# So, whos upset about Crysis.....



## HookeyStreet (Oct 27, 2007)

.....not running as well as they hoped on their rigs? 

The game looks and plays incredible, but FFS, what kind of system will it take to run it totally maxed out!?

Also, hows it running for the SLi/CrossFire enabled users?


----------



## Ben Clarke (Oct 27, 2007)

I'm happy! I though I'd get 2 FE30S... I'm getting 6FPS!


----------



## Morgoth (Oct 27, 2007)

how can i see my fps in crysis i do like to sheck it out


----------



## Airbrushkid (Oct 27, 2007)

All along they said it was a game for future hardware. But no one ever listens. All I hear is wining about low rates. What did you expect. They said it.


----------



## Airbrushkid (Oct 27, 2007)

Use Fraps.




Morgoth said:


> how can i see my fps in crysis i do like to sheck it out


----------



## mandelore (Oct 27, 2007)

i am running it 1920x1200 with settings maxed out, lowish fps, but suppose ill have to0 drop the settings a bit if i want to play at that high a rez, plus i didnt overclock my card, just stock atm. looks great tho  

poor bloke, and talk about a rapid cremation lol


----------



## SpookyWillow (Oct 27, 2007)

Airbrushkid said:


> All along they said it was a game for future hardware. But no one ever listens. All I hear is wining about low rates. What did you expect. They said it.



exactly, far cry was exactly the same.


----------



## mandelore (Oct 27, 2007)

oh, actually i just oc'd my 2900 a fair bit and the game now runs smooth at 1920x1200 with all settings high and object detail v high 

Edit: 

it actually turned out i was playing the game while still in 2D mode LOL

all works fine now, even on a 2.9GHz opty


----------



## peach1971 (Oct 27, 2007)

> how can i see my fps in crysis i do like to sheck it out


 ATi Tray Tools does that job very fine and doesn´t suck performance.


----------



## Morgoth (Oct 27, 2007)

i get 10-25max fps  medium settings


----------



## SpookyWillow (Oct 27, 2007)

i'm quite happy with it so far,  i thought they said DX9 wouldn't get destructible stuff and day/night cycles?    i get both


----------



## Morgoth (Oct 27, 2007)

same


----------



## Ketxxx (Oct 27, 2007)

DX9 can do all that stuff easily. I think they were just feeling lazy at the time, then suddenly realised 90%+ of the market is on DX9 harware and they wouldnt sell the game for shit unless they added trhose features into DX9 mode as well.


----------



## zekrahminator (Oct 27, 2007)

My X850XT keeps everything smooth and lag-free at 1440x900 on my 4800 X2 system with 2GB of RAM  


....with everything on low .


----------



## Ben Clarke (Oct 27, 2007)

My 6FPS is from low... 

I also manaegd to rip the soundtrack from it.


----------



## mandelore (Oct 27, 2007)

Really quite impressed with how well it runs, looks fab! and so far heats my card up the most out of every game, guess thats the DX10 kicking in, my 2900 reached 56C, hottest its ever been in a game. It should be a very nice play once I upgrade the rest of my rig from this DDR1 and craptastic opty. 1920x1200, settings all high, object detail v high. smooth and enjoyable. 

They have done a great job with the visuals in the game


----------



## zekrahminator (Oct 27, 2007)

mandelore said:


> They have done a great job with the visuals in the game



Agreed, even on low settings Crysis looks like Quake 4 + physics - draw distance .


----------



## Casheti (Oct 27, 2007)

Mandelore can you post some more screenies of your DX10 masterpiece?


----------



## Darknova (Oct 27, 2007)

1280x1024 at high. 64-bit. No problems and only very occasional stuttering due to loading.


----------



## theonetruewill (Oct 27, 2007)

zekrahminator said:


> Agreed, even on low settings Crysis looks like Quake 4 + physics - draw distance .



Putting it on High makes a huge difference. Clock your X850XT @ 7874938/49867 and the game should run fine....

No but seriously now, It's good to know that it runs fine on an X850XT. Let's be honest here, the majority of people do not have an 8800GTX.


----------



## mandelore (Oct 27, 2007)

the above pic was from my first play in crysis, ill make some more but the pics are shrank by photobucket so i cant show em in 1920x1200 size. ill try the tpu image thingy, but its never worked for me

oooh, it works, ill make some more, will turn up the AA etc for some niceness


----------



## Casheti (Oct 27, 2007)

Wooooow


----------



## Chewy (Oct 27, 2007)

turning up AA killed my card lol I got lagged    BFG 8800gts OC edition @ stock.


 Edit: Im selling this though and will get me a 8800gt till the new 8800gts or prob 9800's come out. getting $300 for my 8800gts.. trough kijiji clasifieds  I could wait more and get a bit more, but I just lost $$ at the casino lol.


----------



## JacKz5o (Oct 27, 2007)

I got much better performance than I expected on my 6800GS.

1024x768 and all low settings gets me around 40FPS average 

I'm still on old 163.xx drivers, I haven't tried the beta ones yet.


----------



## mandelore (Oct 27, 2007)

ergh... the new screenies im taking are quite large....dunno if i shud just link them or post em as i have above, 2 meg/file


----------



## Disparia (Oct 27, 2007)

Not too bad... 1280x800, medium settings, playable framerate.


