PC specs and how Crysis runs on it [Archive]

sniperghost666

12-10-2007, 08:28 PM

no, this is not a bragging thread. i've just read alot of conflicting reports on how well cysis runs on different systems. remember the minimum system requirements for crysis are:

CPU: Intel Pentium 4 2.8 GHz (3.2 GHz for Vista), Intel Core 2.0 GHz (2.2 GHz for Vista), AMD Athlon 2800+ (3200+ for Vista) or better
RAM: 1GB (1.5GB on Windows Vista)
Video Card: NVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT, ATI Radeon 9800 Pro (Radeon X800 Pro for Vista) or better
VRAM: 256MB of Graphics Memory
Storage: 12GB
Sound Card: DirectX 9.0c Compatible
ODD: DVD-ROM
OS: Microsoft Windows XP or Vista
DirectX: DX9.0c or DX10

the recommended system requirements are:

CPU: Core 2 Duo/Athlon X2 or better
RAM: 1.5GB
Video Card: NVIDIA 7800 Series, ATI Radeon 1800 Series or better
VRAM: 512MB of Graphics Memory
Storage: 12GB
Sound Card: DirectX 9.0c Compatible
ODD: DVD-ROM
OS: Microsoft Windows XP or Vista
DirectX: DX9.0c or DX10

my PC settings are:

Processor- Intel core 2 duo 6700 2.66 GHZ
Ram- 2 gigs
VRAM- 2046MB
OS- windows vista
DirectX- DX10
graphics card- 8800GTX

juat curious how other peoples systems are running this game. i puchased it and all the automatic system settings set everything to the highest setting. but i still have lag and choppy preformance in single and multiplayer

Spils

12-10-2007, 10:44 PM

my PC settings are:

Processor- Intel quad 6600go
Ram- 4 gigs pc6400
OS- windows vista 64 bit
DirectX- DX10
xfi fatality
graphics card- bfg oc2 8800GT
Res 1280 x 720 native:1920x1200:(
2x AA ingame
nvidia control panel all option set to applictaion controled for crysis.exe

the automatic system settings set everything to the highest setting. but i still have lag and choppy preformance in single and multiplayer.

same even on high im yet to find a config that keeps this game averaging over 35fps, its smooth for 80% of the time. But can bog down when the action gets heated..

sniperghost666

12-11-2007, 04:16 AM

i can already see from the amount of responses that there's obviously not very many people on these forums, so i guess i should consider this thread a lost cause...

Stalker-NSDQ

12-12-2007, 12:15 AM

I run everything on high with full Antisoptric Filtering and no AA.

My Specs:

Intel Core 2 Duo E6850
2GB DDR2 RAM (800)
ASUS EN8800GTS 640MB
X-Fi Xtreme Music

WNx Makka99

12-12-2007, 12:24 AM

My specs are in my sig. I run crysis at everything high except for post-processing (not because it cant handle it but because i hate motion blur).

I play it at 1024x768 with 4x AA and 4xAF and the fps sits at around 25 fps and sometimes jumps to around 50 which is very playable for me.

Innova

12-12-2007, 04:23 AM

Whether you run XP or Vista and play Crysis, Nvidia continues to improve its drivers. It's kinda a shame that every other troubleshooting forums post reply ends up suggesting..."have you tried the newest Nvidia drivers."

I'm thinking of the newcomers and the not so savvy ppl.

Games like Crysis and driver makers like Nvidia seem to constantly require "hip" users to download a new driver every 2 weeks. 60% of the troubleshooting replies on forums (did you download the latest flavor nvidia driver to solve your problem?) are usually helped by new driver.

It's not that bad a situation, but for the general public no-nots...it can be.

Just as some games like QW's automatically starts the game telling you if you have the recent patch, games might get someday detect your card driver and tell you need to update the driver and restart the game in order to avoid this or that problem.

