Is Crysis 3 too demanding?

Here's the thing, there's something wrong with some peoples performance, how many of you with bad FPS have win8? Because as mentioned here: http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?p=23814557&highlight=username_sin_chase#post23814557 the only real diff is our os, he uses 8 and I use 7.

I'm getting well over 100fps in most areas, in the bit with the large tower with rockets/laser tracking I could get 130fps outdoors. Everything maxed except motion blur off and SMAAx1 which visually looks the best, x4 is still doable but meh.
 
Mine plays fine on 24" Del 2408WFP @ 1920 X 1200 with everything maxxed (AA and AF set half way)

Spec in sig.

**Edit**

Win 7 64Bit Home Premium on Corsair GS SSD
 
Last edited:
ChrisJSY said:
Here's the thing, there's something wrong with some peoples performance, how many of you with bad FPS have win8? Because as mentioned here: http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?p=23814557&highlight=username_sin_chase#post23814557 the only real diff is our os, he uses 8 and I use 7.

I'm getting well over 100fps in most areas, in the bit with the large tower with rockets/laser tracking I could get 130fps outdoors. Everything maxed except motion blur off and SMAAx1 which visually looks the best, x4 is still doable but meh.
Click to expand...

Fancy stating your rig? The GTX 690 can only achieve 50fps and the Titan only achieves 39fps. I trust you have sli 690s?

EDIT: scratch that, the 690 and the Titan achieve 80fps. Nice card mate!
 
Last edited:
Its like Crysis 1 all over again! (kind of)

But I bet not many people rush out to buy the latest and greatest graphics card to conquer the Crysis 3 demands, interesting how many did when the original came out. My guess is back then, Crysis was ahead of its time and graphically original.

Maybe the new test for gfx card power will be rated by "Can it run Crysis 3 on max?"
 
neoglow said:
Its like Crysis 1 all over again! (kind of)

But I bet not many people rush out to buy the latest and greatest graphics card to conquer the Crysis 3 demands, interesting how many did when the original came out. My guess is back then, Crysis was ahead of its time and graphically original.

Maybe the new test for gfx card power will be rated by "Can it run Crysis 3 on max?"
Click to expand...

You also needed Vista for DX10, and the 8800GTX was DX 10 so it was quite an upgrade to play it in its full glory :D
 
My friend runs an i7 920, 6GB, NVIDIA 660 at 1080.

He's getting averages in the 40's with dips to the low 30's. However, it looks very good and is more than payable.

The 660 is new but the rest of his components are at least four years old. Pretty good run for his money!

*he play with all settings set to 'High' apart from object detail which is set to medium. I believe his AA is set to TS-somethingsomething.
 
Last edited:
Name said:
About to try this on my EVGA GTX670 Ref card.

Hoping to get it on medium at the least.
Click to expand...

No problem (unless you want 120fps or super high res & AA)

on my i5@4ghz, 8gb, evga 670 reference (overclocked a bit) I play in 1440p, no AA, high shaders, shadows and water with everything else on high. This gets ~40fps outside, with 50 / 60 + inside

1080p is no problem, 60s outside, 90+ inside

Multiplayer I get 60+ most of the time with above settings and 1440p

Overclock it to gtx680 speeds to get an extra 5-10fps
 
Last edited:
RedStarRiot said:
No its not as ground breaking as the original Crysis but I think your hating on it for no real reason. I think it plays fine and I'm running on high settings. It really is a lovely looking game and quite a lot of fun.
Click to expand...

Isn't this just burying your head in the sand?
And it's another game where you've got people saying "It runs fine", "It doesn't run fine" yet there's a range of hardware on either side.

Someone with a 6970 saying it runs fine, then someone with a 7950 saying it doesn't, etc.
 
Martini1991 said:
Isn't this just burying your head in the sand?
And it's another game where you've got people saying "It runs fine", "It doesn't run fine" yet there's a range of hardware on either side.

Someone with a 6970 saying it runs fine, then someone with a 7950 saying it doesn't, etc.
Click to expand...