----------



## zekrahminator (Oct 27, 2007)

1440x900, no AA/AF, on a stock X850XT in a non-OC'd system, all settings low. 

Not bad, eh? . 

And to think I was going to sell the X850XT....


----------



## DaMulta (Oct 27, 2007)

I can't wait till I get home today/

I hope Crossfire works with the new demo.


----------



## woozers (Oct 27, 2007)

The graphics on low are... ... awesome! :O Let's see how it runs on my system.


----------



## p_o_s_pc (Oct 27, 2007)

i will let you know when i get back and out my video card back in.I hope to get higher than ben does.


----------



## EviLZeD (Oct 27, 2007)

it runs fine on my comp at 1280-1024 all settings medium if i put all settings to high it starts getting slow 25-35 fps and to low teens in combat  i woulda thought it would run slightly better 
looks amazing on high 

tried very high on everything at 800-600 it was playable


----------



## DaMulta (Oct 27, 2007)

I can't find a fast place to download this.....I wish that TPU had a separate download page for members only.


----------



## OneCool (Oct 27, 2007)

DaMulta said:


> I can't wait till I get home today/
> 
> I hope Crossfire works with the new demo.



Its broken on my setup (2 hd2900's)

But very playable with it disabled in the driver and just running a single @ 1600x1200 all on high.

Very fun


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Oct 27, 2007)

Heres mine at 1440x900 all medium,no aa/af.











Framerates low,but it seems smooth enuff,i may have to turn some more stuff down tho'


----------



## zekrahminator (Oct 27, 2007)

DaMulta said:


> I can't find a fast place to download this.....I wish that TPU had a separate download page for members only.



EA's servers seem fast enough .


----------



## Ben Clarke (Oct 27, 2007)

DaMulta, you want to download... my torrent should be going pretty fast.


----------



## mandelore (Oct 27, 2007)

WARNING: 56k-ers hide (had to resize first 2 so it was under 2meg for uploading to TPU servers)


----------



## Casheti (Oct 27, 2007)

Holy crap the depth of field is amazing in those screenies.

Such stunning graphics, I want a 2900 =[


----------



## Ketxxx (Oct 27, 2007)

I guess I'll have to get the demo an see how it runs on my puter. I bet I can get higher FPS than anyone on equiv. hardware


----------



## DaMulta (Oct 27, 2007)

OneCool said:


> Its broken on my setup (2 hd2900's)
> 
> But very playable with it disabled in the driver and just running a single @ 1600x1200 all on high.
> 
> Very fun



Did you try Super aa with adaptive off? Crossfire also wored with AI off in CCC.


----------



## DaMulta (Oct 27, 2007)

Is teh demo DX10?


----------



## mandelore (Oct 27, 2007)

DaMulta said:


> Is teh demo DX10?



it autoselected dx10 for me, so i would say both


----------



## Ketxxx (Oct 27, 2007)

It'll work in DX9. Zek is chugging along with the demo on his X850


----------



## DaMulta (Oct 27, 2007)

mandelore said:


> it autoselected dx10 for me, so i would say both



So should I go down to walmart and buy vista home?


----------



## mandelore (Oct 27, 2007)

DaMulta said:


> So should I go down to walmart and buy vista home?



No, steal it from the house next door 

it will work awsome on your new setup btw


----------



## DaMulta (Oct 27, 2007)

Should I or not?

The multiplayer demo didn't work with crossfire.


----------



## mandelore (Oct 27, 2007)

totally up to you mate, I like vista, but for some extra eye-candy in a game maybe its not worth it? we need some dx9 / dx10 screen comparisons to see if its really worth it


----------



## Ketxxx (Oct 27, 2007)

^^ I'm dling now, will post DX9 screens when its done. Currently its at... 11%...


----------



## DaMulta (Oct 27, 2007)

mandelore said:


> totally up to you mate, I like vista, but for some extra eye-candy in a game maybe its not worth it? we need some dx9 / dx10 screen comparisons to see if its really worth it



eye candy is always worth it


----------



## DaMulta (Oct 27, 2007)

O is the game fun LOL


----------



## SpookyWillow (Oct 27, 2007)

tigger69 said:


> Heres mine at 1440x900 all medium,no aa/af.
> 
> Framerates low,but it seems smooth enuff,i may have to turn some more stuff down tho'



the shaders is where its at,  to me it looks like AA is integrated into the shaders as it looked ultra smooth on high but jaggy on low.

can anyone with an x1950pro please confirm that enabling AA makes the game run at <1fps 100% of the time?


----------



## Rob! (Oct 27, 2007)

DaMulta said:


> eye candy is always worth it



Wouldn't it be a heck of a lot cheaper to get an OEM version off Newegg?  I believe with their OEM OS policy you just have to buy ANY piece of hardware, so you can buy a $5 cable or something and save $95 off the retail price.


----------



## mandelore (Oct 27, 2007)

the gameplay is nice, its pretty cool using super strength to slap people around and tear down huts like the increadible hulk


----------



## mandelore (Oct 27, 2007)

Rob! said:


> Wouldn't it be a heck of a lot cheaper to get an OEM version off Newegg?  I believe with their OEM OS policy you just have to buy ANY piece of hardware, so you can buy a $5 cable or something and save $95 off the retail price.



oh yes, deffo get an oem version if u are going for dx10.

im using the oem version of vista ultimate. and i have even installed it  so many times with diff hardware that it no longer registered with my key, one quick call to Microsoft and it was sorted. really very easy, so i have no worries about this when im changing my setup near to the new year


----------



## DaMulta (Oct 27, 2007)

Rob! said:


> Wouldn't it be a heck of a lot cheaper to get an OEM version off Newegg?  I believe with their OEM OS policy you just have to buy ANY piece of hardware, so you can buy a $5 cable or something and save $95 off the retail price.



It's 120 at walmart for perm ver

And I could have it today


----------



## OneCool (Oct 27, 2007)

DaMulta said:


> Did you try Super aa with adaptive off? Crossfire also wored with AI off in CCC.




disabling AI also disables CF


----------



## DaMulta (Oct 27, 2007)

No CF will still be on.

So I think, AI does other things I think. CF is a totally different setting.


----------



## zekrahminator (Oct 27, 2007)

I tried turning the settings up for shits and giggles. I think that Crytek got Crysis to work on SM2b cards by making a "custom" shader mode. And so, the only thing I really gain by turning up settings is a farther draw distance, since shaders and textures are locked at "custom". 

Maybe I shouldn't have sold that 2600XT... . Oh well. You can't argue with 45+ frames per second on Crysis... .


----------



## Chewy (Oct 27, 2007)

^^ that dont look half bad Zerk, some AA would help but AA in this game pwns cards! lol

 anyway got my card sold for $320 now


----------



## Casheti (Oct 27, 2007)

I have more but I didn't wanna whore up a massive page.

1280x1024 All Low Apart from Shaders on Medium.


----------



## Oliver_FF (Oct 27, 2007)

I think this is one of the first games that i've been unable to play respectably at High settings on my "old" 7900gtx.

In that respect i'm glad i have the 8800's and 2900's a miss, i'm currently waiting to see how the new cards do.


----------



## AsRock (Oct 27, 2007)

mandelore said:


> i am running it 1920x1200 with settings maxed out, lowish fps, but suppose ill have to0 drop the settings a bit if i want to play at that high a rez, plus i didnt overclock my card, just stock atm. looks great tho
> 
> poor bloke, and talk about a rapid cremation lol




Runs great on mine too.   mandelore can you have V High settings as i cannot and be leave it's due to me having a 512MB card  so can you confirm this please ?.. TY

EDIT: Changed
Res 1600x1200
Setting High \ Shader Medium which changes AA as well to off  ..
AAx2 Not tried it higher yet did not seem like it needed it.
CCC Settings.

AA App controlled
AF App controlled
Narrow Tent
Cat AI Advanced
Vert refresh disabled
AAA Smooth \ Methered Multi Sampling.




And as for the game i'm Very happy with it just wondering when i can afford to get it now lol...


----------



## AsRock (Oct 27, 2007)

SpookyWillow said:


> i'm quite happy with it so far,  i thought they said DX9 wouldn't get destructible stuff and day/night cycles?    i get both



I be leave thats online only that you do not get it.


----------



## Ketxxx (Oct 27, 2007)

zekrahminator said:


> I tried turning the settings up for shits and giggles. I think that Crytek got Crysis to work on SM2b cards by making a "custom" shader mode. And so, the only thing I really gain by turning up settings is a farther draw distance, since shaders and textures are locked at "custom".
> 
> Maybe I shouldn't have sold that 2600XT... . Oh well. You can't argue with 45+ frames per second on Crysis... .



Maybe its just me.. but that screen looks like crap. Is that supposed to be water coming off the cliff face?


----------



## JC316 (Oct 27, 2007)

In all honesty, I am not that impressed with it. The demo is heavily buggy and I don't like the way the suit functions, it's too difficult to change out abilities. The floor, or a mountian, or a box frequently vanishes into thin air.

Time Shift seems to be a much more polished game with a better suit design.

I hope that the final product is better than the demo, but so far, it seems very ordinary.


----------



## Ketxxx (Oct 27, 2007)

^ Many games rely on eyecandy these days. Look back at oblivion, without the eyecandy, its quite a boring game. Luckily there are true games like STALKER. Sure it looks a bit blocky and unrealistic vanilla, but apply some decent eyecandy and realism mods and its a work of art.


----------



## [I.R.A]_FBi (Oct 27, 2007)

plays nice ...


----------



## [I.R.A]_FBi (Oct 27, 2007)

one complaint .. too many controls ...


----------



## zekrahminator (Oct 27, 2007)

Ketxxx said:


> Maybe its just me.. but that screen looks like crap. Is that supposed to be water coming off the cliff face?



That would be the draw distance sacrifice due to me having everything on low . 


I turned everything except water quality, texture, and post-processing up to medium and BAM it's a lot better . 

Still, I know I need to get a 2900XT, a proper silent heatsink/fan, a new PSU, Vista, and possibly a new motherboard (for better OCing and space for the proper heatsink/fan I have in mind).


----------



## OneCool (Oct 27, 2007)

DaMulta said:


> No CF will still be on.
> 
> So I think, AI does other things I think. CF is a totally different setting.




Well it turns it off for me


----------



## Rob! (Oct 27, 2007)

Even on low I must say it doesnt look _too_ bad. 

Anyone play this on a 2600XT yet?


