Crysis 3 performance

nuzik · 20 Feb 2013 at 11:30

i have found that all forms of everything cripple the game. I would love to see the Rig they used to make and test the game!! Who were the Beta testers only people with quad SLI 690's?
I'd also like to see a chart on their site of what people should be aiming for with their cards or better detection in the game. My detection says VERY HIGH, i use the settings and they arent giving me 60fps.

wolvers · 20 Feb 2013 at 13:29

That's how PC games should be. The highest settings giving the very best graphics but needing the very best rigs to run it. More games should be fully scalable like this. There's no good getting grumpy because one 7970 or 680 can't max it out.

Anyone with a 7970 tried out the AMD optimised tesselation setting?

Freddie1980 · 20 Feb 2013 at 13:45

wolvers said:
That's how PC games should be. The highest settings giving the very best graphics but needing the very best rigs to run it. More games should be fully scalable like this. There's no good getting grumpy because one 7970 or 680 can't max it out.

Anyone with a 7970 tried out the AMD optimised tesselation setting?

Typically what happens when a top end gets whipped attitudes change from 'damn this game is demanding!' to 'this game is poorly coded'. Developers can never win.

nuzik · 20 Feb 2013 at 13:53

i agree that the settings etc should be pushing boundaries and top end rigs should be getting better performance. It doesnt look any prettier to my eyes though than BF3. If im wrong correct me on that, albeit the cockney looks great close up but thats the only difference ive seen.
I like it and like to see what i can get out of it. I just didnt want to upgrade yet to Cross Fire but i may have too to get some more out of this, especially as i was looking for a 27" 1440p monitor.

spikerules · 20 Feb 2013 at 13:55

wolvers said:
That's how PC games should be. The highest settings giving the very best graphics but needing the very best rigs to run it. More games should be fully scalable like this. There's no good getting grumpy because one 7970 or 680 can't max it out.

Anyone with a 7970 tried out the AMD optimised tesselation setting?

Sorry but a 690 or 670/680 SLI is, in my humble opinion, the "best rig" that you think would be required for Very High Crysis 3. Those rigs cannot handle the game, hence why people are moaning. If you spend 900 pounds on a GPU you expect it to run on V.High @ 1080p. Especially seeing as though the graphics are probably around the BF3 level. Yes they are much nicer to look at, but they do not equate to 1/4 of the performance.

Basically, you are not making sense....? Are you saying the "best rig" is a rig that doesn't exist yet? Just what IS your point?

Davanius · 20 Feb 2013 at 14:06

Dual 670's, 7950's and up should run this game on max settings at 60 fps and higher.

Unless the aa is bugged and your using it at very high levels.

Out of curiosity spikerules, what aa settings have you tried?

spikerules · 20 Feb 2013 at 14:14

I have tried them ALL. Nothing works for me.. in fact I get negligible performance between settings. The graphics change as does the fps, but fps not by much and the AA is defo different. Basically all V.High with 2x SMAA (the multi gpu one) and I get around 30-47fps @1080p.

Edit - Just to add, Crysis 3 Beta played at 60fps for me and I just benched on Heaven 4.0 and my results seem normal (check the heaven thread here).

LtMatt · 20 Feb 2013 at 14:17

Apologies if this has been posted but Crysis 3 Final using the latest drivers from both the red and green teams.

Crysis 3 Benched @GameGPU.RU
http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/crysis-3-test-gpu.html
Crysis 3 Memory Usage - Up to 1200MB
Video Ram up to 2GB for Ultra setting @ 2560x1600 4x MSAA

CAT 13.2 beta 6 vs Nvidia 314.07

Crysis 3 GPU @ 1920x1080 SMAA 4X

Crysis 3 GPU @ 2560x1600 SMAA 4X

CPU-Scaling @ Very High Quality with No AA

Intel Core Load %

AMD Core Load %

Quote:
AMD has a very good multi-core performance, which is significantly higher than that of processors Intel. This explains the very good results relative to its CPU opponent.

EDIT

Sorry for the small picture size im uploading some better ones hang tight!

Davanius · 20 Feb 2013 at 14:20

spikerules said:
I have tried them ALL. Nothing works for me.. in fact I get negligible performance between settings. The graphics change as does the fps, but fps not by much and the AA is defo different. Basically all V.High with 2x SMAA (the multi gpu one) and I get around 30-47fps @1080p.

Edit - Just to add, Crysis 3 Beta played at 60fps for me and I just benched on Heaven 4.0 and my results seem normal (check the heaven thread here).

Damn. I totally understand why you're annoyed.

Might have to wait until release day for some of the big boys with the big rigs to get anywhere with this I guess.

Sorry spikerules.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 20 Feb 2013 at 14:30

LtMatt said:
Apologies if this has been posted but Crysis 3 Final using the latest drivers from both the red and green teams.

