Crysis Performance with SLI

[tmeacham]

Article written by Rob Wright.

After running the full version of Crysis on Windows Vista through some initial tests, we tested the game on an SLI-enabled Alienware desktop. How much will two GPUs instead of one improve the results?

http://www.tomsgames.com/us/2007/11/20/crysis_sli/

 

[razor512]

while sli seemed too help, the improvement was not good enough.

if 1 card cant run the game properly on maxed out settings, then 2 cards wont run it good enough either

I always see sli as a waste of money as you pay twice the cost for a 20-30% increase in performance

on other tech support forums that i post at, there many users who were upgrading from 7900gtx cards, to 8800 gtx cards

the 7900 can run every game out right now on full settings except crysis and bioshock (due to the direct x 10)

the 8800gtx can also run every game out right now maxed out, except crysis (but it can max out bioshock) whats the point of the upgrade, all that money and you still cant max out the latest games. (main reason why I am not going to upgrade until a better card comes out)

SLI should never be a good option. the next card by nvidia that comes out will be much faster than 2 8800gtx cards in SLI (nvidia has always kept this patters for the most part. The next card that came out was always faster than 2 of the older cards in SLI)

if 1 card runs your games smooth then theres no point in going sli because as the buyers who went sli with the 8800 cards have notice, in a few months, they will be junking 2 cards instead of 1 when they upgrade to a card that can actually run games like crysis (they will also get the urge to scream into a pillow when they find out that for the price of their second 8800, they could have saven that money a few months and get a card that would be much faster than a 8800GTX in SLI would ever be

 

[shurcooL]

12 fps? What?

Anyone else think it's Vista to blame? I'm getting average 30~ FPS at that resolution with a Q6600 + 8800GTX on Windows XP 32 with all settings on 'High'.

 

[robwright]

Did you guys check out the InCrysis interview link at the end of the article? Interesting comments about DX10 and Vista....

 

[razor512]

on every benchmark I have seen, when it came to direct x 9, windows xp has always had higher framerates than in vista.

crysis in windows xp generally had around 6FPS more on high settings dx 9 than on vista

vista is a more demanding OS and crysis is a very demanding game, running both at the same time will lead to less performance

 

[EllisD]

What a complete joke Crysis is! I feel sorry for all the true PC gamers out there this holiday season getting sucked in to buying multiple graphic cards or complete system upgrades (like myself) just to heopfully play this game.

Shame on Crytek!! Sure is looks cool. But if I wanted photo-realistic visuals I'll look out my car window. Im not going to pay $50 to play the 'greatest game available' if my 8800 gtx wont hold snuff up to it. How can you sell a game at premium dollar and it wont run on the best system avail. Thats some bull!

They should have held out on this game until the hardware was in place to show it off. Dont blame vista. My COD4, Bioshock, and Gears of war are amazing on vista. If Crytek thinks i am coming back next summer and playing this game with my 9800gtx they are crazy.

By the way, all the Crysis delays... thank god we didnt get it on time if this is the best they can do.

 

[Luscious]

Would the framerates for CF match those for SLI? I still don't see why a quad-core and two overclocked 8800 ultras wouldn't push this title, driver issues and game patches aside.

Agreed, I would wait for the next top-end GPU to come out in order to really play this game. Wait a little bit, then when you see the game on sale for $20, then you can buy!

 

[fonzy]

I was going to say the 9800gtx(assuming that's what it's called) had better be one kick ass card! I was going to build a new computer partly for this game but if a top of the line n computer can't max this game out then I might as well wait untill hardware comes out that can.

BTW when is nvidia's next flagship card coming out anyway?

 

[coldmast]

a game designed to get better with age.
and will be a good benchmarker for the next two years.
can you imagine how sad the frame rates would be with quad-HDef (5fps?)

doesn't anyone remember when doom3 came out.

hopefully ATI gets a {real} high end card to utilize those four x16 slots with crossfireX
hopefully Nvidia gets their drivers wrapped up, hope to see an Nforce that can do 4 cards as well.
could never afford but I would like to see.