----------



## L|NK|N (Oct 27, 2007)

Im not upset about Crysis it is a beautiful game, and of course it is just a demo some more optimizations will come as no will doubt driver updates for our video cards come also.  As far as tweaking goes, you all should consider checking up on this thread (starting with post #320) at tweakguides.com.  Koroush Ghazi has started some preliminary tweaking with lots of screenshots comparing DX9 & DX10, and detail settings.  There is no doubt in my mind that he will soon have a great guide and more things to give us insight.


----------



## Ketxxx (Oct 27, 2007)

Runs good for me, everything on high, 1280*1024, avertage about 15FPS, even then it plays very smoothly. Turned shadows and something else to low (something to do with lights) and shot up to 30+FPS. However, the option that has something to do with lights currently causes horrible banding so has to be left at high quality or its like looking into thick smog. Details later, got a party to go to


----------



## Easy Rhino (Oct 27, 2007)

so what has played this in dx10 and can take screenshots???


----------



## psychomage343 (Oct 27, 2007)

To tell you all the honest truth i think the call of duty 4 demo has far better graphics then crysis, i guess it's just me but i'm very very impressed with call of duty 4 i can't wait til it comes out.  the crysis game has all teh makings of a very cool fps but none of the graphics quality, i've got my 320 8800gts at 600/950 and all settings maxed at 1280x1024 on my 2.93 4600am2 and it's great, smooth, quick not laggy at all


----------



## zekrahminator (Oct 27, 2007)

You obviously have never shot a tree down before .


----------



## L|NK|N (Oct 27, 2007)

Easy Rhino said:


> so what has played this in dx10 and can take screenshots???



Do you mean who?   Check the link in my previous post.  Koroush took screenies from the save points by using the command line to switch between DX9 & DX10.  Read up on the thread there are some good screenies.  From what I see DX10 has further draw distance, higher rez textures, and better lighting.  Check those screenies and check for yourself.


----------



## Grings (Oct 27, 2007)

It has its own benchmarks by the way (Electronic arts/crytek/crysisspdemo/bin32(or 64)/benchmark_cpu(or gpu))

sorry if anyone mentioned it already, theres loads o' crysis threads


----------



## psychomage343 (Oct 27, 2007)

i may not have shot down a tree before but um... it's not a fist tree shooter, it's a first person shooter, i didn't dl the demo to shoot down trees, it's a nice touch i just enjoy the call of duty game much better that's all, i'll give it a shot though i do think it's a sweet game i was just exceited about cod4 though it's more my type of game


----------



## Casheti (Oct 27, 2007)

The Javelin on CoD4 rox.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Oct 27, 2007)

ok just finished the crysis demo and i really liked it. a lot of fun with cool weapon and armor mods. nice control and feel and real nice graphics even with dx9 on my x1800xt. looking forward to playing the whole game and maybe even buy a dx10 card.


----------



## technicks (Oct 27, 2007)

Well i am a bit bummed out because the game just hasn't got the feel that i was hoping for.
I know it's a demo but i don't see them massively turning things around. I don't even know if they can. Overall the game looks very nice and detailed.
Tho it reminds me way to much of Farcry. Also the AI is crap, like said before shooting sucks, it's even more fun when killing with your fists. First Person Puncher would be a great new game genre. lol. 
Also i don't really like how the weapons/special powers menu works. Imo it distracts you to much from the gameplay. And to be honest i got bored with it after a few hours.
It's a shame that Fraps doesn't work because i had some hilarious moments standing 3 feet next to a enemy and he was shooting in the air. LMFAO


----------



## imperialreign (Oct 27, 2007)

meh . . . maybe I'll dl the demo once I get my rig back up and stable


----------



## technicks (Oct 27, 2007)

Don't get me wrong i like the game but it's just not wat i expected it to be after watching all the trailers and game footage.


----------



## erocker (Oct 27, 2007)

I'm just upset that the demo I downloaded from TPU is corrupt, plus I can't get RivaTuner to work with these new crysis Nvidia drivers.


----------



## walkingone (Oct 27, 2007)

Crysis plays smooth as butter on my system.  I"m using ntune to set the true aspect ration on my 1680x1050 dvi connected monitor.  I like the 1024 4:3 ration setup as I have poor side vision.   The demo was played numerous times without any hitch whatsoever.   I turned anti-aliasing off as I reallly do not need it that much since the DVI connection makes the edges look much cleaner than does VGA connection.   Can hardly wait for Crysis released!


----------



## technicks (Oct 27, 2007)

Try Ntune. Worked for me.


----------



## Morgoth (Oct 27, 2007)

is this true on multiplayer in directX 9 we cant shoot tree's down?
a friend of me told me that i dont belive him, i said it can its the engine not directX ?


----------



## Darknova (Oct 27, 2007)

Morgoth said:


> is this true on multiplayer in directX 9 we cant shoot tree's down?
> a friend of me told me that i dont belive me, i said it can its the engine not directX ?



Never tried in the multiplayer, but in the single player you can. You can even punch buildings down


----------



## zekrahminator (Oct 27, 2007)

I love the grenades in Crysis .


----------



## ntdouglas (Oct 27, 2007)

Has anybody heard if Crysis can use multiple core cpu's? I was a little disappionted auto detect put all settings on medium for me.


----------



## technicks (Oct 27, 2007)

Ditto for me. I just wacked it up to high.