Crysis 3 Benched @GameGPU.RU
http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/crysis-3-test-gpu.html
Crysis 3 Memory Usage - Up to 1200MB
Video Ram up to 2GB for Ultra setting @ 2560x1600 4x MSAA

CAT 13.2 beta 6 vs Nvidia 314.07

Crysis 3 GPU @ 1920x1080 SMAA 4X

Crysis 3 GPU @ 2560x1600 SMAA 4X

CPU-Scaling @ Very High Quality with No AA

Intel Core Load %

AMD Core Load %

EDIT

Sorry for the small picture size im uploading some better ones hang tight!

The AMD CPUs do well in that game,especially the FX6300 compared to a Core i3.

LtMatt · 20 Feb 2013 at 14:31

I'm glad you quoted my final edit. I completely messed up the first six.

humbug · 20 Feb 2013 at 14:33

LtMatt said:
Apologies if this has been posted but Crysis 3 Final using the latest drivers from both the red and green teams.

Crysis 3 Benched @GameGPU.RU
http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/crysis-3-test-gpu.html
Crysis 3 Memory Usage - Up to 1200MB
Video Ram up to 2GB for Ultra setting @ 2560x1600 4x MSAA
CPU-Scaling @ Very High Quality with No AA

Intel Core Load %

AMD Core Load %

EDIT

Sorry for the small picture size im uploading some better ones hang tight!

Is that the FX-8350 out performing the i7 2600K? Even the FX-6300 is out performing the 2500K

So it would seem AMD's input with this has paid off on the CPU, at least it shows what the CPU can do when its used.

Sorry... i'm just a little a taken back by that, i'm used to seeing AMD CPU's trailing Intel by 4786 miles.

LtMatt · 20 Feb 2013 at 14:38

If one more person quotes my post and doesn't snip out the pictures i will kill them.

spikerules · 20 Feb 2013 at 14:39

Sorry I'm a bit stupid when it comes to hyper-threading... am I right in saying Hyper threading is actually hurting the game?

ALXAndy · 20 Feb 2013 at 14:40

LtMatt said:
If one more person quotes my post and doesn't snip out the pictures i will kill them.

haha as I scrolled down I thought exactly the same thing

humbug · 20 Feb 2013 at 14:41

LtMatt said:
If one more person quotes my post and doesn't snip out the pictures i will kill them.

Sorry, as an AMD advocate, usually ridiculed to the damp dark corner and dares not enter the CPU room.... can you blame me for not cutting out the CPU charts, IMO that needs posting again and again and again.....

LtMatt · 20 Feb 2013 at 14:41

humbug said:
Is that the FX-8350 out performing the i7 2600K? Even the FX-6300 is out performing the 2500K

So it would seem AMD's input with this has paid off on the CPU, at least it shows what the CPU can do when its used.

Sorry... i'm just a little a taken back by that, i'm used to seeing AMD CPU's trailing Intel by 4786 miles.

Not really. I think its just how loaded the cpu is.

humbug said:
Sorry, as an AMD advocate, usually ridiculed to the damp dark corner and dares not enter the CPU room.... can you blame me for not cutting out the CPU charts, IMO that needs posting again and again and again.....

I wouldn't get your hopes up too much. See above.

EDIT

Nope you're right. Bloody hell. Urgh, im ashamed of my 2700k. How could you lose to an amd processor. Its going on the MM tomorrow.

spikerules · 20 Feb 2013 at 14:45

Davanius said:
Damn. I totally understand why you're annoyed.

Might have to wait until release day for some of the big boys with the big rigs to get anywhere with this I guess.

Sorry spikerules.

It's very annoying. In fact someone else posted this on the nvidia forums and this is exactly what we are seeing here...

hvac said:

I have played Crysis 3 on my Rig . At max everything turned to very high and msaa8x Vsync @ 60. I get dips down into the low 40's, (game probably will be ok with a little optimization) . When I turn msaa to 4x Its as smooth as butter. just an fyi.

Edit: I just played through to were you first get your bow ( which isn't far) and they're are several scenes were scaling is bad, ( dipping down from 75% per gpu to 30% per gpu) at this point fps goes down to 20 fps. example when looking through the glass right after you get your bow.

Click to expand...

basically exactly what we are seeing with SLI

humbug · 20 Feb 2013 at 14:50

LtMatt said:
Not really. I think its just how loaded the cpu is.

I wouldn't get your hopes up too much. See above.

EDIT

Nope you're right. Bloody hell. Urgh, im ashamed of my 2700k. How could you lose to an amd processor. Its going on the MM tomorrow.

Because it higher than the i7? that fine its still producing better performance.

Its a 4 module x2 core CPU, its properly and evenly loaded across its silicone, its doing its job, probably for the first time ever in a game.

I would like to see a lot more of that sort of load, its actually working, again, for probably the first time ever.

Nope you're right. Bloody hell. Urgh, im ashamed of my 2700k. How could you lose to an amd processor. Its going on the MM tomorrow

Oh don't worry, AMD can't input on every game coming, not by a long way.

gigeorge · 20 Feb 2013 at 14:54

Yeah, but how does it play - is it all clunky like cry2?!