GPU for farcry 3


Recommended Posts

I currently have 2 6870. But was wondering if I would get better performance with one really good card. Any thoughts? Just bought farcry 3 and want to play on ultra. My current cards struggle a little . I could turn the graphics down, but, well once you?ve seen how beautiful this game is its very difficult to do that!! Lol

full spec in sig

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1123654-gpu-for-farcry-3/
Share on other sites

You could run for an nVidia gtx 670 for max details and smooth gameplay. I ran Far Cry 3 with everything on ultra excluding AA wich instead of 8x was 4x @ 41 FPS average on a GTX 570 , respectively 1920/1080 resolution. Even 660ti would perform well I'd say if your budget is tight.

I'm running FarCry 3 on a single GTX 670 with everything maxed out and there isn't as much as a hiccup. This is my favourite card since the 8800GT came out.

I have a 7970 in my other computer, but while it's technically a faster card, I hate it. The drivers suck and it's hot and noisy like a jet fighter.

I have a GTX680 SLI and game at 2560x1600. With everything maxed out, except for anti-aliasing (at 2x) I get decent performance - I hit 60fps a lot of the time but there are some very noticeably performance drops and the slow down seems rather inconsistent. I'm expecting updated graphics drivers and a patch or two will address most of the issues.

It's a very demanding game but the visuals are the best I've seen. It easily blows Crysis / Crysis 2 out of the water.

what about AA, you guys got that turned off?

I have it on 4x. I can't tell you the exact FPS because I haven't checked, but I'm very picky about performance so I'd say it's rather good. I also have HBAO enabled.

From what I hear, SLI/Crossfire is rarely worth it due to all the issues people have with it. I'd rather go for a single top-end card - at least it'll give you the option to double up when it's needed.

From what I hear, SLI/Crossfire is rarely worth it due to all the issues people have with it. I'd rather go for a single top-end card - at least it'll give you the option to double up when it's needed.

If you want to game at 2560x1600 then SLI / Crossfire is the only option and for me it's worth it. While a number of games have SLI issues at launch they are usually corrected pretty quickly and the performance more than makes up for it.

bought gigabyte 7970 from Dabs for ?283.09. Ebuyer are selling the same card for 315. I used promo code "MVC20" to get 20 quid of the price too. on top of this it comes with 4 free games Dirt Showdown, Far Cry 3, Hitman Absolution, Sleeping Dogs FREE

thats a bargain!

From what I hear, SLI/Crossfire is rarely worth it due to all the issues people have with it. I'd rather go for a single top-end card - at least it'll give you the option to double up when it's needed.

SLI had issues years ago. Today, however, there are zero issues. I've had my 680s in SLI since release day, and i've never had a problem. imo, it's worth the entry fee.

No, Far Cry 3 is pretty demanding no matter the GPU. 1080p maxed out settings on a ?375 GTX680 still only manages 35fps

Keep in mind that nvidia has released new beta drivers (310.64) which claim up to 38% performance increase.

SLI had issues years ago. Today, however, there are zero issues. I've had my 680s in SLI since release day, and i've never had a problem. imo, it's worth the entry fee.

You must just be playing different games. I've had launch day SLI issues with DiRT Showdown, Borderlands 2, Far Cry 3, Batman: Arkham City and XCOM: Enemy Unknown. That's despite using the latest respective beta drivers that supposedly had fixes for those very games. In fact I've had more issues with SLI for my GTX680s than with Crossfire for my HD5970. That said, I still prefer the nVidia experience overall and I don't mind putting up with the occasional issue for the performance it offers.

But the idea that there are "zero issues" today is laughable. It's not even slightly true.

Keep in mind that nvidia has released new beta drivers (310.64) which claim up to 38% performance increase.

Even with those SLI was broken at release and performance is still sketchy. They only offer such an improvement because performance was so bad before.