----------



## mandelore (Oct 27, 2007)

Easy Rhino said:


> so what has played this in dx10 and can take screenshots???



all my pics are dx10 and @ 1920x1200  see  page 2

@ Asrock:

I turn up physics, object detail, water detail, and shadows to v high, the rest are high

Edit: oh the textures are v high too, otherwise its shit without it


----------



## ntdouglas (Oct 28, 2007)

Whats everybody getting for frames per second. With fraps I'm getting 38-58 fps. Everythying is on medium. Shadows, physics, particle and water on high. Again, does anybody know if crysis can use multi core cpu's?


----------



## SpookyWillow (Oct 28, 2007)

yes it does


----------



## Helvetica (Oct 28, 2007)

Mandelore, can you take a screenshot with it showing your FPS?

I'm getting terrible lag frame.  I have 512mb 2900XT.


----------



## mandelore (Oct 28, 2007)

My fps sorta hovers about the 30 mark, dropping to 24/25 with peeps about, but I cant allow a game to be ran in anything other than 1920x1200, its just far to mean to my monitor lol...

oh, my cpu is at 2.9GHz. I should be doing alot better once I upgrade to a phenom and some DDR2 ram, im still on ye olde DDR1 ram lol


----------



## newconroer (Oct 28, 2007)

Hah, I wish I got as excited as some of you lot about running a game in DX9 on low settings.

I wasn't even impressed with DX10 on maximum settings ;/ I knew how this would turn out, but who ever listens to reason.

In a light-hearted way, I'm laughing at all the hype mongers who built rigs with their UBER quads only to have them fall flat on their face with their precious holy grail game.


As for the driver comments... If you read the notes, 163.69 (Vista) was optimized for Crysis, so I haven't a clue what they changed for these 169.01. I rolled back to the 163.69 and gained an avg of three-four FPS.

If you have a top-end machine, don't waste your time and system compatibility(s) with 169.


----------



## DaMulta (Oct 28, 2007)

Things I do not like

1.)Does not seem to run that well, but it is my CPU I think.

I run a frame rate of 20 with settings at high NO AA

AMD FX-62
Crossfire HD 2900XT 1 GB cards
2 Gigs of DDR2 4-4-4-14
Raid-0 1TB




2.)When you shoot dead people it goes right thru them like they aren't there.




3.)The four weel drive truck will not drive over rocks. Even when it's just one tire on a small rock.





4.)The aim seems to be WAY off in this game I swear.

No this worked at first but the problem cam back....BUT I can play the game with CF with this setting
OK if you just run Crossfire with Crysis you will get images like this.

5.)I have to pick up every gun for ammo.......

6.)I can shoot down trees, but I can't shoot down plants.






The way to fix this is to go to CCC and turn on this setting.




 You can also run Super AA 16X to fix this issue as well, but that setting is used as 1 card for speed. The other card will be used for quality only.

Bam it's fixed(or so I thought)


----------



## erocker (Oct 28, 2007)

I like the fact that this game is crippling even 8800 ultras, it's about time that games take a step forward, this game deffinitely does.  I'm sure when the game is released, performance will be better than this demo.  So, now I guess I wait for a single card that runs this game.... and Phenom.


----------



## DaMulta (Oct 28, 2007)

OK you have to have temporal on for the game to work right. I am 100% sure now.







This is what you get with medium settings LOL


----------



## AsRock (Oct 28, 2007)

mandelore said:


> all my pics are dx10 and @ 1920x1200  see  page 2
> 
> @ Asrock:
> 
> ...



Very High not a option it seems with a 512MB card though. .


----------



## rick22 (Oct 28, 2007)

you have to run vista to get very high as its the DX10 part of the game


----------



## ex_reven (Oct 28, 2007)

Im upset about the fact that ive tried downloading the freaking thing from gamearena.com.au (unmetred usage  ) like 5 times and the dl keeps corrupting


----------



## DaMulta (Oct 28, 2007)

People die with their arms up in the air lol


----------



## Athlon2K15 (Oct 28, 2007)

get it from fileplant took me about an hour @ 800kb/s i think


----------



## bvillepc (Oct 28, 2007)

*Very disappointed*

I get horrible performance with Crysis demo! First, here are my specs, nothing over clocked:

CPU: Intel Quad-Core Q6600
Memory: 2GB DDR2 800 Crucial Ballistix
Video: ATI HD2900XT 1GB
Sound: Creative X-Fi Fatal1ty

Now, I'll just list out my settings with respective FPS:

Low @1280x1024: 35fps
Medium @1280x1024: 20fps
High @1280x1024: 10fps
Very High @1280x1024: 10fps

I was very disappointed by this demo as I feel I should be getting much better performance than this with my system. I get 60fps easy with the Unreal 3 demo with all settings maxed out. This Crysis demo gives me the same performance as the beta version. Now, if this is what the final game is going to be like, i sure as crap won't buy it. If Crytek doesn't intend this demo to reflect the final version's performance, then they should just call it Beta 4.


----------



## ex_reven (Oct 28, 2007)

Crysis was designed to make use of quad cores.
I think you should try overclocking to around the 3ghz mark. 

It would be interesting to see the change in performance that you get.


----------



## Behemoko (Oct 28, 2007)

bvillepc said:


> I get horrible performance with Crysis demo! First, here are my specs, nothing over clocked:
> 
> CPU: Intel Quad-Core Q6600
> Memory: 2GB DDR2 800 Crucial Ballistix
> ...