Mavrik347

12-16-2007, 02:34 AM

Processor - AMD Athlon 3800+ X2 64bit
Ram - 2 gigs
VRAM - 256MB
OS - Windows XP Pro
DirectX - DX9c
Graphics card - 6800GT Limited edition

How does it run? Smooth as a babies bottom wrapped in silk. (on all low of course)

sniperghost666

12-16-2007, 06:53 PM

i found that (for everone who has a 7800 or higher) that changing all the graphic settings to high instead of the highest setting, makes the game run alot smoother

Lt_Hanley

12-17-2007, 11:27 AM

Ummm who cares about high? I run mainly on medium and the game still looks Amazing i will run smooth too. I have 8800GTS two gig ram and a dual core 2.66ghz

sp44z

12-17-2007, 06:09 PM

My comp is 4-5 years old so, I laugh at you all! :D

PIV 2.8
ATI x1950
3gig DDR Ram
Creative Audigy

I can run the game on medium and it's not too bad, but for best performance, I run everything on low and it runs without a hitch. Personally, I enjoy Crysis...a lot. Haven't tried out the MP yet, but the myriad things you can do in SP, just makes it an enjoyable game. Is it the best FPS ever made? No, but it doesn't mean it's not a damn good game! :ar15:

sniperghost666

12-17-2007, 07:01 PM

Ummm who cares about high? I run mainly on medium and the game still looks Amazing i will run smooth too. I have 8800GTS two gig ram and a dual core 2.66ghz

have you tried it on high? you should be able to run it on that setting smoothly with an 8800gts. and i found that antialsing (however you spell it) on 8x is an optimal setting, just a suggestion

Lt_Hanley

12-17-2007, 10:33 PM

I will have to try it out myself i really dont care though the game no matter the setting look amazing.

sniperghost666

12-18-2007, 01:27 AM

I will have to try it out myself i really dont care though the game no matter the setting look amazing.

cool :nod:

Verzili

12-19-2007, 05:59 PM

4200x2

2900xt

2gb ram.

medium plays smooth.

high is ok until lots of action.

veryhigh is great for my post card project :)

upgrading to a 790 chipset with 4x pcie when the newer amd x4 come out,(9700@2.4 i think)

then ill wait and see what the 3870x2 performance is like and may put in 2 of them,if that does not do the job then,well upgrade will have to wait :)

Trooper_811

12-20-2007, 12:29 AM

Anyone out there using a widescreen monitor? I have a widescreen monitor on the way and I want to run Crysis on the monitor's native resolution which is 1680x1050.

I also am building a new PC (bought parts today) b/c I will need the extra power to run Crysis at this resolution. What is your experience with widescreen performance?

HEFO

12-20-2007, 07:39 PM

sp44z

12-20-2007, 07:49 PM

I hear Al Gore blames the high system requirements on global warming. :nerr:

EngkAnt0

12-21-2007, 01:50 AM

i just bought the game and installing it right now..

u guys think i can play this game on all high?

my specs are

core2 duo e6750 2.66ghz
2gigs ram 800
8600gts 256mb
500gb hd
audigy se sound card.

JASONX.DK

12-21-2007, 06:19 PM

i just bought the game and installing it right now..

u guys think i can play this game on all high?

my specs are

core2 duo e6750 2.66ghz
2gigs ram 800
8600gts 256mb
500gb hd
audigy se sound card.
nope,not even i can without lag

Trevortt

12-21-2007, 06:26 PM

HEFO

12-21-2007, 08:46 PM

You would be able to play all on high if you had a new 8800GT card, that 8600gts is not meant for gaming at all.

Thats the most stupidest thing I ever heard...

8600 GTS
() is in SLI

Stream Processors: 32 (64)
Core Clock (MHz): 675 (945)
Shader Clock (MHz): 1450 (2030)
Memory Clock (MHz): 1000 (1400)
Memory Amount: 256MB (512MB)
Memory Interface: 128-bit (256-bit)
Memory Bandwidth (GB/sec): 32 (64)
Texture Fill Rate (billion/sec): 10.8 (21,6)

8800 GT

Stream Processors: 112
Core Clock (MHz): 600
Shader Clock (MHz): 1500
Memory Clock (MHz): 900
Memory Amount: 512MB
Memory Interface: 256-bit
Memory Bandwidth (GB/sec): 57.6
Texture Fill Rate (billion/sec): 33.6

sniperghost666

12-22-2007, 02:34 PM

HEFO

12-22-2007, 03:19 PM

yeah you can, let me know if i'm right or not :salute:

Your wrong, med - high with lags...
Medium - very very very very very very very very very very small lags....

sniperghost666

12-23-2007, 09:19 AM

Your wrong, med - high with lags...
Medium - very very very very very very very very very very small lags....

you have a 8600gts 256mb card?

iQu'e

12-23-2007, 10:07 AM

AMD Athlon 64 X2 5000+ 2,6 GHz

2 GB DDR-2 RAM

8800 GTS 512 mb

In SP, Very high (without AA) runs at about 25 FPS, drops to about 15 when there's lots of action so it's actually very playable if you play on the easiest setting.