 

[TSIMonster]

Under XP with everything on high and 2xAA @ 1680x1050 the game looks great on my system. I haven't ran FRAPS on it, but it plays very smooth and I have absolutely no complaints.

 

[jimmysmitty]

shurcooL you are running it on high in XP. You should get a better average than in Vista on Very High. Although SLI getting wasted is kinda sad to me. Same for you TSIMonster. When I ran the game on High in Vista I did get a much better framerate(or it seemed smoother) than everything on Very High.

I remember Doom 3 but actually the latest hardware could play it on maximum. And Dom 3 was nice but HL2 looked way better in the graphics arena and didn't require ungodly hardware.

Kinda like COD4. That games graphics are close to what Crysis has and it still runs great. I just wounder if the cryengine 2 has issues.

BTW I would like to see it run on a Crossfire setup using 2 HD2900XT/Pros with 1GB GDDR4 to see if it does want more video memory. Of course the 2900Pros will be hard to come by but if you want to donate a 2900XT 1GB to me I will pop it in my system and test it out for ya wnink wink.

 

[spoonboy]

What a complete joke Crysis is! I feel sorry for all the true PC gamers out there this holiday season getting sucked in to buying multiple graphic cards or complete system upgrades (like myself) just to heopfully play this game.

Shame on Crytek!! Sure is looks cool. But if I wanted photo-realistic visuals I'll look out my car window. Im not going to pay $50 to play the 'greatest game available' if my 8800 gtx wont hold snuff up to it. How can you sell a game at premium dollar and it wont run on the best system avail. Thats some bull!

They should have held out on this game until the hardware was in place to show it off. Dont blame vista. My COD4, Bioshock, and Gears of war are amazing on vista. If Crytek thinks i am coming back next summer and playing this game with my 9800gtx they are crazy.

By the way, all the Crysis delays... thank god we didnt get it on time if this is the best they can do.

Firstly, your an idiot for buying it if you knew it was beyond just about any system out there to run it at full, and then get annoyed because you cant either.

Secondly, just because you cant run it at high doesnt mean its crap.

Thirdly, the figures are out there, and they do show xp is quicker all round.

Fourthly, your just bitter that your system has been humbled by a game, and that your year old graphics isnt up to max settings.

To finish, what is wrong releasing a game ahead of its time? If you now its forward looking, put your blinkers back on and dont play it, you whinging fool.

Whoever said half life 2 was overrated, your damned on the money. Bought it, completed it, sold it. If I wanted that many scripts, I'd be on the stage.

 

[spoonboy]

Kinda like COD4. That games graphics are close to what Crysis has and it still runs great. I just wounder if the cryengine 2 has issues.

The foliage and water in crysis kill the frames. The scenes in crysis are alot more complex than COD 4. The effect of the presentation is similar in magnitude though. Cryengine 2 hasnt got issues, its just far beyond any other engine in its capability. Were back to the days of hardware catching up with software. Remember oblivion pre 8800 series?

 

[itotallybelieveyou]

LOL. Crysis = Graphics card destructotron

 

[AlexandreVentura]

Hi,

I don´t understand why people in sites insist in run Crysis with Vista 32bits and 2Gb of ram.

If is to run in Vista , run with 4Gb of good ram , its more cheep than a another GTX!!


And in my opinion Crysis is build to 3 things, Cores , PCIe bandwidth and 64bits... i think that max of the game will be in 64 bits....


Is a game for a (near)future hardware...

 

[FITCamaro]

Why the hell are you testing with Vista 32-bit? 64-bit is out there. And if I'm not mistaken, Crysis has a 64-bit code path.