Does nobody remember Oblivion when it came out?  Sorry to be the broken record player, but..  Games are made for future hardware, and this game finally shows it, and it is the best one to do so since Oblivion came out IMO.


----------



## niko084 (Oct 28, 2007)

I'm getting around 40fps in Dx10 with a e6750 @ 3200, 2gb ram, and a 2600xt
all medium settings at 1280x1024

So all in all, I'm pretty happy it runs on that machine.... Now I just have to get a dx10 card in my main machine...


----------



## niko084 (Oct 28, 2007)

bvillepc said:


> I get horrible performance with Crysis demo! First, here are my specs, nothing over clocked:
> 
> CPU: Intel Quad-Core Q6600
> Memory: 2GB DDR2 800 Crucial Ballistix
> ...



Thats worse performance than my 2600xt.... Your machine must be running like crap!
Look into running processes, services, background programs... etc...


----------



## erocker (Oct 28, 2007)

It's very playable and pretty on high settings for me with these settings

2850mhz cpu
620gpu
935vmem

If I now can pick up someones 640mb 8800Gts for a good price I will be happy when I buy the full game.  Oh, and a new PSU i guess...


----------



## niko084 (Oct 28, 2007)

erocker said:


> It's very playable and pretty on high settings for me with these settings
> 
> 2850mhz cpu
> 620gpu
> ...



I would probably aim for a mobo,proc,ram first, then goto psu and sli.


----------



## bvillepc (Oct 28, 2007)

niko084 said:


> Thats worse performance than my 2600xt.... Your machine must be running like crap!
> Look into running processes, services, background programs... etc...



I just realized that I had AAx4 enabled in CCC, and even after putting all settings to app. preference, it only upped my performance by a little bit. So at "Very High" I get about 20fps and at "Low" I get about 45fps. Still not what I'm looking for. I also don't have anything running on my system in the background. I tried updating my DX10 to the November release, and that helped a little. I also just realized that I'm still on Catalyst 7.9, so I'll see how 7.10 does.


----------



## niko084 (Oct 28, 2007)

bvillepc said:


> I just realized that I had AAx4 enabled in CCC, and even after putting all settings to app. preference, it only upped my performance by a little bit. So at "Very High" I get about 20fps and at "Low" I get about 45fps. Still not what I'm looking for. I also don't have anything running on my system in the background. I tried updating my DX10 to the November release, and that helped a little. I also just realized that I'm still on Catalyst 7.9, so I'll see how 7.10 does.



Ya thats simply not right if you have updated drivers and such....
What resolution are you playing in?


----------



## newconroer (Oct 28, 2007)

|Does nobody remember Oblivion when it came out? Sorry to be the broken record player, but.. Games are made for future hardware, and this game finally shows it, and it is the best one to do so since Oblivion came out IMO.|


Yes, and do you remember that Oblivion was a port from the Xbox, one that was coded like junk, and looked like ass needing a whole year of third party community mods just to bring up to decent visual standards, but because the base code was so awful, the majority of those texture and LOD mods were useful for little more than screenshots.



As for Crysis being 'designed' for quads, no, it supports quads, but not designed FOR. It is stated that it runs off two main cores, and the others are possible helpers.  We can clearly see the Q makes little difference here, so far, but that's what we have to work with. Until the new quads, we haven't an idea of how effective the quad support in Crysis is ;/ 

What I'm wondering is where are the people with X chips in this matter? Surely someone with a 4.1ghz or higher X chip from our TPU community has tried playing the demo.


----------



## niko084 (Oct 28, 2007)

I'm also installing on XP now for some dx9 performance marks...
I very honestly think my 2600xt performs in dx10 better than dx9.


----------



## niko084 (Oct 28, 2007)

Yes indeed, I gain about 3-5 fps average in dx10.

I get in 1280x1024 all medium settings-
dx9 - 35-36 fps average
dx10- 38-41 fps average

Ran the tests through 10 loops each.

System used to test-
e6750 @ 3200
2gb ram 1:1
2600xt gddr4


----------



## newconroer (Oct 28, 2007)

Niko, how do you fare at 1280X1024 with all very high, except shaders down to medium or high and no AA?


I think you could swing it with the medium shaders, and still retain 20-25 FPS.


----------



## niko084 (Oct 28, 2007)

newconroer said:


> Niko, how do you fare at 1280X1024 with all very high, except shaders down to medium or high and no AA?
> 
> 
> I think you could swing it with the medium shaders, and still retain 20-25 FPS.



All set to high it drops to like 10-15fps..
When I drop all the left side settings *forget what they are* to medium its perfectly playable and looks amazing at around 25-30fps.


----------



## Darknova (Oct 28, 2007)

niko084 said:


> All set to high it drops to like 10-15fps..
> When I drop all the left side settings *forget what they are* to medium its perfectly playable and looks amazing at around 25-30fps.



Mind explaining something then....how is it I can play 1280x1024 with everything on High, and get perfectly playable fps?


----------



## niko084 (Oct 28, 2007)

Darknova said:


> Mind explaining something then....how is it I can play 1280x1024 with everything on High, and get perfectly playable fps?



dx9 built card under dx9 that simple. and a 2600xt is a bit slower than a 1950xt in dx9 anyways...


----------



## Darknova (Oct 28, 2007)

niko084 said:


> dx9 built card under dx9 that simple. and a 2600xt is a bit slower than a 1950xt in dx9 anyways...