I run the game at 2560x1440 downsampled to 1920x1080 (to reduce aliasing), DX11 with all settings maxed, PostFX set to "false" in the config (to disable DoF and what not), and no AA. The in-game MSAA takes a huge toll on performance no matter the system so I can't recommend using it. The game runs flawlessly (60 FPS) with the latest beta drivers so far.

Specs:

Intel i5-3570K @ 4.2GHz

GeForce GTX 680 @ Stock

8GB Corsair XMS3 DDR3-1600

Crucial M4 128GB SSD

I can safely recommend a single 680 from personal experience. It looks like you're considering 680's in SLI, which would be even better I'd imagine.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • This got me thinking, would you rather a self driving car prioritise protecting its passengers or everyone else? I'd choose the one that keeps me and my kids safest. At some point, these cars have to make those choices already, don't they? Wonder if we have a way to find out what way they lean.
    • The proportion (or number of iterations) has nothing to with this aspect of Copyright I am describing. In short, it doesn't matter how many times the manager tells you to change something or how. Your work product is always YOURS until and unless you then assign that to the person representing the client/company, usually for financial compensation -- either in salary or as a subcontract work for hire payment. if iterations determined copyright, then businesses would have learned to just keep making changes until they could claim they owned the copyright, without having to compensate the artist for their work. And that would be BAD. The only place where the amount of changes does have a role is in how much does a human modify a previous public domain work (from any source) before it is considered fair use or their own work, etc. For example, if a human makes substantial changes to a public domain (re: AI, by definition) work, then they can then claim that derivative work as their own...but NEVER the original version, of course. That's why anyone can make a movie about Dracula, for example, as long as it is based on the public domain novel, but not if they take new ideas from copyrighted movies made afterwards. As one of the people who personally advised the US Copyright Office on their recent ruling on these very issues, be assured that I specifically used the terminology precisely -- though I made it simple enough for laymen to understand it. If I made this confusing by doing so, I apologize. But, to be clear regarding your assumption that I would agree to your second statement that I quoted above -- the answer is NO. If AI does the work, no matter how much "direction" you give it, it cannot be copyrighted. All AI generated content is in the Public Domain and therefore the copyright cannot be assigned to ANYONE, even you -- until and unless substantial modifications are made to it BY A HUMAN BEING (yourself or a contracted artist/writer/etc.) and then that copyright on the derivative work is legally (in writing) transferred to you. This is a critical distinction. And it is important that people, especially AI sloppers, understand this. For example, YouTube is not paying AI slop generators for the copyright, etc. of their AI slop. What YouTube is doing is sharing AD REVENUE for permission to publish your AI slop. Copyright/ownership/rights never come into it. Importantly, that means that anyone can copy any AI slopware on YouTube, etc. and rehost it anywhere they want, even back on YouTube, and there is nothing legal that YouTube can do about it with regards to copyright protections, ownership, DMCA, etc. Anyone is legally free to use any AI slopware in any way they want. When this ruling was pending, I warned Disney legal of all of this before they did their OpenAI deal -- that it would literally dilute their entire IP portfolio forever. They ignored that warning for the PR and stock bump. But that is why, when the ruling came down last year, Disney quickly extricated themselves from that OpenAI deal, even eating the initial upfront fees -- followed closely by OpenAI ending their entire AI video generating business model. They adjusted their PR release dates to make this less obvious to shareholders, of course. Phew. I hope that this clears up the key distinctions for you and anyone reading. If you have any additional questions or even hypotheticals about AI and Copyright, please feel free to ask.
    • Each of the devices displayed on this page now has a little volume meter next to it to show if there is audio actively playing. About time.
    • Owing to the nature of Windows feature enablement updates, it was distributed over Windows Update services as a complete system upgrade rather than as an ordinary cumulative update
  • Recent Achievements

    • Collaborator
      ryansurfer98 went up a rank
      Collaborator
    • Week One Done
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Eurosoft10 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      Skeet Campbell earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Month Later
      Sharbel earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      565
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      188
    3. 3
      Michael Scrip
      79
    4. 4
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      74
    5. 5
      neufuse
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!