Perhaps but I can only go with my own experience as an example. I would suggest somebody having issues with a 7950 would seem odd as I'm getting a smooth experience with my 6970 on high settings. I have noticed that the majority of people having issues are using Nvidia cards and that the game is amd optimised is it not? AMD seem to be getting a grip on gaming at the moment with most of the big titles and both new consoles it will only get worse.
 
If some of you are struggling with 3570K's and GTX 670/AMD 7950 gpu's then I won't have much joy with my Oc'd Q6600 (@3.5) and GTX 570, will wait 'til I've upgraded before playing this.

I've been using this old Q6600 for nearly 6 years now! Until then I was the type who would upgrade cpu/motherboard at every refresh, can't believe how long it's lasted!:eek:

Definitely seeing lower than I'd like GPU usage in some of the newer games now though (FC3 for instance 60-70%) which is hurting framerates, can't imagine I'd be able to run Crysis 3 even at medium settings. I'm quite glad though that we've finally got a game that's pushing the hardware again after what seems to have been a long spell of games that haven't exactly pushed the boat out graphically, Far Cry 3 is probably the first game for ages that had me dialling down details/effects to get playable fps.
 
DrToffnar said:
I dont think that's the case. People who'v spent thousands of pounds on there rigs should be able to feel comfortable knowing they can run almost anyhitng without the pain of horrific drops. It's not a great deal to ask. I know it's one of the risks you take when deciding to be a PC gamer but still... Sometimes I think the 'PC master race' is so obnoxious that we can't see when were being ripped off...
Click to expand...

I myself am one of those people.

I have an i7 ivy bridge 680 sli setup.

But I also understand that the game has only just come out.

It takes a while, both from new driver releases and patches, to improve performance in games, especially for sli setups
 
DrToffnar said:
Whilst I thoroughly appreciate the idea of pushing graphical capabilities to the absolute limit, I am a little baffled that I can't quite stabilize Crysis 3. My system is pretty decent by todays standards. GTX 670 SLI (not OC'd) an i5 3570k (again, not OC'd) and 16GB of good ram running at 2400mhz. I had no issues with C1 and C2, my average fps being 84 from what I could tell and it would never drop below 60.

With Crysis 3 at the moment however I'm running it at high preset with post processing turned off and am quite often experiencing awful fps drops sometimes below 30...

Is it just a case of my system not quite hitting the mark? Or is Crysis 3 just poorly optimised compared to its predecessors?
Click to expand...

PC gamers have been spoilt over the last 6 or 7 years with game development slowing in linE with console tech limits, the biggest tech hurdle has been the explosion in screen size/resolution. In the late 90s early 00s there where huge jumps in graphics and map sizes (delta force series anyone voxels...) Recently games have been running on rehashed versions of one engine (cod etc...) With the new gen of consoles I see another jump in graphics.

Also op crysis/doom 3 are both games that the majority of gamers could not play at max for long after the release, expect more of the same over the next couple of years.
 
setter said:
Op is running sli 670's TwsT. Not sure how a 650w unit would cope with theese and the cpu oc'd. But for reference, with the cpu in sig and a gtx 670 @1310/7586 mhz, my power draw at the wall is 340w in games such as bf3.
Click to expand...

and do you think a second card would really draw the over 300? the 680 power draw at the wall is 360w on metro 2033 according to reviews


He should be fine if his psu is bronze rated or better,
 
I Just bought a Sapphire 7950 3GB Boost Overclocked it
running i5 4500k @ 4.4ghz
8gb of 1600 ram at 1920x1080 and it's running extremely well for me..
 
Nvidia 670 (1920x1200) with latest drivers
i7 - 3770k not overclocked
16gb ram
installed on mechanical 7200 drive
win 8 64bit

Runs really smoothly here, very impressed with how smooth. I'm running everything on very high apart from shading. I also have V-sync off and haven't noticed tearing.

I also tried GeForce Experience Beta to set my settings and it came up with exactly the same as what I had but wanted to reduce my shadows to high.

GeForce Experience Beta can be downloaded here:
http://www.geforce.co.uk/drivers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom