Crysis and UT3 tank

[Axulciex]

40 FPS in everything but the most hectic gunfights and 25-30 FPS during the boss battle (this was a noticeable drop, but with a noticeable reason).

I'm NOT running it on DX10, i'm using cvar tweaks to enable very high graphics on DX9 which may be where the performance boost is coming in, I don't have vista hogging up a load more resources.

And I assure you, every setting was as high as I could get it except antialiasing, where i settled for 8XQFSAA.

At the other end of the spectrum, my housemate's pc is woefully dated and he can run it at 30FPS average on custom graphics settings with most in the medium range. I think he's running an athlon XP 2600, radeon x100 pro with 1 ig of RAM and he's running it well enough to enjoy it. So yes, i'd say a £300 / $600 pc would run it pretty well.

These are benchmarks running the exact same system as you but with two GTX's in sli.
WinXP service pack 2, Dx9 Very high all settings. 1600x1200 8XQFSAA. Driver revision 169.13(best for crysis)

GPU TEST
Average FPS: 21.18
Min FPS: 9.93
Max FPS: 25.57

CPU TEST
Average FPS: 19.76
Min FPS: 7.88
Max FPS: 26.54

the tests are located in the bin32 folder of crysis

You might not be running an fps counter and 40fps is just a generous assumption; because I can say with great confidence your not getting it. I'm not just basing this on my results, but every result posted on the incrysis.com forums. 8xAA is complete overkill for that resolution and I assume an average size monitor, I'm not sure I believe your running it.

 

[Axulciex]

First off: "you're" and "your" - learn the difference.

Secondly: I'm using the FRAPS framerate counter which, while not 100% accurate, would not DOUBLE the percieved FPS.

I'll learn to use grammar and spelling when you stop lying about your crysis performance.
Well its clear now your not oblivious, you claim to have a framerate counter.
A tri-sli setup with 3 ultras will get a max of 37fps in very high 1900x1200 1xaa 4xAF, higher resolutions run alot faster than loads of AA by the way.

This is the same debate.
http://www.incrysis.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=16488

Maybe you've exaggerated some areas; like running all settings very high not custom, and running 8xAA. Performance like this at almost equal visual quality is completely possible with some smart tweaking. But theres no point sticking to your guns, don't be stubborn.
I don't want to push this out of the realm of civil debate so I'll just close it on the point that I'll never believe you, so don't bother backing your story up.

Sorry for the hostility's man, forums suck.

 

[McMo0^]

Skip to the end to ingnore the rambling

crysis was... fun, but it wasn't breathtaking. I'm runnin a q6600 and a 8800gts 320, and before the megatechs go lol that card is the worst of the 8800's i'm aware of that, i bought it when it was the midrange card in the series. Anyways, i suppose we should've learned the lesson from farcry, woo pretty, but my god it felt like it took me a long time before i could play it on high settings with a decent res. Crysis plays... ok on mine providing i tweak the settings a fair bit, but i have to be honest, even on the very high settings, this game doesn't look mind blowing. Cod 4 for me was an outrageously pretty game, and although it didn't do as much as crysis, it took nowhere near as much power. when the 9800's come out, i'll play it through again, but i have to be honest, some of the things that seemed to make the demo of the game really cool, weren't really available in the full game, by the second level, the koreans were organised as opposed to all fearing idiots. and the "free movement" was vastly restriced by land mines, which you could shoot and activate, cept then your position was given away, and the alarms were sounded... so much for stealth.

Zero-g level was a big let down, I never really felt anti gravity, maybe cos the suit seemed to make up for my lack of natural zero-g skill... it just annoyed me that the phsyics still felt out of place...

UT3's cool and all but its basically just another ut game. I enjoyed it, but UT2k4 is like cs 1.6 next to source, it just isn't the same, and it never will be, people really do seem to need a new game to be the same old game, and yet would moan if they'd just paid for the same game...

orange box and cod 4 have been the real fps successes for me this year, all 3 games new in the orange box made me chuckle, sit there in awe, and generally have a great time playing. And cod 4 has restored my faith in online shooters, the ones i've been playing the last couple of years have gotten really repetetive really quickly, while this still feels fresh to me. probably because it is though.

IN CONCLUSION:

Crysis was a techdemo that didn't really impress technically, and needed to much power.

UT3 wasn't UT2k4 but wasn't different enough to set itself apart

Go for orange box or cod 4 as they seem to be the years woot games

 

[Axulciex]

Dude, you can throw numbers at me 'till you're blue in the face, I don't care.

I know what performance I get, nothing you post on a forum is going to change the little yellow counter on my screen.

haha, I want to let this go but I just can't let you get away with it. damn anonymity turning me into a dick.
Theres nothing else I can do but throw numbers at you, we're talking numbers. now its just who gets the last word war.

You sure do know what performance you get, and its not 40fps at 1600x1200 VH 8xqAA
This is pointless though your not going to admit it no matter how much I *****.
Coming up next: falsified benchmarks.

 

[Axulciex]

You're quoting numbers from other people. Untill you try it youself, you argument is invalid. I can throw all kinds of numbers around, doesn't mean they're right.

God I love troll baiting.

Eh? that first benchmark was run on my computer haha. I did it especially for you
This is fun. You don't have any numbers to back up anything and I've already sent you my own results and a 3rd party opinion.

Well man I'm off to bed enjoy being full of shit.

 

[Jack Sheehan]

I run one of the most laughably awful pcs ever and i was still able to play hl2. If i tried to play crysis I'm sure i'd cause some sort of resonance cascade in the space time continuum.

 

[Chis]

People give me flack for this, but I really think the graphics of Bloodrayne2 were sufficient for modern gameplay.

That's interesting, I'd pretty much agree. BR2 has, visually, aged pretty well. However, I didn't get to play it until last year and found its utterly simplistic gameplay immediately boring (and yes, I'm one of those nerds that like vamp girls - Vampire Bloodlines was an immensely superior game which also still happens to look great, despite the occasionally iffy textures).

Compare that to something like Quake 3: visually it hasn't aged quite so well - though, certainly it looks far better to Q1 or Q2, and from a design standpoint I still admire its unique, pseudo-gothic-tinged sci-fi look. The gameplay on the other hand - whether you can stand deathmatch or not - is widely regarded to be the most solid and satisfying in its field.

Edit: For the record, I received Q3 AND UT'99 for that Christmas and dosed heavily on both games.

 

[the_carrot]

People give me flack for this, but I really think the graphics of Bloodrayne2 were sufficient for modern gameplay.

That's interesting, I'd pretty much agree. BR2 has, visually, aged pretty well. However, I didn't get to play it until last year and found its utterly simplistic gameplay immediately boring (and yes, I'm one of those nerds that like vamp girls - Vampire Bloodlines was an immensely superior game which also still happens to look great, despite the occasionally iffy textures).

Compare that to something like Quake 3: visually it hasn't aged quite so well - though, certainly it looks far better to Q1 or Q2, and from a design standpoint I still admire its unique, pseudo-gothic-tinged sci-fi look. The gameplay on the other hand - whether you can stand deathmatch or not - is widely regarded to be the most solid and satisfying in its field.

Edit: For the record, I received Q3 AND UT'99 for that Christmas and dosed heavily on both games.

I agree with you about the gameplay completely. But I actually like the graphics in that game. I think they're great for modern purposes.

 

[Chis]

but his rig (Q6600 and 8500 GT) can only play it at Low settings

If he were to replace his graphics card with an 8600GTS or a 8800GT, it would play just fine at medium to high. Just don't go mad on the resolution. A Q6600 is quite sufficient to play Crysis (hell I'm using an E2160 albeit OC'd to 2.7GHz), but the game MUNCHES GPU like it has a wasting illness (Copyright Yahtzee).

(especially Epic, talentless bastards)

That is just bollocks. I'm not fond of the whole uber-macho look of the characters in UT3 or GoW either, but if you can't see the quality of design, texturing and map making they put into their games, you must be fucking blind. Disclaimer: I used to be a UT2K4 Onslaught fanatic, but otherwise am not into Unreal at all.

i mean seriously who can say that CoD4's ending was bad, it wasn't amazing

Yes it was. Especially when you *SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER* get to fire the final shots. Seriously, I think the 6-8 hours of CoD4 eclipse all of Half-Life 1/2/Eps, if only for plot. But I'd agree that the whole "push through a set of repeatedly respawning troopers" aspect of the gameplay starts to grate after a while.

Yet another edit: Am I the only one for whom the ending of UT3's single player campaign brings to mind the ending of Blake's 7? Now THERE was some good sci-fi...

 

[Axulciex]

Nighty night troll.

