How long before playing Crysis Warhead at 60fps constant at 1920x1200

I don't understand the 'poorly optimised' claims either. It scales extremely well. I can play Crysis on my computer (specs in signature) with everything on Medium/High...yeah the resolution is low, but it still indicates that weaker computers can handle the game and provide a fun experience. I've certainly had a ball with it, even without 1920x1200, Direct X 10 and three dual-GPU cards in my PC.
 
I can run it pretty much maxed out and get 30fps or so which is fine for crysis, it was an O.K game as well bar crytek not realising rubbish plots with Mutants/aliens do not work.

Still, I recently decided to load it up with the AIgnoreplayer command enabled and just went for a walk, really is a pretty game.

However, seeing as my parents won a 1080P 50" lCD a while ago I decided to humph my comp over and set it up to show them what their TV could do as they still used SD channels. Needless to say they weren't that impressed. To alot of gamers crysis is still the benchmark of gaming in many ways, to old people who never grew up with games, it's just not that interesting.
 
Plague_Injected said:
I don't understand the 'poorly optimised' claims either. It scales extremely well. I can play Crysis on my computer (specs in signature) with everything on Medium/High...yeah the resolution is low, but it still indicates that weaker computers can handle the game and provide a fun experience. I've certainly had a ball with it, even without 1920x1200, Direct X 10 and three dual-GPU cards in my PC.
Click to expand...

Personally I think Crysis looks like crap on lower end machines. You can play it, sure, but on a mid-ranged PC Far Cry 2 and even COD4 will look better and run smoother. Crysis only looks better than the competitors when run on an uber machine, even though I dont like the look of Warhead maxed out because the filters look ugly (too much SSAO makes everything look grainy).
 
Tudz said:
Personally I think Crysis looks like crap on lower end machines. You can play it, sure, but on a mid-ranged PC Far Cry 2 and even COD4 will look better and run smoother. Crysis only looks better than the competitors when run on an uber machine, even though I dont like the look of Warhead maxed out because the filters look ugly (too much SSAO makes everything look grainy).
Click to expand...

no, Crysis on High run on mid range machine smoothly, and its far more better than Far Cry 2 and CoD 4....

not mentioning Medium Setting still looks very good...
 
MANIST said:
Ive had Crysis and Warhead and just now finished them from start to finish. I have to say im the type of person that wouldnt play these until I could max them out on enthusiast settings at 1080P.
On warhead I average 40-45+fps jungle 80-100+fps indoors through the entire game using a heavily volt modded and watercooled pair of gtx 285's.
I had everything set to enthusiast and running 8xAA and also using DirectX-10, i never saw the minimum fps go below 35fps entire game.
Heres the kicker though>
I had to pump 780mhz core and 2950mhz-vram on both of these 285's and it was 100% stable and one of the most jaw dropping visual/fun games Ive played in years. Also running the q9550 at 3900mhz helped push those cards, and set pci-e to 125mhz made a noticable difference.

On the otherhand Original Crysis on DX10 1920x1080p maxed in game settings im only able to get 40-45fps average by using 4xAA instead of 8xAA like warhead.

Even in the ice levels on both games it would not drop my fps's. When I ran two 850mhz+core 9800GTX+'s in SLI It would destroy my minimum FPS's down in the 10-15's at only 2xAA. On the single 285 it became playable but minimum's killed it also, added a 2nd 285 and we started to get somewhere. Then Watercool (load temps's at 30-35celcius) and pump 1.28v through them (courtesy of Xtremesystems volt guide) at 780mhz core and this game just rocks never having a bad game experience. I feel 30fps average is a little sluggish feeling in this game but once I broke the 40-45fps average its perfect and probably feels no faster at 60fps.

Also if you guys complain about crysis beating your systems in, give cryostatsis a try and watch your SLI rigs come back with there tail between there legs. I dont want to here how this game is poorly coded also cause look at it closer on how much damn Ice and particles are everywhere. Poor 285's on cryostasis is why I have a 3rd 285 waiting for the proper motherboard.


Manist
Click to expand...

That is the solution indeed. Get another GTX285 and get that extra 5 fps gain. Your minimum fps will still be in the 30s regardless of tri sli or quad fire, don't matter what your cards are if you are running 1920x1200, max AA, max AF, max settings, crysis will kill your system. You will lessen the lag though, and that is definitely worth the extra $300 IMHO. It is an enthusiast game and therefore it is necessary to have an uber / enthusiast system. I love the foliage in crysis, it's just too bad the chinese guys and characters in crysis are horrendous and don't have much detail in them. Hopefully that will improve with Crysis 2.:cool:
 
PS3 said:
That is the solution indeed. Get another GTX285 and get that extra 5 fps gain. Your minimum fps will still be in the 30s regardless of tri sli or quad fire, don't matter what your cards are if you are running 1920x1200, max AA, max AF, max settings, crysis will kill your system. You will lessen the lag though, and that is definitely worth the extra $300 IMHO. It is an enthusiast game and therefore it is necessary to have an uber / enthusiast system. I love the foliage in crysis, it's just too bad the chinese guys and characters in crysis are horrendous and don't have much detail in them. Hopefully that will improve with Crysis 2.:cool:
Click to expand...

it was originally chinese, but later was change to North Korean... :p

Kind of disappointed when they change it :(
 
I wouldnt have scored a third GTX285 at full price since I know its going to only gain me a whopping 5fps :rolleyes:. Bestbuy had the BFG GTX 285 OC edition that was factory clocked to high on the shader causing bad artifacting so they dumped the 4 they had in stock for only $240 a piece :D Lisbon Ohio store if anyone wants to try and snag one. I totaly would not have bought a 3rd card for the 5fps gain but more of I LOVE 3DMARK and live on xtremesystems.org fanboy. In reality its no different than slapping nitrous and a turbo on a car, its fun and I enjoy seeing raw power in anything :)
Really main reason on not reselling this card after flashing a factory reference bios over to it is because I want to se cryostasis run maxed out. Im OCD compolsive on things like this so It kills me to not run cryostasis/crysis/farcry whatever maxed out.
Thanks for compliments on my pc also :D
 
MANIST said:
Ive had Crysis and Warhead and just now finished them from start to finish. I have to say im the type of person that wouldnt play these until I could max them out on enthusiast settings at 1080P.
On warhead I average 40-45+fps jungle 80-100+fps indoors through the entire game using a heavily volt modded and watercooled pair of gtx 285's.
I had everything set to enthusiast and running 8xAA and also using DirectX-10, i never saw the minimum fps go below 35fps entire game.
Heres the kicker though>
I had to pump 780mhz core and 2950mhz-vram on both of these 285's and it was 100% stable and one of the most jaw dropping visual/fun games Ive played in years. Also running the q9550 at 3900mhz helped push those cards, and set pci-e to 125mhz made a noticable difference.

On the otherhand Original Crysis on DX10 1920x1080p maxed in game settings im only able to get 40-45fps average by using 4xAA instead of 8xAA like warhead.

Even in the ice levels on both games it would not drop my fps's. When I ran two 850mhz+core 9800GTX+'s in SLI It would destroy my minimum FPS's down in the 10-15's at only 2xAA. On the single 285 it became playable but minimum's killed it also, added a 2nd 285 and we started to get somewhere. Then Watercool (load temps's at 30-35celcius) and pump 1.28v through them (courtesy of Xtremesystems volt guide) at 780mhz core and this game just rocks never having a bad game experience. I feel 30fps average is a little sluggish feeling in this game but once I broke the 40-45fps average its perfect and probably feels no faster at 60fps.

Also if you guys complain about crysis beating your systems in, give cryostatsis a try and watch your SLI rigs come back with there tail between there legs. I dont want to here how this game is poorly coded also cause look at it closer on how much damn Ice and particles are everywhere. Poor 285's on cryostasis is why I have a 3rd 285 waiting for the proper motherboard.


Manist
Click to expand...

I'm surprised that with your insane system specs you're not running an i7/x58. While it's no improvement over C2D/Quad in most situations, the one place where it's definitely shown legroom is with SLI setups. I don't know if if that's true at 8xAA, but I think I've seen graphs illustrating its SLI performance improvement at 2xAA and 19x12.
 
I also remember the original farcry. that game worked well, but to crank it up i had to get much newer hardware than what was around in those days. my first system to play it was athlon xp1800 and radeon 9000. that game never came to life for me till i got my 8800gts and a core 2 as well as patching the game. i can see crysis running good in the next year...
 
I dont feel that the i7 platform will be a huge jump in performance for what I do with this thing. I would rather spend the money that would go to a new motherboard, cpu, and ddr3 just for a little upgrade in speed for a custom phase change cooling system for what I have now. I feel that if I can scale my q9550 to 4500mhz+ on a home built phase change or some water chiller like I have built for my 285's Its more educational to me per dollar spent. Then in the future move my custom cooling unit over to whatever platform is coming after i7. I wouldnt say no to a i7 rig at all but the money to change my already cherry picked ddr2 and countless cpu's I have tested is not quantifiable.
Lets see here:
new i7 cpu $200+
new mb for it $200+
ddr3 at least a $100+

going to a 24/7 home built phase unit for $400-600=much more fun per dollar and its reusable on multiple cpu's. :p

Im a mullet camaro/transam gear head my entire 28 years of life so modding this stuff is more fun than throwing money at it to gain performance. Do you guys remember drooling over the vaporchill system Hardocp did that review on? Thanks goodness for family members that are HVAC heads so I can build this thing in the garage instead of plunking a $1000 down on a vapochill.
 
The original farcry brings back memorys of running for the nearest 6800vanilla agp cards and modding the guts out of them. Getting home and running the shader model 3 patch on it and watching all the beautiful water effects and foilage come to life. I remember going through 4 of those damn vanilla's until I found one that would unlock all 16 pixel shaders and run 425+core. I had more fun with those 6800's than any other nvidia/ati card I have come across and were decent priced for the performance over the 9800radeon's or those dreaded FX5700ultra's. Easy as pie to pump 1.5volts through them and slap a NV5 cooler and you had some evil power then. Still best hardware upgrade was running original non steam Half life on a rage fury then moving to a hercules geforce 2 gts and just having the hair on your arms standup from shear creepiness of that game :D
 
Anyone commenting on the AI or textures should check out the mods addressing both: Advanced AI and HiRes Texture pack (both Crysis and Warhead).
 
Crysis will be maxed in 2012.
Obama will be reelected.

All hell will break loose.
 
yaya, sli that baby and you can do max settings ! lunatic left a review on there that he played far cry 2 fine with it as well :)
 
MANIST said:
I dont feel that the i7 platform will be a huge jump in performance for what I do with this thing. I would rather spend the money that would go to a new motherboard, cpu, and ddr3 just for a little upgrade in speed for a custom phase change cooling system for what I have now. I feel that if I can scale my q9550 to 4500mhz+ on a home built phase change or some water chiller like I have built for my 285's Its more educational to me per dollar spent. Then in the future move my custom cooling unit over to whatever platform is coming after i7. I wouldnt say no to a i7 rig at all but the money to change my already cherry picked ddr2 and countless cpu's I have tested is not quantifiable.
Lets see here:
new i7 cpu $200+
new mb for it $200+
ddr3 at least a $100+

going to a 24/7 home built phase unit for $400-600=much more fun per dollar and its reusable on multiple cpu's. :p

Im a mullet camaro/transam gear head my entire 28 years of life so modding this stuff is more fun than throwing money at it to gain performance. Do you guys remember drooling over the vaporchill system Hardocp did that review on? Thanks goodness for family members that are HVAC heads so I can build this thing in the garage instead of plunking a $1000 down on a vapochill.
Click to expand...

i7 is only worth it if you go tri sli. Make sure to Raid SSD drives to truly benefit from that type of system :D. Mean while I'm stuck with my ps3, but I will upgrade and post in this thread once a rig is capable of playing crysis maxed at 60fps average at 1080p / max AA/AF.

/thread
 
PS3 said:
i7 is only worth it if you go tri sli. Make sure to Raid SSD drives to truly benefit from that type of system :D. Mean while I'm stuck with my ps3, but I will upgrade and post in this thread once a rig is capable of playing crysis maxed at 60fps average at 1080p / max AA/AF.

/thread
Click to expand...

PS3 is not a option here. the hardware is a complete crap compare to PC. And there is no AA/AF to begin with on console...

btw, my rig already running at 30-40fps on 4xAA/8xAA in Crysis, I really dont think it is that far from 60fps. Also, the game is completely smooth in 40fps, you can never tell a difference between 40-60 in Crysis...cuz motion blur takes over it...
 
I play at 1080p with everything maxed with my 285 ssc. I enabled triple buffered v-sync and everything is smooth as silk. I haven't bothered to bench my fps in a long time because it's not really relevant with Crysis as shansoft pointed out. If you're interested in testing, that's one thing. But if you're interested in playing with full eye candy enabled, the technology already exists :)
 
MANIST said:
The original farcry brings back memorys of running for the nearest 6800vanilla agp cards and modding the guts out of them. Getting home and running the shader model 3 patch on it and watching all the beautiful water effects and foilage come to life. I remember going through 4 of those damn vanilla's until I found one that would unlock all 16 pixel shaders and run 425+core. I had more fun with those 6800's than any other nvidia/ati card I have come across and were decent priced for the performance over the 9800radeon's or those dreaded FX5700ultra's. Easy as pie to pump 1.5volts through them and slap a NV5 cooler and you had some evil power then. Still best hardware upgrade was running original non steam Half life on a rage fury then moving to a hercules geforce 2 gts and just having the hair on your arms standup from shear creepiness of that game :D
Click to expand...

+1 on the 6800!
I had a 6800le that with some extra volts I opened up the whole can of worms, all the shaders/pipes and still OC'd pretty good!
 
as much as id like to have a video card with 4gb of ram, we're limited to a card with 2gb thats actually meant for gaming... good try though :)
 
Smiththers2 said:
as much as id like to have a video card with 4gb of ram, we're limited to a card with 2gb thats actually meant for gaming... good try though :)
Click to expand...

Really?? Damn, I was so hopeful that the $4,000 video card (x2 for SLI) was going to run Crysis wonderfully :confused:
 
PS3 said:
Will the next gen video cards be able to do this, or perhaps the next next gen. This game has been out for quite some time and it's sad to see you can't play it without dropping below 60fps yet, even with all these monster dual gpu cards out. :(
Click to expand...

never, thats how it is. you think that in a year or two you will be able to play it like that but it was made in a way that you will not be able to.

its the same thing with gta4, you'll never be able to play it at 100fps at a decent resolution on your 36 westy because the makers of it fucked it up:rolleyes:
 
Hulk said:
you'll never be able to play it at 100fps at a decent resolution on your 36 westy because the makers of it fucked it up:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I don't have a westy. And proof that the makers "f*ed it up?" Crysis is probably the most optimized game to ever be released on the pc.
 
I don't know when it will happen but for everyone who says that the game is messed up, just take a look at how crappy the game played when it first came out on then hardware and compare it to how much better it plays now on newer hardware. It don't look like messed up code to me, it's just a matter of hardware catching up to it for it to play to the max and get great fps.
Just my .002 cents.
 
I think the 5870x2 will do it...with some good drivers that is.Didn't the 4870x2 come close to doing it?
 
By the time you can play crysis and it's itterations at 100fps all maxed out noone will care anymore.
 
I don't think it'll happen until the generation after the next. Its already been a few generations and still no 100fps lol.
 
Conker said:
I don't think it'll happen until the generation after the next. Its already been a few generations and still no 100fps lol.
Click to expand...

last generation is complete shit ..

when 8800 GTX stay on top of the card for 2 years, that mean is something is ultimately wrong... :rolleyes:

its not the game, but the card makers....
 
I remember back when F.E.A.R. was the "Crysis" of its day (as in, it was THE graphics benchmark of the time). F.E.A.R. was conquered by the Geforce 8 series, the 8800GT being the mid-range card to let you max out all settings and maintain 60fps (it did for me at least).

F.E.A.R. was released October 17, 2005.

8800GT came out on October 29, 2007. Almost exactly two years.

Crysis came out on November 13, 2007. So, probably we'll get a card capable of conquering it at around December of this year or January of 2010, which is pretty much to when Nvidia's GT300 is supposed to hit. I'm not putting much hope in AMD's HD5000 series doing the job, since based on what I've researched, its just the HD4000 series with DirectX 11 capability stapled on.
 
King of Heroes said:
I remember back when F.E.A.R. was the "Crysis" of its day (as in, it was THE graphics benchmark of the time). F.E.A.R. was conquered by the Geforce 8 series, the 8800GT being the mid-range card to let you max out all settings and maintain 60fps (it did for me at least).

F.E.A.R. was released October 17, 2005.

8800GT came out on October 29, 2007. Almost exactly two years.

Crysis came out on November 13, 2007. So, probably we'll get a card capable of conquering it at around December of this year or January of 2010, which is pretty much to when Nvidia's GT300 is supposed to hit. I'm not putting much hope in AMD's HD5000 series doing the job, since based on what I've researched, its just the HD4000 series with DirectX 11 capability stapled on.
Click to expand...

5000 series will not be 4000 series with DX11, no idea where you got that from, but most likely not going to be that way...

overall, GT 300 does sounds really good, and it "SEEM" to have a huge performance improe, but there isn't any evidence or benchmark to back that up..
 
MurderCityDevil said:
it's hard for me to believe that very many people care now, much less another year from now
Click to expand...

I'm holding off playing Warhead 'til W7 and I put together my tri-SLI system, whenever the new cards come out...

Maybe then I'll check out the FEAR series as well...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top