• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Crysis 3 Open BETA Benching.

Associate
Joined
27 Oct 2007
Posts
2,147
I noticed in the beta that my 7850 GPU usage was only 60% but I was at about 30-40FPS with a occasional dip to 24FPS in airport. Hopefully it will perform better when it's released.
 
Soldato
Joined
25 Nov 2011
Posts
20,639
Location
The KOP
i'd hate to be a game dev, they just can't win. crytek makes a game that truly pushes the hardware with crysis 1 and everyone whines that it should run better, so they make crysis 2 and it runs well on day one so then they complain it's just a port and should push the hardware more and run worse. now were back to step 1 again with crysis 3 and it should run better. dunno how people can say that it looks worse than the 1st crysis, really no idea

You missing the point here. I not trying to run this game on Ultra with a single card I can understand I need more power to run.
I am setting the Beta at Medium/high settings and getting 60fps and drops to 30fps and staying there for couple mins.

The Alpha Run much better on All high settings so I just hoping its the coding and drivers.

But I will not be buying the game till I know it runs fine.
 
Caporegime
Joined
24 Sep 2008
Posts
38,322
Location
Essex innit!
You missing the point here. I not trying to run this game on Ultra with a single card I can understand I need more power to run.
I am setting the Beta at Medium/high settings and getting 60fps and drops to 30fps and staying there for couple mins.

The Alpha Run much better on All high settings so I just hoping its the coding and drivers.

But I will not be buying the game till I know it runs fine.

AMD don't have this game optomized yet. I am sure they will soon though :)
 
Associate
Joined
13 Jul 2005
Posts
501
lol completley agree mate, must have it on ULTRA LOW or something lol. I think its visually stunning, i am a bit miffed that my computer istn capable of running it at TOP WHACK but then if it had run perfectly on full spec then it probably wouldnt have looked as amazing as it does !

i'd hate to be a game dev, they just can't win. crytek makes a game that truly pushes the hardware with crysis 1 and everyone whines that it should run better, so they make crysis 2 and it runs well on day one so then they complain it's just a port and should push the hardware more and run worse. now were back to step 1 again with crysis 3 and it should run better. dunno how people can say that it looks worse than the 1st crysis, really no idea
 
Associate
Joined
13 Jul 2005
Posts
501
People must be seeing different things than i am, what monitors do you have ? because form me I can run BF3 on top settings and yes it is nice but Crysis 3 without a doubt looks far better and as for Far Cry 3 its like a polished Xbox 360 Port ! Not in the same league as Crysis 3 with some of the settings on high. I had actually thought games graphics werent moving on that much until i played C3.

At the end of the day its a Beta, so hopefully the performance will improve for a lot of us in the full game, I played the Pre release of Crisis 2 and the peformance increase on the final version was a lot better so fingers crossed.

Thats nice and all but the game doesnt LOOK good to be that demanding.
This is the problem, not that it's demanding.

BF3 looks better and even FC3 does.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
24 Sep 2008
Posts
38,322
Location
Essex innit!
I also think visually it looks fantastic. Copious amounts of AA will cripple even the best systems. I love to see games that push our systems so hard and then compare them to the console versions.

My potential son in law played BF3 on a PS3 and when he see me playing it on ultra settings, he couldn't believe how bad it looked on his PS3. I built him an I5 system soon after :)

Crysis 3 is for real men. :p
 
Associate
Joined
13 Jul 2005
Posts
501
LOL, yeah my mate played BF3 on the xbox (with the HD pack) his jaw dropped when he saw it running on my PC in top settings. I am (or was) a big fan of the xbox 360, i havent played for so long because the graphics look so dated, Crysis 3 Beta on it is a joke !! im so glad the new one Xbox is out this year Im just hoping that it will be capable of games like Crysis 3 anywhere near as good the graphics quality or i will be sticking to PC games for the next 8 years or so.

As far as the game actually goes im a avid fan of the COD games (the proper MW ones not the awful BO ones) and ive always wanted a similar game but of a different theme but found nothing matches COD in far as gameplay...this crysis (although on mouse and kb) is pretty similar and seems very good so im looking forward to seeing the full version.

I also think visually it looks fantastic. Copious amounts of AA will cripple even the best systems. I love to see games that push our systems so hard and then compare them to the console versions.

My potential son in law played BF3 on a PS3 and when he see me playing it on ultra settings, he couldn't believe how bad it looked on his PS3. I built him an I5 system soon after :)

Crysis 3 is for real men. :p
 
Caporegime
OP
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
47,676
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
show him the crysis 3 comparison :D

PC
http://i.minus.com/iwjahbdNVt5mt.png


Anyone who says that looks crap is acting derp.... :p

Look at the complexity and detail in that.

I'm a big fan of the quality of the GFX in BF3, they are impressive, but Crysis3 beats it, i think.

The amount of texture in it is unreal, the tessellation in this game must be off the scale, no wonder all GPU's choke on it.
 

HeX

HeX

Soldato
Joined
20 Jun 2004
Posts
12,018
Location
Huddersfield, UK
Anyone who says that looks crap is acting derp.... :p

Look at the complexity and detail in that.

I'm a big fan of the quality of the GFX in BF3, they are impressive, but Crysis3 beats it, i think.

The amount of texture in it is unreal, the tessellation in this game must be off the scale, no wonder all GPU's choke on it.

Still say Crysis 1 looked better:

For

Example


Crysis 2 and 3 just have lots and lots of post processing over fairly bland and unimpressive small maps.
 
Soldato
Joined
13 Aug 2012
Posts
4,277
I also think visually it looks fantastic.

Me too best graphics I seen :)

I was very impressed when I stopped to look at the floor and there was cockroaches running around everywhere in perfect detail you could see all there little parts moving.

Going back on bf3 afterwards was a definite downgrade in graphics especially the floor texture and water effects.
 
Caporegime
OP
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
47,676
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
Still say Crysis 1 looked better:

For

Example


Crysis 2 and 3 just have lots and lots of post processing over fairly bland and unimpressive small maps.


There is no denying Crysis 1 also looks great, there is also a lot of texture in it, but i also have Crysis 1, and Warhead, and 2.

2 is a definite evolution of the clarity and quality of the image from 1 and Warhead, 3 is an evolution over that, to me the image definitely looks better, certainly better than 1 and Warhead.
The maps are small, about the size of a BF3 SQDM, but then there are only 2 maps, this is BETA and can hardly be judged to the full game.

Whats more, (to what others have said) 10 minute rounds are not to short, they are certainly not CoD, its also a far more complex game than CoD, you have to play it some to get to know the game, you start to realise its not just run and gun.
That is simply something you can do if thats the way you want to play it, just like BF3.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
24 Sep 2008
Posts
38,322
Location
Essex innit!
iwjahbdNVt5mt.png


i8hSQtc0vqoIE.png

Images from earlier :)
 
Soldato
Joined
6 May 2012
Posts
9,399
Location
Wigan
i'd hate to be a game dev, they just can't win. crytek makes a game that truly pushes the hardware with crysis 1 and everyone whines that it should run better, so they make crysis 2 and it runs well on day one so then they complain it's just a port and should push the hardware more and run worse. now were back to step 1 again with crysis 3 and it should run better. dunno how people can say that it looks worse than the 1st crysis, really no idea

Agreed :)

Thats nice and all but the game doesnt LOOK good to be that demanding.
This is the problem, not that it's demanding.

BF3 looks better and even FC3 does.

No way does BF3 or Far Cry 3 look better



I also think visually it looks fantastic. Copious amounts of AA will cripple even the best systems. I love to see games that push our systems so hard and then compare them to the console versions.



Crysis 3 is for real men. :p

Abso-------lutely :D
 
Caporegime
OP
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
47,676
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
I also think visually it looks fantastic. Copious amounts of AA will cripple even the best systems. I love to see games that push our systems so hard and then compare them to the console versions.

My potential son in law played BF3 on a PS3 and when he see me playing it on ultra settings, he couldn't believe how bad it looked on his PS3. I built him an I5 system soon after :)

Crysis 3 is for real men. :p

Just one problem with that, the PS4 (Orbis) is rumoured, increasingly rumoured to be getting an AMD 8 Core Steamrooler + 7950 APU hybrid.

I can't see it myself, re- TDP / Cooling, But its obvious that Sony are pushing the boat out with Orbis, judging by what they say they want it to do, it probably will do 1920 x 1080P HQ GFX, and end up with a 4 core Steamrooler + 7850 equivalent GPU.

On a Game Console with a very lite OS purely designed for gaming its probably going to be quite good.
 
Caporegime
Joined
24 Sep 2008
Posts
38,322
Location
Essex innit!
Just one problem with that, the PS4 (Orbis) is rumoured, increasingly rumoured to be getting an AMD 8 Core Steamrooler + 7950 APU hybrid.

I can't see it myself, re- TDP / Cooling, But its obvious that Sony are pushing the boat out with Orbis, judging by what they say they want it to do, it probably will do 1920 x 1080P HQ GFX, and end up with a 4 core Steamrooler + 7850 equivalent GPU.

On a Game Console with a very lite OS purely designed for gaming its probably going to be quite good.

Why is there a problem?
 
Caporegime
Joined
24 Sep 2008
Posts
38,322
Location
Essex innit!
I doubt it. The road maps for AMD and Nvidia look strong. AMD are having great success with GPU sales and Nvidia are very very strong.

Since the days of the Amiga, I have heard this, that and the other but it never happens. If money can be made, a company would be foolish to drop investment. We are in a recession and this is why the doom and gloom.
 
Back
Top Bottom