Crysis, what is limiting the framerate?

HangTime said:
The limiting factor is 3x8800u - simply doesn't have enough grunt :)
Click to expand...
If that is true it would mean that lowering the resolution will greatly improve the framerate but it doesn't.

I find it very hard to believe the game is limited by three 8800Ultra's
 
Clinkz said:
I rubbish you rubbish

You are an idiot if you think a game that runs poorly can be justified by blaming insufficient hardware. The primary factors in any games development life cycle are cost and feasibility. Above all, to be feasible, a game must make money. To do that, it must sell. Crysis WAS poorly coded because it simply does not give enough of an improvement over any other technology today and yet has a significant performance penalty assosiated with it. It attempts too much and achieves too little. The simply fact is the technologies displayed in games like crysis dictate not what is playable today, but what should be playable in the (near) future. These sorts of games are nothing more than poorly devised and commercialized industry concept pieces. Consumers such as yourself should be more interested in the technology that is available and playable today, not what may be playable years down the line. Case in point CoD4, which looks and plays absolutely bloody fantastic even on 1 or 2 year old hardware like im running now.

I have not played crysis, though i have observed others playing it and followed the promotional hype that followed it. I will not touch it with a 10 foot barge pole until the technology that can run it properly is available and financially viable. When that time comes, however, i suspect there will be far better and infinitely more enjoyable games than a concept piece made years ago.
Click to expand...

yet, if they simply reclassified medium in game as very high, and low as high and added even lesser options for "new" medium and low settings and hide the "higher" options. then it would run great on most hardware, and look similar in quality to any game out there and you would have nothing to complain about. its not YOUR choice that the highest setting should be playable. its theres. you WANT the highest setting to be completely playable now, why can't people tell the difference between want and need anymore. If they reclassified the settings it would run as you want and you wouldn't have realised it could do more, they could have "released" a patch that was 2 gigs and pretended it was high res textures which unlock the settings in a year for all the people that just can't understand the gameplay doesn't change based on the graphical settings and kid themselves a game will suck unless they can play it at top settings.

It isn't industry standard to make a game in such a way, but then, this game won't look dated in 2 years either will it. Nor did the industry standard become law at any point and frankly, anyone can make their game anyway they want.

it IS hardware limited, dropping graphical settings changes the framerate quite significantly. overclocking cpu does next to nothing. i mean its this simple, every game in history does one of two things, increases fps when you overclock cpu/drop cpu based settings, or increases fps when you overclock gpu/drop gpu based settings. Every game in history lets you see if its gpu/cpu limited this way. Crysis is gpu limited, simple as that. IT doesn't run at 500fps when you run the lowest res/settings, because the world is massive and the maps are massive, that takes a certain amount of juice to keep all the memory/textures loaded.

tri sli doesn't scale that well, and they were using very high settings in that review with dx10. I would hazard a guess that like sse4 can massively boost performance with honestly, very very little hardware/transistor cost next gen gfx will have a few registers and things that can boost speed for some basic dx10 stuff, hell it might not, who knows.

maybe the game isn't coded the best in the world, but at high settings the game runs pretty decently as is, and blows anything else away. it looks better than anything else but also does it on a massive massive scale. thinks like bf2 didn't run that well because the massive maps/draw distance takes a lot of power. normally the "best" looking games are indoor games with a limited number of things to draw and lots of easy walls to produce to reduce the graphical cost. Crysis goes best graphics with an incredible amount done.
 
The way some people talk about the so called lack of optimization of Crysis you would think it was coded by monkeys.

I'm pretty sure the people who coded Crysis are some of the best in the world and have been writing code all their lives... It just doesn't make sense that they wouldn't have a clue how to write decent code.
 
I was getting around 23fps with my 7900GT, upgraded yesterday to a 8800GT and I'm getting around 40fps with the same settings (in the benchmark) - not massive but more than playable. The upgrade wasn't just for Crysis, I wanted a faster, quieter card anyway.

In game (where it matters) I now have a lot of the settings on high and am able to enable AA where previously I could not so personally I'm impressed that I can run one of the most demanding and beautiful looking games I've seen for sometime with such settings using only a £150 graphics card paired with my increasingly long in the tooth A64 4600+.

I'm getting a e8400 next week so am looking forward to seeing how it runs with that.

I think the devs. have done a really good job with Crysis, great game.
 
Secret_Window said:
Well, to be fair the graphics aren't the best out there and the physics too, so for it to be ahead kinda seems silly, but that's my opinion.
Click to expand...

What are you smoking. Please to tell what game looks better than Crysis.
Please don't say COD4....:rolleyes:



---or were you meant to write "are" rather than "aren't" :p
 
pre1twa said:
The way some people talk about the so called lack of optimization of Crysis you would think it was coded by monkeys.

I'm pretty sure the people who coded Crysis are some of the best in the world and have been writing code all their lives... It just doesn't make sense that they wouldn't have a clue how to write decent code.
Click to expand...

Well i think the thing that annoys most people is Cervat Yerli stated numerous times that the game was being designed to take advantage of multi gpu and multicore cpu's. Using sli or crossfire in crysis really doesn't do that much to the framerate compared to other games.

So where is all this coding to make it work well with multi gpu multicore cpu. Crysis is more than likely the worst sli\crossfire scaled game there currently is given the fact that it SHOULD work really well with that kind of setup.
 
Gerard said:
Crysis is more than likely the worst sli\crossfire scaled game there currently is given the fact that it SHOULD work really well with that kind of setup.
Click to expand...

Supcom is worse :p
It doesn't support dual cards at all (or atleast didn't last time I looked!)
 
Gerard said:
Well i think the thing that annoys most people is Cervat Yerli stated numerous times that the game was being designed to take advantage of multi gpu and multicore cpu's. Using sli or crossfire in crysis really doesn't do that much to the framerate compared to other games.

So where is all this coding to make it work well with multi gpu multicore cpu. Crysis is more than likely the worst sli\crossfire scaled game there currently is given the fact that it SHOULD work really well with that kind of setup.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's a fair point.
 
crysis is ahead of it's time, graphics are brilliant on high settings, i played through on medium and the framerate was pretty erratic, but it still looked awesome!
 
Gashman said:
dead right there, though its not really GPU bound, hammers your CPU though
Click to expand...

How is he right, you admit yourself SupCom is bottlenecked by the CPU for most people, you cant expect to see massive improvements.

Also Crysis sales suck for all the hype there was, I probably would have brought Crysis but instead I have a copy, which means I will be one of the many people not bothering to play online either, further damaging the community with the relatively low player base.
To me one of the best advantages PC games online (ie CoD4 etc), is that theres loads of servers, mods, and the occasional good custom map.
 
Last edited:
Skyfall said:
It's the PC market in general, bit of a recession. Don't think sales have even passed 1m (or nowhere near it?) consoles are really taking over.
Click to expand...
Nothing wrong with PC sales, November/December have probably been the best months in PC gaming for the whole year. As for Crysis sales, well...

InCrysis said:
After listening to the Q3 2008 Electronic Arts Earnings Conference Call we have learned that Crysis has been a strong performer with sales having exceeded expectations. EA also reported Crysis reaching the platinum mark meaning over 1 million copies of the game have been sold worldwide.
Click to expand...
Source.
 
SebC said:
Set the graphics to High. Then load up any other game and be astonished at how Crysis utterly defeats any kind of graphic in other games :cool: IMO Crysis is quite optimised for what it is; but yes there must be issues with the coding or drivers that stop it from running well on 3x8800.
Click to expand...
Have you played Flight Simulator X with all of the graphics set to Ultra High and with Tile Proxy/? :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom