3D Graphics Performance in Crysis

Perhaps the most visually stunning and hardware-intensive game on the market, Crysis is bound to stay with us as a benchmark for some time to come. ExtremeTech has taken an in-depth look into how Crysis performs with modern graphics cards. The results echo Crytek's claim that the game's engine is built for computers three years old and three years in the future. Consumer-grade hardware simply cannot handle the game at full speed.

View: Full Story @ ExtremeTech

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Firefox 2.0.0.10 Gaffe Prompts Quick Fix

Next Story

Vista SP1 Release Candidate expected next week

42 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

[size=7] I play Crysis at 1680x1050 Resolution with all settings on High with 2x AA with no problems at all. My specs: AMD Athlon 64 X2 4000 2.1Ghz, 2x Radeon 3870 512MB CrossFire, 2gb RAM.

Tweaking the autoexec file to increase the grahics and fps. Just replace the current autoexec with this one (see below & open with notepad) and watch the improvement.

My performance...
<><><><><><><><><><><><><>>--SUMMARY--<<><><><><><><><><><><><><>
11/25/2007 11:37:15 AM - XP

Run #1- DX9 1024x768 AA=2x, 32 bit test, Quality: High ~~ Overall Average FPS: 45.025

My rig...
Abit AW9D-MAX (Intel i975-ICH7)
Bios version # 7.3.13
Intel Core 2 Duo CPU e6600 @ 2.40GHz OC @ 3.3GHz Arctic Freezer Pro 7
EVGA GeForce 8800 GTS 640mb
G.SKILL 2GB (2 x 240-Pin) DDR2 6400 800 Mhz 4-4-4-15

Copy/paste to replace the current autoexec file to...

con_restricted=0

r_VSync=1
d3d9_TripleBuffering=1
r_ssao_quality=1
r_ssao_amount=0.4
r_SSAO_darkening=1.3
r_TerrainAO_FadeDist=1
r_HDRlevel=1
r_TexturesStreaming=0
r_ColorGradingDOF=1
r_ShadowJittering=1.5
r_ShadowBlur=3.0
e_gsm_lods_num=5
e_shadows_from_terrain_in_all_lods=0
r_UseEdgeAA=2
e_shadows_max_texture_size=768
e_view_dist_ratio=80
e_particles_lod=0.7
e_vegetation_min_size=1.5
e_view_dist_ratio_vegetation=48
r_sunshafts=1
e_water_ocean_fft=1
e_detail_materials_view_dist_xy=4096
e_detail_materials_view_dist_z=256
r_UsePOM=1
e_lod_ratio=8
e_terrain_lod_ratio=0.6
e_vegetation_sprites_distance_ratio=1.7
r_GeomInstancing=1
e_vegetation_static_instancing=1
e_particles_thread=1
e_cull_veg_activation=70
e_max_entity_lights=20
es_MaxPhysDist=300
es_MaxPhysDistInvisible=35
r_BeamsMaxSlices=250
r_DetailDistance=12
r_TexturesStreaming=0

r_EyeAdaptationBase=0.15

whats so funny? I got 16GB on my windows 3.1 Machine....so i dun get it?

lol

attrib -sarcasm me:\comments

you do understand that you can have roughly ~3GB of ram on a 32 bit OS, don't you? you can't utilize 4, but it will support 3 something.

Gotta love people who have no idea what they're talking about, eh ;)

(Talking about the OP, not the first reply... Excellent reply :P)

Ineed -

It sure is ironic so many people all of a sudden talking about 8800 Ultras -

And the people talking about playing it in XP --- STFU not even comparable

I guess the people at crytek have super computers or are secretly playing a more complete and optimized version, I blame EA for rushing crytek.