Ooops, I read your specs and missed the post about the rig you tested it on


----------



## niko084 (Oct 28, 2007)

Darknova said:


> Ooops, I read your specs and missed the post about the rig you tested it on



Aww ya... I have not even installed it on that machine yet, and I don't think I will until I swap out the video cards.


----------



## Darknova (Oct 28, 2007)

niko084 said:


> Aww ya... I have not even installed it on that machine yet, and I don't think I will until I swap out the video cards.



How come? You might actually be able to turn AA on with them


----------



## niko084 (Oct 28, 2007)

Darknova said:


> How come? You might actually be able to turn AA on with them



Eh, too lazy, demo is lame....

I'm going to probably buy the game in a month or two anyways..
By then I'll probably buy a 8800GT or a 38**


----------



## Wile E (Oct 28, 2007)

DaMulta said:


> So should I go down to walmart and buy vista home?


I know this was a while back in the thread, but if you can find a retail disk (from a friend or wherever), you can install any version for a 30day trial, as long as you don't enter a serial.


----------



## SpookyWillow (Oct 28, 2007)

tbh i'm suprised it runs as good as it does on my pc

gpu test

!TimeDemo Run 2 Finished.
    Play Time: 64.64s, Average FPS: 30.94
    Min FPS: 1.71 at frame 138, Max FPS: 38.82 at frame 1764
    Average Tri/Sec: 22984620, Tri/Frame: 742823
    Recorded/Played Tris ratio: 1.23


CPU test

!TimeDemo Run 2 Finished.
    Play Time: 51.41s, Average FPS: 29.18
    Min FPS: 2.88 at frame 196, Max FPS: 39.77 at frame 116
    Average Tri/Sec: 18526714, Tri/Frame: 634955
    Recorded/Played Tris ratio: 1.13

settings used

 1280x1024
 GameEffects" high
 VolumetricEffects" high
 ObjectDetail" high
 Particles" high
 Sound" high
 PostProcessing" high
 Shading" medium
 Physics" medium
 Water" medium
 Shadows" low
 Texture" low
 no AA


----------



## Ripper3 (Oct 28, 2007)

DaMulta said:


> People die with their arms up in the air lol



I've heard of rigor mortis, but that's just retarded, lol.


----------



## Frick (Oct 28, 2007)

SpookyWillow said:


> tbh i'm suprised it runs as good as it does on my pc
> 
> *list of specs and settings*



Yeah, it's not as demanding as I thought..

Anyhow, I'm downloading the demo ATM, again. We'll see how it is tonight/tomorrow. 

BTW, can anyone tell if the beta requires more oompfh in your system than the demo?


----------



## FAXA (Oct 28, 2007)

SpookyWillow said:


> i'm quite happy with it so far,  i thought they said DX9 wouldn't get destructible stuff and day/night cycles?    i get both



That was for multiplayer .


----------



## X800 (Oct 28, 2007)

On my system it works very good at everything at high DX9 all maxed to quality in CCC Res 1280*1024 .Cpu clocked to 2739mhz and card gpu 800/1100 mem.Runs like a dream =)


----------



## AsRock (Oct 28, 2007)

bvillepc said:


> I get horrible performance with Crysis demo! First, here are my specs, nothing over clocked:
> 
> CPU: Intel Quad-Core Q6600
> Memory: 2GB DDR2 800 Crucial Ballistix
> ...



you tried turning down the AA.. BUT if you turn Shader quality up to high it turns AA back on and off when you put it on Medium which i found Annoying.  As i found out late last night but still looks sweet .


----------



## FAXA (Oct 28, 2007)

I'm surprised at how crappy the performance was on my machine :S. 

Everything on medium at 1024x768 and it was just about playable - the lowest FPS was about 4 and the average was about 23. Surely it should run a little better?


----------



## Athlon2K15 (Oct 28, 2007)

ive been playing all day long with 1680x1050 @ medium with no problem im getting at least 30-40 fps


----------



## cdawall (Oct 28, 2007)

waiting for the dl to finish @50% right now will post FPS and SS when its done  and now that i know im  stable with vid @569/1520 i may even get playable framerate...need to get a better mobo though anyone want to send me a free s754 nforce3 mobo? so i can oc the cpu without crapping out the gpu...(any oc on the cpu make the AGP bus unstable since i have no bus locks )


----------



## theonetruewill (Oct 28, 2007)

FAXA said:


> I'm surprised at how crappy the performance was on my machine :S.
> 
> Everything on medium at 1024x768 and it was just about playable - the lowest FPS was about 4 and the average was about 23. Surely it should run a little better?



Latest drivers?


----------



## mrw1986 (Oct 28, 2007)

I played until 4am last nite on my system listed in my system specs perfectly fine. The only things that sort of were choppy were a couple of the cinematics. Mainly the one jumping from the plane. The only other time it hiccupped was when I reached a checkpoint, but it was literally only a millisecond. I can only imagine how this will run on my Q6600/Q6700 and 8800GT.


----------



## bvillepc (Oct 28, 2007)

niko084 said:


> Ya thats simply not right if you have updated drivers and such....
> What resolution are you playing in?



