Crysis Warhead performance WORSE!?

Guys I'm running 64-bit Vista and I'm hearing that might be part of the problem? I'm not sure if the game just doesnt run better on 64-bit as it normally would (it's not 64-bit unlike Crysis 1), or if it's actually hurting performance? Maybe somebody can clear that up?
 
We'll see tomorrow when it unlocks off steam, Ive been replaying the original just to tell the difference.
 
cannondale06 said:
I just looked at the task manager total but I will take a look at the process itself.


btw this game looks WORSE than the original game. I put everything on Enthusiast and it still looks like shit in many areas. the foliage is much much worse looking. yes I know its not playable but I can stand still and look. lol
Click to expand...

true, the first one was alot prettier.. i bought this game just to look at the trees :) ... and they made the game darker.. but hey, its all good, they had to stop the negative "this game runs like shit" comments, so they made it look uglier :(
 
Works great here. Rig in sig, minus one GTX-280 (no longer SLIing.) It plays faster on average than Crysis does. I have Crysis set to everything on Very High. Warhead is set to everything Enthusiast. It's not incredibly faster, but it seems more consistent so far. (I haven't played that far in, but a decent chunk of actionful gameplay for this example.) Either they optimized a bit, or stripped something out maybe, but it does run faster for me on the same system maxed. Crysis on one card is in the mid 20s at Very High. I haven't checked the actual FPS on Warhead yet, but it's noticeably smoother. (just not hugely)

Edit: Sorry, forgot to mention 1680x1050, no AA.
 
mjz_5 said:
... so they made it look uglier :(
Click to expand...

So it's not only me who noticed that. Judging by screenshots posted here Warhead seems to have some kind of brown tint to it, and it didn't look "as clean" as original Crysis. Too bad some people have a problems with frames again, i hope somebody will find a way to improve that.
 
GibsonEX said:
So it's not only me who noticed that. Judging by screenshots posted here Warhead seems to have some kind of brown tint to it, and it didn't look "as clean" as original Crysis. Too bad some people have a problems with frames again, i hope somebody will find a way to improve that.
Click to expand...

i'm glad im not the only one.. :)...
 
I'm getting anywhere from 30 to 60 fps running my 8800GTS (G92) cards in SLI at 1280x1024 with everything on enthusiast and no AA. For me that is much better then Crysis was doing for me at very high.
 
I dont see where the problem is, or maybe I haven't run into it. I'm running on Enthusiast at 1280x1024 no AA with VSync turned on, and I just played the first level up to where you blow up the propaganda station with no problems at all.

Maybe I'll run into problems after this level, I don't know but for now it's running fine wit the rig in my sig.
 
GibsonEX said:
So it's not only me who noticed that. Judging by screenshots posted here Warhead seems to have some kind of brown tint to it, and it didn't look "as clean" as original Crysis. Too bad some people have a problems with frames again, i hope somebody will find a way to improve that.
Click to expand...

What is funny about this. Some people just care about running the game on highest graphics. Even if the developers made it look worse
 
Question, and this might be noob, but did Warhead ship in only 32bit? No 64bit option?
 
I bet this performance increase the devs are talking about is just them using cubans crysis config.
 
Carv said:
I dont see where the problem is, or maybe I haven't run into it. I'm running on Enthusiast at 1280x1024 no AA with VSync turned on, and I just played the first level up to where you blow up the propaganda station with no problems at all.

Maybe I'll run into problems after this level, I don't know but for now it's running fine wit the rig in my sig.
Click to expand...
I hope you dont run all your games at that res with those cards in SLI. you would get the same and in many cases better performance at a higher res in most games.
 
64bit Vista, 8800GTS 640mb 4GB ram Q6600 @ 3ghz

1920*1200 Mainstream (Medium) settings. I average about 40fps outdoors.
 
jaegertech said:
No. Well, at least the Steam version isn't. Per r_displayinfo 1, it is running in 32-bit DX10 for me.
Click to expand...
if you browse to the crysis folder (programfiles x86\steam\steam aps\common\crysis warhead) you'll notice there is only bin32, no bin64 :(.
 
cannondale06 said:
I hope you dont run all your games at that res with those cards in SLI. you would get the same and in many cases better performance at a higher res in most games.
Click to expand...


Only have one card.


As for the 32bit, what gives? I wonder if the people that bought it on CD have a 64bit version available.
 
Carv said:
Only have one card.
Click to expand...
sorry I quoted the wrong person. :eek:

bpmurrGT said:
I'm getting anywhere from 30 to 60 fps running my 8800GTS (G92) cards in SLI at 1280x1024 with everything on enthusiast and no AA. For me that is much better then Crysis was doing for me at very high.
Click to expand...
I hope you dont run all your games at that res with those cards in SLI. you would get the same and in many cases better performance at a higher res in most games.
 