Ah well, Im running it at very high settings (everything maxed on dx10) on 720p with about 40 to 60 fps, but maybe my 8800 ultra has something to do with it

System in a nutshell:
Point of view 8800 ultra
Intel Core Duo 6850
4 GB ram
32mb cache seagate drives

The key to running crysis smooth is running it on a lower res.. (figures). And don't even try using anti aliasing,

You can buy a expensive 8800 GTX or you can buy (same price if not less) a xbox360 and stop worrying to update your system for every new game present on the market.

Magallanes said,
You can buy a expensive 8800 GTX or you can buy (same price if not less) a xbox360 and stop worrying to update your system for every new game present on the market.

Buying console games is pretty expensive. And some of us use computers more than just gaming.

Gabe3 said,

Buying console games is pretty expensive. And some of us use computers more than just gaming.

Unless you video editing in high definition, and/or 3d graphics processing, what exactly do you do with your computer that couldn't be done on a computer 5 years ago?

If people want to play latest and greatest computer games on max detail settings and can afford the new systems every year, then more power to them. But I agree with Magallanes that an XBox 360 is a much better buy than a 8800 GTX video card.

That being said, dang I want to upgrade my computer! :P

1600x1200 high settings for everything I get 25-30+ fps. and its very playable

AMD X2 5000+
2GB OCZ 6400ram
WD 36GB raptor
2x 320GB samsung 7200.10 drives
creative x-fi
8800 GTX with 163.69 drivers
21.3" samsung 213T LCD

What I think is hilarious is the ...21.3" (dont forget that all importnt .3 ") !!!

and 25-30 fps is VERY PLAYABLE ?????

SO DO YOU CONSIDER A HYUNDAI AN ENJOYABLE PLEASURE RIDE COMPARABLE TO THE EUROPEAN IMPORTS ??

ROFL

TEX4S said,
What I think is hilarious is the ...21.3" (dont forget that all importnt .3 ") !!!

and 25-30 fps is VERY PLAYABLE ?????

SO DO YOU CONSIDER A HYUNDAI AN ENJOYABLE PLEASURE RIDE COMPARABLE TO THE EUROPEAN IMPORTS ??

ROFL

uh...well lets see 213T is the model number, and if i said 22" i would be lying...so uh... grow up?

25-30fps is very playable that for alot of people seems to run slow, and thats just a running average, fraps has gotten me alot higher in some places, im giving you an overall average for the entire game with everything turned on high, and i don't have that bad-ass of a system either.


You have something against korean automobile manufacturers? I've been in a few hyundais that ride better than some european cars....I lived in germany for 3 years and owned 2 bmws and my honda/friends hyundai rides alot better than those 2 cars ever did...

so again i state my previous statement...grow up.

Not sure what the summary means by "consumer grade hardware can't handle it" but, my can and I bought it as a consumer.

I think the next big game will make use of multi-screen. single screen is a waste when dual can really open up a ton more possibilities.

Denver_80203 said,
Not sure what the summary means by "consumer grade hardware can't handle it" but, my can and I bought it as a consumer.

I think the next big game will make use of multi-screen. single screen is a waste when dual can really open up a ton more possibilities.


There's different general grades of PC hardware. What the names of the various grades varies depending on who you ask. I Imagine they're using a grading continum something like this:
Obsolete, Entry-level, Consumer Grade, Commercial Grade, Professional-Grade, Gamer Extreme, Experimental/Custom Built.
I assume when they say "Consumer-Grade" they mean some HP or Dell box you can pick up at a big-box store. If so, they're right that that kind of machine will likely not be able to handle Crysis. Even Dell's so-called "Extreme Gamer" line isn't really very extreme, and the kind of stuff people usually buy from system builders like them are not aimed at gaming.

Croquant said,

There's different general grades of PC hardware. What the names of the various grades varies depending on who you ask. I Imagine they're using a grading continum something like this:
Obsolete, Entry-level, Consumer Grade, Commercial Grade, Professional-Grade, Gamer Extreme, Experimental/Custom Built.
I assume when they say "Consumer-Grade" they mean some HP or Dell box you can pick up at a big-box store. If so, they're right that that kind of machine will likely not be able to handle Crysis. Even Dell's so-called "Extreme Gamer" line isn't really very extreme, and the kind of stuff people usually buy from system builders like them are not aimed at gaming.