Well, with the newest Catalyst drivers and the November release of DirectX installed, the game becomes playable, at least. To run the game on "Very High" settings and get at least 30fps, I have to play it at 1024x768 with no AA. It gets up to 72fps when I look at the sky or ground only and drops down to about 16fps in the scenes where there are buildings and such. It's a beautiful game, and it's just not meant to be played at anything lower than "High" settings. The lower resolutions really take away from the game. This game would be fantastic if I could play it at my monitor's highest supported resolution and maybe even some AA. I hope some new drivers will allow me to do this.


----------



## niko084 (Oct 28, 2007)

bvillepc said:


> Well, with the newest Catalyst drivers and the November release of DirectX installed, the game becomes playable, at least. To run the game on "Very High" settings and get at least 30fps, I have to play it at 1024x768 with no AA. It gets up to 72fps when I look at the sky or ground only and drops down to about 16fps in the scenes where there are buildings and such. It's a beautiful game, and it's just not meant to be played at anything lower than "High" settings. The lower resolutions really take away from the game. This game would be fantastic if I could play it at my monitor's highest supported resolution and maybe even some AA. I hope some new drivers will allow me to do this.



You have a separate problem... I cannot really point out what it is, but your performance is simply horrible.


----------



## bvillepc (Oct 29, 2007)

niko084 said:


> You have a separate problem... I cannot really point out what it is, but your performance is simply horrible.



I dunno what the hell it is. I sure wish I could find the problem. I spent like $2k on my new rig just to play Crysis, and everything (Bioshock, Unreal 3, Half Life 2 E2, C&C 3, Battlefield 2/2142) except Crysis runs great with all settings maxed out at my highest resolution. Maybe it's not using all my CPU cores, or I need to run at as Administrator, I dunno. I hate when things don't just work the way I expect them to, lol.


----------



## JC316 (Oct 29, 2007)

cdawall said:


> waiting for the dl to finish @50% right now will post FPS and SS when its done  and now that i know im  stable with vid @569/1520 i may even get playable framerate...need to get a better mobo though anyone want to send me a free s754 nforce3 mobo? so i can oc the cpu without crapping out the gpu...(any oc on the cpu make the AGP bus unstable since i have no bus locks )



Hmm, I am interested to see your results. I have a friend with a system about like yours.


----------



## niko084 (Oct 29, 2007)

Keep seeing this issue with X-fi sound cards.....
Try running onboard sound...


----------



## Steevo (Oct 29, 2007)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test_Drive_Unlimited#PC


Yes!!!!!



Another shit game for us on the PC, Go Crysis.



Sorry guys, but I think starting next build, it will be a 360 so I have some games, and games that actually play.


----------



## bvillepc (Oct 29, 2007)

niko084 said:


> Keep seeing this issue with X-fi sound cards.....
> Try running onboard sound...



I tried removing my X-Fi sound card and even leaving on-board disabled with the same performance level as with it in. So, I dunno what the deal is. ATI is supposed to be coming out with some new drivers soon. Maybe those will help.


----------



## newconroer (Oct 29, 2007)

With a rig identical to the one in my specs, yet using a 8800 GTS at 600/1000 I get roughly:

Vista
64bit executable
1280X1024
AA disabled
All settings "Very High"

low-mid twenties average while in the jungle
high teens average while near objects i.e. down in the enemy camps
mid-high teens average during fire fights while near objects, with dips to low teens



Vista
64bit executable
1280X1024
2x AA
All settings "Very High" but Shader quality "High"


mid thirties average while in the jungle
mid-high twenties average while near objects i.e. down in the enemy camps
low-mid twenties average during fire fights while near objects, with dips to high teens


I went and dropped the CPU to 3.010ghz and seemed to generally lose less than five FPS in most scenarios, but didn't test it extensively.


I did this, to see if the Mrs. would be able to enjoy playing it with a GTS, and well, she said and I quote "Very high shaders or nothing."

So... I don't know what to do hehe.


----------



## Wile E (Oct 29, 2007)

newconroer said:


> With a rig identical to the one in my specs, yet using a 8800 GTS at 600/1000 I get roughly:
> 
> Vista
> 64bit executable
> ...


Sounds like an excuse to buy an 8800GT to me. lol


----------



## X800 (Oct 29, 2007)

If you want to see FPS in screen when you play press § for the console to come down and write r_displayinfo 1


----------



## Xaser04 (Oct 29, 2007)

The demo play ok for me at 1680x1050 medium / high settings (post processing and shadows on Low)

This is on:

C2D E4300 @ 3ghz
X1900XT 256mb @ stock (havn't tried overclocking it yet)
2GB ram
Windows XP 32bit

Running on Omega Cat 7.2's (Yet to update)

Seems to give playable framerates however I have noticed massive texture corruption on certain parts of the level followed by completely random crashes. At first I thought hardware issue but The UT3 demo runs flawlessly maxxed out for hours.

I must admit though after an intial quick play through crysis has left me a tad dissapointed. It just doesn't feel fun to me (This might have something to do with the massive session I had on UT3 just before and difference in the pace of the two games)

I will give it another chance I think (and try the DX10 features on XP trick) but I don't think I will buy the game - well not at full price anyway.


----------



## zekrahminator (Oct 29, 2007)

I'm definitely buying the full version when it comes out .


----------



## cdawall (Oct 29, 2007)

JC316 said:


> Hmm, I am interested to see your results. I have a friend with a system about like yours.



my system is down 60gb HDD is dieing and wouldnt boot after i restarted yesterday...fixed for now will give results when i can


----------