Carv said:
Only have one card.


As for the 32bit, what gives? I wonder if the people that bought it on CD have a 64bit version available.
Click to expand...

I have a hard copy and no 64bit folder.

Also warhead runs alot better than the first one with everything on very high
 
Crysis really hated my X2 5000+ and Crossfired 3870s. It couldn't even play the opening crash video without skipping. I fiddled with it for about 2 hours before I backed up my Steam dl and moved it to my 6850 w8800GTS (640mb).

Running very smoothly at 1280x1024 mainstream settings. Haven't tried experimenting yet, as I am happy it is finally running.
 
Timbowens said:
How does it feel to run your mouth and then get owned?
Click to expand...

How does it feel to be a troll? Is that a bag of bait on your hip?

Thats it...Post a screen shot of a rig that wasnt even endorsed by Crytek to run the game :rolleyes:


Owned...~snicker~ Yeah, right. Just another Crysis hater who cant run the game on last gen hardware and is throwing a temper tantrum over it.


Take another look athe the CRYTEK ENDORSED rig on Tiger Direct that I linked to and you will see that it nowhere matches that net box that was posted. Seriously, DONT expect to run Crysis on any other setting than gamer with a low rez such as 1024 or around there. If you actually had any other expectation than that, you read what you wanted to read hoping your last gen card could run a next gen game...Yeah, right. I'll meet you back in reality.


http://www.product-reviews.net/2008/09/10/ea-crysis-warhead-pc-desktop-specifications-and-pricing/
9800GT

http://game.blogdig.net/archives/ar..._Ready_PC_Specs__Price__Crysis_Warhead__.html
9800GT

http://www.newscred.com/article/sho...-face-melting-specs-for-700-pcs-48c86e08071f0
9800GT

Oh, look here. This is right off the official Crysis Warhead web site...
http://crysiswarhead.ea.com/blogs/news/archive/2008/09/11/crysis-warhead-amp-the-ultra-pc.aspx
Again, 9800GT

http://www.actiontrip.com/rei/comments_news.phtml?id=090908_12
9800GT

http://www.gamesetwatch.com/2008/09/the_remo_files_the_crysis_warh.php
9800GT



Starting to see a pattern here? You NEED a 9800GT or better to pull DECENT performance from this game. Period. End of story. Again I hand you your clue.
 
Kidfinger said:
How does it feel to be a troll? Is that a bag of bait on your hip?

Thats it...Post a screen shot of a rig that wasnt even endorsed by Crytek to run the game :rolleyes:

Owned...~snicker~ Yeah, right. Just another Crysis hater who cant run the game on last gen hardware and is throwing a temper tantrum over it.

Take another look athe the CRYTEK ENDORSED rig on Tiger Direct that I linked to and you will see that it nowhere matches that net box that was posted. Seriously, DONT expect to run Crysis on any other setting than gamer with a low rez such as 1024 or around there. If you actually had any other expectation than that, you read what you wanted to read hoping your last gen card could run a next gen game...Yeah, right. I'll meet you back in reality.

http://www.product-reviews.net/2008/09/10/ea-crysis-warhead-pc-desktop-specifications-and-pricing/
9800GT

http://game.blogdig.net/archives/ar..._Ready_PC_Specs__Price__Crysis_Warhead__.html
9800GT

http://www.newscred.com/article/sho...-face-melting-specs-for-700-pcs-48c86e08071f0
9800GT

Oh, look here. This is right off the official Crysis Warhead web site...
http://crysiswarhead.ea.com/blogs/news/archive/2008/09/11/crysis-warhead-amp-the-ultra-pc.aspx
Again, 9800GT

http://www.actiontrip.com/rei/comments_news.phtml?id=090908_12
9800GT

http://www.gamesetwatch.com/2008/09/the_remo_files_the_crysis_warh.php
9800GT

Starting to see a pattern here? You NEED a 9800GT or better to pull DECENT performance from this game. Period. End of story. Again I hand you your clue.
Click to expand...
what is wrong with you? it wasnt him that said he should be able to run enthusiast setting. the only thing he said was that he had to run mainstream settings so your making your point to the WRONG person.

Timbowens said:
It's raping my 8800gt.....RAPING it.

I had to go to 1280 x 1024 and mainstream setting to get it to be playable.

Bah humbug.
Click to expand...
 