Gaming= XPS, Alienware, VooDoo, or HP BlackBird.

Nothing else stands between.

HP dv6500tse (Influx)
Core 2 Duo T7500 2.2Ghz
2 GB Memory
nVidia GeForce Go 8400 GS

Runs Crysis on high for all with anti analising and amp turned to 2x, DirectX 9. (DX10 works but with like 20 fps less..)

ViperAFK said,
I'm sorry but I'm going to have to call BS on that

lol I wouldn't have believed it either but if you were next to me I'd show you.

QUICK EDIT: Plus I said it runs, not runs well. I turn shadows to medium, anti and amp to off, and everything else on high to play the game. (It runs on what I claimed but not during action scenes/huge explosions)

On my pretty decent gaming rig the highest settings I could play with were medium, at which point it looked a lot less better than other 2007 titles like bioshock which ran perfectly on my system at maximum. Good graphics isn't about wasting time and money on enormous textures, you need an optimized engine to display them properly on a gamer's computer. And don't give me that Get A Better Comp sauce, see the end of sentence #1.
(However at max graphics it looked amazing. Too bad it was a screenshot with sound. :p)

What might be the configuration while developers programmed & tested at final phase?..any idea?
4GB, quadcore, >512 MB card?

guruparan said,
What might be the configuration while developers programmed & tested at final phase?..any idea?
4GB, quadcore, >512 MB card?

Throw in a pair of 8800GTXs in SLI and you're probably close.

Maybe it's just me, but I have all graphics settings at High and the game runs smooth and fast as hell on my XP Pro / e6700 / 8800gts / 2gb / p5w dh deluxe system. It runs better than any other game I have bought recently AND it looks stunning.

GEIST said,
Maybe it's just me, but I have all graphics settings at High and the game runs smooth and fast as hell on my XP Pro / e6700 / 8800gts / 2gb / p5w dh deluxe system. It runs better than any other game I have bought recently AND it looks stunning.

At what resolution though?

I'm running:
eVGA 680i
Quad 6600 @ 2.5GHZ
4GB DDR2 PC800
2x eVGA 8800GTX
2x 150GB Raptors in RAID0
XP Pro with PAE.

My native res is 1920x1080 and it still chugs...

When will people get it through their heads that more core's don't = more speed. The game (nearly all current games) are only coded to really make use of 2 core's at the most.

necrosis said,
When will people get it through their heads that more core's don't = more speed. The game (nearly all current games) are only coded to really make use of 2 core's at the most.

...Except that Crysis does utilize all four cores. It will utilize however many cores you have on your system. The developers made this engine to last for a while.

necrosis said,
When will people get it through their heads that more core's don't = more speed. The game (nearly all current games) are only coded to really make use of 2 core's at the most.

Most new games are coded for multi-core. It's you who'll soon be in the past.

EXCEPT it makes no difference as Crysis isn't so much cpu bound, its graphics bound.

When are people going to realise it isn't about multi-cores, its about gpu efficiency?

Multi-core CPUs are the future. Octo-core CPUs are due out by the end of 2008. No, you won't necessarily need one, but eventually you will.

But Crysis isn't coded for multi-core, it's coded for a fantasy processor that doesn't exist in the real world. I think much of it also has to do with storage limits. I think hard drives are part of the bottleneck in this game, not CPUs. It's streaming stuff off them as you play, so it doesn't matter how fast your CPU is if it has to wait to load a dozen giant HD textures or new objects.

It makes my computer cry at lowest settings (though lowest 16:10 resolution)

cant wait till february/march! New laptop, penryn processor, crysis in higher resolution and good settings

I'll bet you replacement will get killed off by Crysis as well. No mainstream computer can run it on Very High DX10 with a framerate higher than 4 fps as of today.