 

[chevellerocks]

I agree that it is crazy to SLI your cards just to play one game, but it's no reason to get your panties in a bunch because others want to do it. Let them spend there money how they want. I am one of those people who love games and new technology enough I am willing to sink a chunk of cash into 2 video cards so I can play it on Very High instead of high. I just bought 2x8800gts SSC and yes it did cost me $800, and yes it was worth it to ME. Anyways I probably wouldn't of bought them if it weren't for EVGA and there great step up program. I have till Feb 15th to get some new cards and I am sure by then my $800(or a bit more) will buy me something that will last a good while. Speaking of that does anyone know what to expect from Nvidia before then?

 

[darkstar782]

on other tech support forums that i post at, there many users who were upgrading from 7900gtx cards, to 8800 gtx cards

the 7900 can run every game out right now on full settings except crysis and bioshock (due to the direct x 10)

the 8800gtx can also run every game out right now maxed out, except crysis (but it can max out bioshock) whats the point of the upgrade, all that money and you still cant max out the latest games. (main reason why I am not going to upgrade until a better card comes out)

SLI should never be a good option. the next card by nvidia that comes out will be much faster than 2 8800gtx cards in SLI (nvidia has always kept this patters for the most part. The next card that came out was always faster than 2 of the older cards in SLI)

So, with one 7900GTX you are saying I can max out any game at 2560x1600?

Give me a break, 8800GTX SLi struggles with some games.

In most games at this res, SLi is way more than a 30% boost, and I need all the GPU power I can get. If there is a faster single card I can buy, please show me it.

 

[bornking]

I ran the demo in sli with two 8800gts320 OC and I got avg. of 20-30 fps on very high (the xp-dx10 hack) at 1024 X 768. And 18-25 on 1280X1024.

SLI does work, maybe not 1.8X better in crysis, but when the second card is cheap, then why not? I bought it way before the 8800gt was out and it too is not much better than the 8800gts in Crysis, so it is Crysis' fault.

 

[randomizer]

I just play it all on low except textures (hacked to very high), sound (high) and physics (high). 1680x1050 and no AA gives me 35-40FPS average outside.

E6600
x1950 pro 256mb
4gb RAM
vista x64

I can't play the game at <25FPS like some people, too much input lag. Besides, I want to play the game smoothly, not just look at pretty pictures.

 

[darkstar782]

I have pretty much decided that I wont play the game for another year or two, so that I can:

1. Buy it dirt cheap
2. Play it how it was meant to be played...

Shame really, but for it to be playable I have to reduce the gfx settings to the point that Timeshift is FAR prettier and smoother.

 

[justjc]

I wonder if Rob Wright has heard of the diffrence it should make to rename the Crysis.exe file, appearently there have been made some "optimisations" of the drivers that kick in when the Crysis.exe is run. I read this at http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2279&Itemid=38

Maybe a new test should be made to see the diffrence?

 

[topman]

At 1280x1024, renaming the executable in ForceWare 169.04 gave us close to a 7% drop in performance. Utilising ForceWare 169.09, there is no longer any
performance drop from renaming the Crysis executable, but performance overall is around 7% lower than that seen in the previous driver set, putting it
on a par with the older driver with the game EXE renamed. This is still faster than the older ForceWare 163.69 WHQL driver, but suggests that much of the
additional performance seen in ForceWare 169.01 through to 169.04 was due to that water reflection rendering issue.


WAT GOOD IS THAT lol D:

 

[Poopsmasher]

I know, its been said so many time over and over but how on earth can you release a game that doesnt run on current hardware?????!!!!!!

Freakin hell!
Im not going to buy this game, it doesnt look good on high setting caus 12fps is a complete joke, and it looks completely average on medium setting at 45fps because of the detail level!

Sure it sounds like a fun game, why not make it playable?
With my current rig i can enjoy the game on medium, what about the
100 000+ kids who cant buy pricey pc's!

Shoo, i really needed to vent there, sweet.

 

[m1ddy]

it seems to be different for everybody. My lil bro runs everything on very high in vista 64\dx10 on an 6700, P35 mobo, 8800gtx and 2gb ddr2 800 at perfectly acceptable frame rates. He was running at 1024x768 with no AA tho.