I wish I would have read this thread before buying this game off of steam. Runs worse than Crysis for me as well. 1680x1050 at mainstream is about as high of details settings I can run of my 8800GTX / QX6700@3.0Ghz. I am running Vista 64 as well, with 4GB's of ram. If I raise the detail settings to gamer, I get framerates in the low 20's. Enthusiast settings bring things down to mid to low teens. I wonder why Crytek removed the 64bit exe? I used to get framerates and sharper textures running the Crysis with this version of the executable. I wonder if they will add this back witha future patch? Anyways, the game is going to sit on my drive until my next hardware upgrade, it's just not visually enjoyable as is on mainstream settings.

Bah.
 
Í'm sorry to hear that everyone is having so much trouble and that the performance disappoints. Reading those reviews from different sites I really was excited to hear performance had improved in comparison with Crysis.

I wasn't able to test the game on my computer with an HD 4850 as the harddisk decided to give trouble yesterday when starting up. But reading everyone's comments doesn't make me very optimistic though. I hope that at least I'll be able to set Textures/Shaders/Water/Motion Blur on "Gamer" and Shadows/Object Quality on "Mainstream". I'm willing to put the rest on "Minimum". (1280x1024)



I have installed the game on a second computer with a 7600 GT. From the short amount of time that I have played, I did get better performance and smoothness out of it in comparison with the orginal Crysis on that system. (Everything minimum, except Shaders/Water/Motion Blur on "Gamer" and Shadows/Object Quality on "Mainstream" on 800x600) I've been enjoying the part I played and it still looks great IMHO. I really do want to play the game on my main system though, but I get the impression Crysis really dislikes AMD cards. * sigh*
 
Performance did improve. If you run everything on high you get awesome fps. my 8800gtx at full res with high everything except water and shadows NO AA is pushing out avg 30fps. Smooth compared to the 18 i was getting with the first crysis. Also, my buddy built one of those crysis 600 dollar machines except he used the 9800gtx he is pumping 30+. Yes its not full everything, and it doesn’t have to be. Thats what makes this game awesome. Warhead really is running better, especially online.
 
think about it guys, nobody could run very high smooth and now we can.. Thats got to be an huge improvement.
 
maudio3 said:
think about it guys, nobody could run very high smooth and now we can.. Thats got to be an huge improvement.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but it's not really the same. Texture pop-in is ridiculous. There's also a very strange "fuzziness" to the whole deal. I would also bet that the environments and geometry have been simplified.

Congrats to the whiners, you sure made things better!
 
I find it amusing that anyone thought they could run this game with anything less than a current gen card and have it look decent :)
 
mastercheeze said:
Yeah, but it's not really the same. Texture pop-in is ridiculous. There's also a very strange "fuzziness" to the whole deal. I would also bet that the environments and geometry have been simplified.

Congrats to the whiners, you sure made things better!
Click to expand...
yeah the pop in shit seems much worse and is quite irritating because it kills any since of immersion. yeah the graphics look way worse in places especially the foliage. also whats up the brown tint?
 
Same here.. Warhead runs worse than the original Crysis. And sad thing is, I had a 8600GT when I played through the original, which is 2X worse than the HD4670 I have now. I wonder if it is a 64-bit issue.

Also: weird thing is, if I turn all settings down to mainstream it barely affects my FPS. Going from Gamer to Mainstream I gain maybe 5-10FPS.
 
x3sphere said:
Same here.. Warhead runs worse than the original Crysis. And sad thing is, I had a 8600GT when I played through the original, which is 2X worse than the HD4670 I have now. I wonder if it is a 64-bit issue.

Also: weird thing is, if I turn all settings down to mainstream it barely affects my FPS. Going from Gamer to Mainstream I gain maybe 5-10FPS.
Click to expand...
5-10fps is pretty big with a card like the 4670 so I see no reason to complain there. other than that it appears the Warhead runs worse on ATI cards. I think I may just get an 8800gt or 9600gt instead of the cheaper 4670 I was planning on getting. I really hate to reward Nvidia though for what seems to be butchering of ATI on this game. I would like to hear from more ATI users first though.
 
Game runs great on my ATI card and btw TeamTIA is addicting!
Its kinda like UT3 meets Crysis. They may have not optimized the single player as much as they should've but they optimized the crap out of Multiplayer.
I haven't seen anything that supports people claiming Warhead runs worse then Crysis take what people say here that have less then a 4870 or GT260 with a huge bag of salt. Game is smoother and runs better than the original. Crytek lied again but it runs great on those cards and higher. I posted benchmarks and screenies in few of the other dozen threads already made. Too much QQ not enough pewpew in this thread.
f_Crysis20080m_311ad78.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top