Just curious what most people are getting running crysis with an 8800GTS and Vista 64 bit. I am getting constant 20 fps (FRAPS) outside with an 8800GTS 512 Q6600 @ 3.3GHZ 4GB Vista 64 bit. All settings are VERY HIGH (shadows High) 4X AA and 8X Aniso
I can get the same without the AA and Ansio but all on very high. When I do a mix of qualities (most important like shaders on very high and the such) I get better.
I get 18-26 FPS with Very High at 1400x900. Honestly, as soon as I turn AA the FPS drops so I just play without it. The highest smoothest resolution I get is 1366 x 768(1.0 MP) which gives me a steady 22-30 FPS.
Other than the videocard, I pretty much have the same system as mrmraye (Look at my signature).
I see...well technically,
1650x1050 = 1732500 pixels (which I get low:13 - High 24 FPS - Avg: 19) 1280x1024 = 1310720 pixels (which I get low:15 - High 26 FPS - Avg: 22)
1400x900 = 1260000 pixels (which I get low:18 - High 29 FPS - Avg: 24)
1366x768 = 1049088 pixels (which I get low:22 - High 42 FPS - Avg: 28)
Nota: I benchmarked my FPS on the first animation from where the plane shows up in the sky until the player jumps out of the airplane. I figured it reprensents well the hardest performance sections of the game.
**Edited: I don't use the GPU test because I find the results misleading. You get much better results in the GPU test than what you would get playing through all the levels which is overpromising**
So yeah, I get about the same FPS as you under these conditions.
As you can see by adjusting some levels to medium, others to very high and some to high you can play Crysis @ 50 fps @ 1680 by 1050 on a decent rig.... ( bench is for the first level before you drive the jeep)
As you can see by adjusting some levels to medium, others to very high and some to high you can play Crysis @ 50 fps @ 1680 by 1050 on a decent rig.... ( bench is for the first level before you drive the jeep)
You're right, but we can all good FPS with medium settings.
I noticed you overclocked your 8800GTX...which brand of Card do you have (MSI, EVGA, ETC)?
Its a Dell oem version, with the fans set to 100% on riva tuner I can get it to 642/1080, I have the fans at 60% most of the time and when needed it kicks in at 80%, it gets to max 78 c with these settings, very happy with the card...
Agree with you on Crysis, but you can put some details to very high while keeping it perfectly playable and stunning..
Stuff like physics and shadows are not stunning, so you can knock them down to medium, similar with post processing, leaving you to put water,detail,texture, game effects all at very high..Game still looks just as stunning and plays smoothly...
Plus I find 40fps on Crysis to be like 60 to 70fps on games like unreal,cod 4....
All settings on highest (except the ones that are greyed out)
1280*1024
4xAA
AF on max
32FPS
It's pretty smooth, I've seen smoother. I tried turning some settings down. BUT I DIDN'T LIKE IT, SO I PUT THEM BACK.
Then I was happy again.
Dos1986: Pretty sweet overclock w/ reasonable temperatures. I have mine overclocked at 620/960 and haven't tryed higher yet. For some reason, overclocking in Vista doesn't give me extra FPS in Crysis!!! XP on the other hand gives me 10% increase in performance.
XP.
Sometimes it dips a little below that, sometimes above.
I haven't run FRAPS, that just the figure from turning FPS on IN-game.
Are the greyed out settings DX10 only settings or something????
The grayed out settings are Vista exclusive settings. Ironically, there is a tweak available to enable these settings. Look for it online, you just have to change some text in the log files and that's it.
The poster was actually looking for benchmarks in Vista. All of our benchmarks were in Vista using actual DX10 settings.
Turned my own settings up to all very-high on vista ultimate, slowed to 12 fps @ 1920x1200 on an 8600 GTS with a Q6600 @ 3.6 GHz. Normally it hovers around the 30 mark when I turn off AA and AF
Ordering either a 9800GTX or 9800GX2 when they come out, and along with the 8gb RAM I'm expecting to arrive tomorrow it should bring it up nicely
Interesting numbers. no matter what is chunked at this game it takes and laughs and says give me more. DX10 definitely does not improve performance but its a sacrifice for superior quality
I get around 40 fps with two 8800GTS and all settings on very high except shadows which is on high @ 1680x1050. Running it in DirectX 9 mode with the very high settings hack I can add 10 fps to that. It's all running on a 4x4 system with 8GB memory and Vista x64.
If I turn on the overclocking (I have water cooling with an optional phase-change cooler in the loop capable of cooling the system to -40C) I can get that all up to around 60fps in DirectX 10... but then the whole system is drawing nearly 1.2kW from the power supply (
for what its worth, i get around 25 fps at all high 2x aa 1280x1024
2900 xt (well, pro, but u know what we do with those.... ) and e2160 @3.0ghz - and thats vista on dx9
I get 30-40 FPS with all settings on High, 1680x1024, no aa/af on windows xp. I havent tested it on the Vista platform, im going to wait till I upgrade my RAM before I install Vista. I have not tried the hack to get all very high settings on this rig yet.
I get 30-40 FPS with all settings on High, 1680x1024, no aa/af on windows xp. I havent tested it on the Vista platform, im going to wait till I upgrade my RAM before I install Vista. I have not tried the hack to get all very high settings on this rig yet.
Ide like to mention that I have an "eVga nvidia 8800gt superclocked edition", if that matters.
It's really not that unbelieveable. I did mess with OC a little, had my processor up to 3.1 and my video card from 650/1900 to 675/1950..didnt notice anything in games. I just wanted to get a higher 3dmark06 score. I consitantly get 30-40 fps in game at stock speeds. Only thing i changed was my memory timing becuase my motherboard defaulted it to 5-5-5-18, I changed it to 5-5-5-12, which is the timing it is supposed to run at.