Questions about Crysis and my system,

[radium69]

Good afternoon,
Here are specifications of my "Gaming Rig",
Which I am going to play Crysis with.
Q6600 G0 stepping 2,4 ghz (going to OC to 3,0ghz on air, and maybe to 3,4 with a Tuniq Tower)
4x 2 gig Corsair XMS2 sticks (total of 8 gig ram that is) DDR2 800mhz
2x 8800GTX ( In SLI mode )

Now, there is going to be a dual boot , XP PRO and VISTA.
It's true that windows XP and vista can only locate 3 gig ram. So what should I do with the rest of the ram? I've heard the problem will be solved with that if I use a 64bit version of Vista or whatsoever,

Now the point is, I want maximum performance from the system, I've heard there is some kind of 64bit patch out for crysis? Will that help? I'm going to game with my 22inch widescreen LG flatron @ 1680x1050.

I'm also very confused with about everything,
*Settings of Crysis
*General behaviour of the system (will be ariving soon)
*The Ram issue
*The SLI issues (beta drivers? and so on?)

Please enlighten me with your answers,
Cheers,
Radium

 

[LiuKang]

I simply downloaded all the lastest drivers for my hardware and the game runs very well at "demanding" settings. I am only running 2GBs of RAM and an OCed e6400 -- but I'm running GTXs in SLI with pretty good results:

- 1680x1050
- WinXP (32-bit)
- All settings on "high"
- AA x4
- 30-50fps average depending on the environment and action

As far as your RAM question is concerned, just Google it... it's been discussed so many times. Personally, I wouldn't waste my money on 8GBs of DDR2 considering DDR3 is right around the corner. I'd rather spend my money on faster RAM, run it at a 1:1 ratio, and get my timings down as low as possible.

G'luck.

 

[rgeist554]

Now, there is going to be a dual boot , XP PRO and VISTA.
It's true that windows XP and vista can only locate 3 gig ram. So what should I do with the rest of the ram? I've heard the problem will be solved with that if I use a 64bit version of Vista or whatsoever,

It's not that XP can only locate 3gig of ram, it's the 32 bit versions of the OS's that can't recognize over 2.7-3.5GB (Usually a little less once your Video Card takes it's share of your memory). Just get the 64 bit version of either if you want to run 4 or more GB of RAM. Also, with a 64 bit OS, you need to make sure you get the 64bit drivers for all your hardware.

Don't buy 8GB of RAM either. If you go with the 64 bit OS, I wouldn't go any higher than 4GB. Anything more than 4GB will probably provide no noticeable performance gain. Thank you, now just send me the money you saved on 4GB of performance ram.

I won't be the first to tell you, Vista sucks atm. DX10 sucks, hardware is not ready for it.

As for Crysis - You could probably run settings similar to LiuKang with that setup, just don't expect to create a miracle computer to run at 70FPS w/ Very High settings on Crysis. The hardware is just not here yet.

 

[pete4r]

I simply downloaded all the lastest drivers for my hardware and the game runs very well at "demanding" settings. I am only running 2GBs of RAM and an OCed e6400 -- but I'm running GTXs in SLI with pretty good results:

- 1680x1050
- WinXP (32-bit)
- All settings on "high"
- AA x4
- 30-50fps average depending on the environment and action

As far as your RAM question is concerned, just Google it... it's been discussed so many times. Personally, I wouldn't waste my money on 8GBs of DDR2 considering DDR3 is right around the corner. I'd rather spend my money on faster RAM, run it at a 1:1 ratio, and get my timings down as low as possible.

G'luck.

Timings do not really matter in the real gaming world, and also for Intel CPUs they seem to be less important.

I have 8GB of RAM, and on very high settings after a couple of hours playing, the usage of RAM have reached 5.2GB and still growing.... its insane!!

2GB will crash out on most occassions after awhile, if you plan to run the game on High settings (any DX10 games). today 2GB does not make sense in gaming world, 4GB is minimum standard

 

[rgeist554]

I have 8GB of RAM, and on very high settings after a couple of hours playing, the usage of RAM have reached 5.2GB and still growing.... its insane!!

Are you running Vista while burning DVD's, chatting, checking e-mail, and encoding a Video all while playing Crysis or something? I've never peaked over 1.6GB of RAM usage while playing. (I even played the entire game through in 2 sittings, no breaks.)

 

[stemnin]

If youre using 32bit system, crysis will never exceed 2gb. (unlike supreme commander and some other games), 64bit OS will go over 2gb of ram. 5.2GB sounds like alot.

 

[rgeist554]

If youre using 32bit system, crysis will never exceed 2gb. (unlike supreme commander and some other games), 64bit OS will go over 2gb of ram. 5.2GB sounds like alot.

