just got my gtx 280. crysis warhead settings.

spiki · 20 Oct 2008 at 23:34

Tried DX9?

Th3D0n · 21 Oct 2008 at 02:20

well i run warhead on ethuastic at 1240*1040 with no AA in dx 9 and it runs fine.

my specs are
Cpu c2d e2060 1.8Ghz clocked to 3Ghz
2 Gig of ram
mobo 965p DS3
ati 4850 512 Meg

Amnesia · 21 Oct 2008 at 04:22

i would have thought warhead would be flying with that graphics card(without AA).

iviv · 21 Oct 2008 at 04:55

Nodiggidy123 said:
what are realistic settings i can apply to this game runnig at 1650x1050

i dont seem to be getting great performance at all. quite often fps drops sub 20 and im trying to get a good mix of quality without sacrificing to many frames.

is there any custom configs i can use?

rest of pc spec in sig

Should be able to run it with everything on! From what I hear, you can run it at ultra high with 1Gb ram and an 8800GT.

HeX · 21 Oct 2008 at 09:19

spiki said:
Tried DX9?

This. DX9 is far faster than DX10 mode.

Squark · 21 Oct 2008 at 11:06

iviv said:
Should be able to run it with everything on! From what I hear, you can run it at ultra high with 1Gb ram and an 8800GT.

MY sarcasm detector just jumped off the scale!

Metalface Mark · 21 Oct 2008 at 11:25

Nodiggidy123 said:
do u think an extra gig of ram would help? another problem i have with this mobo is the thing wont boot with 4 sticks and i cant up the vdimm cos the bios is locked. the motherboard is atually a asus p5ne so im very tempted to try and flash it with a proper asus one.

i want my old ds4 back

Crysis is probably the worst game to have smaller ram on, theres a thread in memory about it, min fps is half with 2gb over 4.

bobert50 · 21 Oct 2008 at 12:02

Hmmmm i got the same fps on crysis in any benchmark and seemingly ingame with my c2d e6600 clocked at 2.4 stock and 3.2ghz. To me that suggested it was gpu dependant personally ?

eyetrip · 21 Oct 2008 at 14:06

bobert50 said:
Hmmmm i got the same fps on crysis in any benchmark and seemingly ingame with my c2d e6600 clocked at 2.4 stock and 3.2ghz. To me that suggested it was gpu dependant personally ?

The banchmarks do not paint a very good picture of in-game performance.

Xez · 21 Oct 2008 at 16:01

HeX said:
This. DX9 is far faster than DX10 mode.

Why would he do this when DX10 does look better and his card can handle it quite obviously?

Nodiggidy123 · 21 Oct 2008 at 17:29

it is playable just. tbh i was expecting a little bit more.

out of interest it seems that the gpu has to work harder in dx9 judging by the fan noise. im wondering if my problem is something to do with my hardrives. i have 2 500gig drives but they certainly dont seem to be particularly fast.

HangTime · 21 Oct 2008 at 22:04

Happy said:
Obviously the Q6600 would be a lot faster in games are multithreaded

Not necessarily; don't forget that you get diminishing returns the more cores you have, and the vast majority of the gain from multithreaded games will also be realised by a dual core chip such as the E4300. The extra 600mhz clock speed will likely offset much of the gain from the extra cores and cache.

Xez · 21 Oct 2008 at 22:38

Nodiggidy123 said:
it is playable just. tbh i was expecting a little bit more.

out of interest it seems that the gpu has to work harder in dx9 judging by the fan noise. im wondering if my problem is something to do with my hardrives. i have 2 500gig drives but they certainly dont seem to be particularly fast.

I doubt that i have warhead installed on one of my secondary 80GB hard drives which is a good 7 years old as my main drive which is a 36GB raptor cant fit anymore on

What drivers are you using? I had a good average FPS improvement from the latest drivers