correct. And with maturing of drivers and patches the frames will increase over time.
February 22, 2013 5:20:07 AM

so in short i have to stick with my card for a long time... probably will change it for GTA 5 then...
a c 132 U Graphics card
February 22, 2013 5:23:57 AM

I would say Crysis 3 will probably be more stressful on cards then GTA V however keep in mind that GTA V has not been announced to released on the PC even though one should expect it to.
February 22, 2013 9:35:39 AM

looking forward to see GPU benchmarks for Crysis 3 no AA/with AA... in order to see how will the GTX 560ti will fare... here in Tom's...
February 23, 2013 5:20:29 AM

so then this card will be good until next year in time for battlefield 4...
a c 132 U Graphics card
February 23, 2013 9:38:46 PM

that sounds about right. I'll have to check that article out. I think a lot of it has to do with the ram usage. Also, I've been hearing that the game is heavily multi threaded.
a c 132 U Graphics card
February 24, 2013 7:49:02 AM

Well at that resolution yes but you could always go down to something like 1620x1050 and have playable frames at high.
February 24, 2013 11:57:10 AM

if i drop the resolution? will it look cartoonish?
a b U Graphics card
February 24, 2013 1:30:58 PM

No. It will just not be the same resolution making things less sharp. Just make sure you drop to a res that is the same aspect ratio so that everything doesn't stretch.
a c 132 U Graphics card
February 24, 2013 9:36:47 PM

It just wont be nearly as defined as if you were running in full 1080p but you can do it. And the aspect ratio should be the same 16:9.
a c 169 U Graphics card
February 25, 2013 1:28:26 AM

honestly there isnt much difference between the lowest detail setting and the next step up in C3, well i hardly noticed it anyway. It still looks good on the lower detail setting at 1080p, but the full game may differ from the beta. even if you have to turn other details down you should still be able to turn texture detail up since you have 2gb vram.
a c 132 U Graphics card
February 25, 2013 6:35:58 AM

Right but that isn't what we were going into . We were going into what kind of settings one should expect with the 560Ti with Crysis 3 and based on that review which has 1600x1200 resolution that if you went down to a x1050 resolution you could probably get away with high and have it be playable. I played alpha and beta the game didn't look any different so I'll agree with you there however that wasn't really what we were going into.
a c 132 U Graphics card
March 5, 2013 6:34:34 PM

I had just noticed that myself. Well either way you have another point of reference with the benchmark mentioned earlier.
March 6, 2013 7:18:33 AM

should i wait for the Crysis 3 Killer GPU? what i mean is the GPU will be able to run Crysis 3 on max settings @ 1920x1200 60+ FPS before buying it...
March 6, 2013 7:59:39 AM

What about going SLI? A second 560Ti won't be too pricey (picked one up myself for £100).
Anonymous
March 6, 2013 8:05:16 AM

bigshootr8 said:
A 670 will be able to max the game not constant 60 FPS min but it can handle it sure. I was getting max frames over 100 and avg frames around 60 FPS with the BETA. With time the drivers will be more optimized for it from both AMD/Nvidia.


I dont think maxing out crysis with even a gtx 670 the game would be playable.I had a heavily overclocked 7950 and had to turn down AA a bit.same with my gtx 480 sli and those will crush a single 670
Anonymous
March 6, 2013 8:07:50 AM

diellur said:
What about going SLI? A second 560Ti won't be too pricey (picked one up myself for £100).


Since yours is a 2 gb card id say sli is a good option if it were a 1 gb version i wouldnt do it
a c 132 U Graphics card
March 6, 2013 5:31:36 PM

@Mike I'm sure it can be done. I've done it. I have tons of benchmarks flooded in my photobucket. I would say also that I wouldn't use MSAA in Crysis 3 with a Nvidia card I would use TXAA 4x as its a nvidia only tech and uses less video memory then the MSAA counterpart.








Intel Core i5 2500k @ 4.2 ghz
Asrock Z68 EXTREME4 Gen 3
Gigabyte Geforce GTX670oc Windforce3
Corsair Vengeance DDR3 1600 8GB (2x4)
Samsung 830 256 GB SSD
OCZ Vertex 2 90GB SSD (scratch drive)
Western Digital Caviar Black 1TB SATA III
LG 12x Super Multi Blue WH12LS38
ASUS Xonar DX 7.1 Sound Card.
CM Storm Sniper
Corsair AX850 PSU
Corsair Hydro H100

a c 132 U Graphics card
March 20, 2013 1:57:39 PM

I really like how they outline graphic cards however I would say that as a word of caution that both companies do great things in certain areas where as the other company just does okay in that area for example 3D has a better infrastructure then AMD does although AMD's 3D option is a bit more open and free, and then of course there is AMD's ease of use with there multi screen setup with Eyefinity. So it really just comes down to what your budget is and what kind of games you are after along with features. Lately I haven't been playing anything that has been using Nvidia's Physx engine so I may be more open to AMD's product as a value platform and the stronger performer of late in most titles.
March 20, 2013 3:02:33 PM

Anonymous said:
Since yours is a 2 gb card id say sli is a good option if it were a 1 gb version i wouldnt do it


It's actually the 1GB version I've got. 1GB is fine for one screen at 1920x1200, if you tweak your settings. Reducing AA and AF is the primary way to do this...haven't had a problem yet. Heck, I could run Skyrim on Ultra with one 560Ti at 1080p, and that's with a fair number of texture packs.
March 28, 2013 3:27:40 AM

OMG... Battlefield 4 is here... maybe i will delay upgrading my GPU... by that time the series 7 of nvidia have arrived and be cheaper...
July 4, 2013 10:05:10 AM

now i am planning to buy GTX 770... is it time now to upgrade? or should i wait for the red team's response?
a c 132 U Graphics card
July 5, 2013 9:55:46 AM

Truly hard to say. Right now I look at the performance of each card and I feel the GTX770 is really the answer to the 7970 and possibly the Ghz edition because of the price point that its at. I'm not sure how much faster the next line of AMD cards will be because it will be a refresh and not a new architecture push. Sure the top end will see improvements however the mid-line probably increasingly less. Is it time to upgrade I don't know quite yet if you are still getting decent performance with your card I would say wait however if you aren't and would like higher settings then perhaps.
a c 169 U Graphics card
July 5, 2013 12:57:16 PM

between the 770 and 7970 ghz they trade blows depending on game, and trade pricing blows depending on manufacturer. Probably a good time to upgrade to either one with such close competition driving prices down. If you plan on any sort of multi-gpu upgrade later on, i would go with nvidia without a second thought at the moment.
a c 132 U Graphics card
July 5, 2013 4:51:42 PM

iam2thecrowe said:
between the 770 and 7970 ghz they trade blows depending on game, and trade pricing blows depending on manufacturer. Probably a good time to upgrade to either one with such close competition driving prices down. If you plan on any sort of multi-gpu upgrade later on, i would go with nvidia without a second thought at the moment.


Don't you think though in the end that if you were going towards a second card by the time you needed one there would probably be something better out there that would make it not worth your time. Granted you weren't going for a multi monitor setup at a higher resolution and needed the horsepower of two cards.
!