Ah, learned something new. That still seems like an awful lot though. Especially since it doesn't seem that a 64bit OS is doing as well as Crytek said it would.

 

[rower30]

Crysis seems like it runs OK on an older system;
AMD3800X2
2Gig RAM
2 x 7800GT SLI
Creative X-Fi
XPSP2

No, the game never "crashes" due to memory. I think the memory comments on 64 bit OS's is flat wrong. A PC will perform better with more memory...to a point, but they don't wander around awhile and then crash with less memory. it sounds like someone is an overclocker and simply has an unstable system setting that they aren't willing to "give-up" in the name of one-upmanship.

I can't imagine that Crysis running as well as it does on my "punny" system @ 30-42FPS as set-up above, a more current system with a 8800GT or better could possibly be unacceptable in any way. Even with DX9.0c.


I have the system settings at 1024 x 768 and all graphical toggle sat MEDIUM except sound, which I set at HIGH and shader, which I set to LOW.

The problem with the MID setting on shader quality is that I get twinkling shimmer all over the top of everything which is very distracting. Not so if I set it to low or HIGH, but high kills my frame rate. Compared to FarCry the game engine is recognizable, but different if that makes any sense. The colors are more Technicolor style (sort of matte and dull). But t is still a good-looking game. I use 1024 x 768, even though the supposed game optimizer selected 800 x 600 and low settings, so I don’t use any anti-aliasing, which slows stuff down too much for the benefit.

Some funny things I’ve found playing the game.
- This game has no health, instead using your bio suit to “recharge”, so it seems odd that you can saver on most levels at will. You technically have infinite health if you learn to back away from bad situations quick enough and just hide. FarCry allowed ZERO saves except at checkpoints, and you were limited on health through the levels. This game seems more appropriate to have no saves except at game set points than FarCry.
- On low settings, the background isn’t rendered at all, or very well. OK, this is as it is supposed to be but it is also like cheating. Why? Because all the trees and artifacts the combatants hide behind aren’t there! They stand out in the open like ducks in a pond. When you snipe them, the trees and foliage that they are supposed to have been behind, finally “hides” them. But, you already know they are behind the tree, so just shoot it down! And, once you pop a shot near them, they wander into view anyway.
- The scope graticals are blurry and WAY too thick. This is a gaff in the game. FarCry scope latitude and longitude graticals were razor sharp. And, the scope is a single magnification. This isn’t a good sniper game, just acceptable.
- I found that equipping my character with the silencer is a HUGE advantage. Crawl through the grass and head shot everybody on single shot setting with max strength for a steady aim. Not to mention, no one knows where to find you with the shot silenced.
- OK, are these guys all wearing body armor? It just seems way too difficult to kill anyone except with a point blank shotgun blast or an assault rifle headshot. And farther away? Try, try, try is all I can say.
- You clip into walls and things way too easily. Trying to crouch or go prone has to be done well away from anything, or you just stand there.
- A rocket won’t take down a fragile helicopter? Get real, man!
- Grenades seem appropriately effective.

All in all if you liked FarCry you’ll love this game, too. Even with DX9c it looks great…even at low settings.

 

[spuddyt]

the scope that is a single magnification.... hmm.... did you ever find the sniper scope? you know, the one that has 4x AND 10x magnification
and about the helicopter.... I'm not expert an on helicopters, but I would imagine if any army wanted them, they'd make them tough enough to take some fire....

 

[FH]

rower30, I think I've also seen the twinkling you talk about with shaders on mid. An alternative solution may be to turn shadows to low instead.

 

[itotallybelieveyou]

Good afternoon,
Here are specifications of my "Gaming Rig",
Which I am going to play Crysis with.
Q6600 G0 stepping 2,4 ghz (going to OC to 3,0ghz on air, and maybe to 3,4 with a Tuniq Tower)
4x 2 gig Corsair XMS2 sticks (total of 8 gig ram that is) DDR2 800mhz
2x 8800GTX ( In SLI mode )

Now, there is going to be a dual boot , XP PRO and VISTA.
It's true that windows XP and vista can only locate 3 gig ram. So what should I do with the rest of the ram? I've heard the problem will be solved with that if I use a 64bit version of Vista or whatsoever,

Now the point is, I want maximum performance from the system, I've heard there is some kind of 64bit patch out for crysis? Will that help? I'm going to game with my 22inch widescreen LG flatron @ 1680x1050.

I'm also very confused with about everything,
*Settings of Crysis
*General behaviour of the system (will be ariving soon)
*The Ram issue
*The SLI issues (beta drivers? and so on?)

Please enlighten me with your answers,
Cheers,
Radium

really want maximum performance? Install the game and go crank everything up. No problem with a godly system like yours