I love the impotent rage of forum users. Unless he physically comes to my flat and looks at my system running the game, there's no way this can be proven beyond doubt either way. Results can be falsified and screenshots altered, so no matter what he tried, nothing will prove or disprove me.

He seems like the kind of asshole who'd try though.

Morning people. Its actually pretty easy to prove that crysis can't run in those settings on that system at that framerate. On the other hand its hard to prove your computer is magical, and no I can't prove its not from all the way here in Australia. Hahah, you got me right. Damn strait if I lived over there I would come to your flat and look at your system, I would even bring my Cvar configs and check all your shit. Go on and bluff me.
I think we've gotten to the point where we can see you don't believe yourself and started to get personal, thats fine. Call me whatever you want I love it.

I wouldn't push this if it were any other issue, trolling or whatever you call it. I just have very strong principals regarding blatant bullshit, can't help myself.
You don't seem to be up for a debate, stick to your first story long enough and everyone will believe you right? Go ahead and laugh to yourself, its a lie too.

This is great fun I'm up for more.

 

[Axulciex]

OMG I'M RITE UR RONG LULZ I WIN THE ARGOOMUNT!!

haha, theres no way to win this argument, as I admitted I can't prove your computer isn't a strange magical anomaly.
All systems are different, but no subtle differences are going to give you impossible performance.

EDIT: I just tried running the 8xqAA from the nvidia control panel and turned Vsync off.
instead of running AA from the in game config.

GPU TEST
Average FPS: 33.09
Min FPS: 9.55
Max FPS: 43.13

CPU TEST
Average FPS: 32.33
Min FPS: 7.43
Max FPS: 45.15

This got me curious, so I tried running the same test with and without the forced 8xqAA (1650x1050)

Forced 8xqaa
GPU TEST
Average FPS: 31.52
Min FPS: 9.95
Max FPS: 45.23
No AA
GPU TEST
Average FPS: 31.53
Min FPS: 8.41
Max FPS: 45.38

Theres no performance hit, which means the forced AA isn't actually working.
Now this makes sense, I owe you an apology for being a dick, but I wasn't wrong.
I wouldn't have bothered if you had claimed 1600x1200 VH noAA, it seems strange to use control panel to force a feature thats included in game; so it didn't come into my assumptions.
Any real AA in Crysis results in a huge performance hit, try it.

Allthough this is running on two video cards, your performance has become more plausible.
Theres roughly a 10-15 fps increase for sli, you would have had to superclock your card to melting point to get a 40fps average. But I would believe a high of 40 when nothing is going on.

Run the tests and post your results.

 

[Vigormortis]

(especially Epic, talentless bastards)

That is just bollocks. I'm not fond of the whole uber-macho look of the characters in UT3 or GoW either, but if you can't see the quality of design, texturing and map making they put into their games, you must be fucking blind. Disclaimer: I used to be a UT2K4 Onslaught fanatic, but otherwise am not into Unreal at all.

i mean seriously who can say that CoD4's ending was bad, it wasn't amazing

Yes it was. Especially when you *SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER* get to fire the final shots. Seriously, I think the 6-8 hours of CoD4 eclipse all of Half-Life 1/2/Eps, if only for plot. But I'd agree that the whole "push through a set of repeatedly respawning troopers" aspect of the gameplay starts to grate after a while.

The only "quality" I've EVER seen in an Epic game came from the modding community, not Epic. Their level designs, except for a scant few maps, are tired and repetitive. The only thing they've ever excelled at was making game engines (and they've failed at that too with Unreal Engine 3). As for saying COD 4 has a better plot than the Half-Life series as a whole is just ludicrious. That's like saying Battlefield 2 has a better and more narrative plot than Bioshock or that Quake 3 is a better narrative than Deus Ex. You yourself even say the gameplay of COD 4 "begins to grate". I'm not knocking COD4, it's the first COD I've actually enjoyed playing. Yet I just can't see any justification in your claim. You say my words are "bollocks"? Lmao. In the end though, it's all a matter of taste. One man's trash is another man's treasure.

On a side note, I did love playing Onslaught in UT2k4 at LANS, but that's about it.

 

[burnin8r]

ok so UT3 officially went gold before it was released and now the PS3 version has gone gold as well...

thats still considered tanking, right ?

 

[TheHound]

Going Gold in the gaming buissness means a gold master copy was sent for production.

EDIT: Well Obviously not a solid gold disc that would be stupid and expensive. Maybe like some sort of diamond disc though.