In MP I play a mix of medium/high, 2x AA and it runs steadily at about 30 FPS. Drops to 20 occasionally but it's still playable.

All medium runs at ~60 FPS so if I'm not in the mood for eyecandy that's the way to go.

HEFO

12-23-2007, 01:07 PM

you have a 8600gts 256mb card?

yep..

Speckled_Pants

12-23-2007, 05:08 PM

SILENCED

12-24-2007, 06:04 AM

Originally Posted by Trooper_811
Anyone out there using a widescreen monitor? I have a widescreen monitor on the way and I want to run Crysis on the monitor's native resolution which is 1680x1050.

I also am building a new PC (bought parts today) b/c I will need the extra power to run Crysis at this resolution. What is your experience with widescreen performance?

I have a 20" Widescreen running CRYSIS on 1680x1050 fine.
I got all my graphics set to medium, but textures and sound are set to high.

Runs very smooth, especially online.

sniperghost666

12-24-2007, 10:08 AM

Quad core q6600 @ 3.25ghz
4gb Crucial Ballistix PC2-8500
8800 GTX
Vista 64

5.8 Overall on vista experience and 13,000 on 3DMARK06

Runs everything on high with a little lag, runs everything on very high (dx10) with loads of lag.

Not happy at all with the performance, only played the game 3 times.

that's one of my biggest arguments about the game, how can a guy with a QUAD core, and and 8800 GTX run everything JUST on high and STILL have lag??? I'm just curious as to why they released the game KNOWING that even a high end PC couldn't handle the game. now they're going to have to wait at least a year or possibly 2 years for a PC to come out that can run everything on very high. yes the game still looks good and the SP is very well done. but i'm just thinking about the economics of releasing it so soon. because by the time a PC comes out to run it on very high, the game will be reduced to 29.99 on the bottom shelf. sorry to get off topic, just annoys me. oh and pants, try COD4 if you get a chance, if that's your type of game. and good luck with crysis

Speckled_Pants

12-24-2007, 01:40 PM

that's one of my biggest arguments about the game, how can a guy with a QUAD core, and and 8800 GTX run everything JUST on high and STILL have lag??? I'm just curious as to why they released the game KNOWING that even a high end PC couldn't handle the game. now they're going to have to wait at least a year or possibly 2 years for a PC to come out that can run everything on very high. yes the game still looks good and the SP is very well done. but i'm just thinking about the economics of releasing it so soon. because by the time a PC comes out to run it on very high, the game will be reduced to 29.99 on the bottom shelf. sorry to get off topic, just annoys me. oh and pants, try COD4 if you get a chance, if that's your type of game. and good luck with crysis

Well with the system i have i was expecting to run the game on the highest settings possible, which is the whole reason i bought the game. We all saw the videos before the release, and they're what got everybody excited. If i knew before hand my machine wouldnt be up to the job (the job i mean everything on max) i wouldnt have bothered, but like most i was sucked in by the hype. Like you say, who wants to buy a game now and wait a couple of years before they can play it properly? not me thats for sure.

I am actually playing cod4 and i love it, also ut3. If it wasnt for cod4 i'd prob spend a little more time with crysis, tweaking the settings a little so it does run better and giving the game more of a chance. But like you im a little annoyed with it and i just cant be bothered, cod4 is very addictive and i think thats where my attention will be for a while to come.

sniperghost666

12-24-2007, 02:03 PM

Well with the system i have i was expecting to run the game on the highest settings possible, which is the whole reason i bought the game. We all saw the videos before the release, and they're what got everybody excited. If i knew before hand my machine wouldnt be up to the job (the job i mean everything on max) i wouldnt have bothered, but like most i was sucked in by the hype. Like you say, who wants to buy a game now and wait a couple of years before they can play it properly? not me thats for sure.

I am actually playing cod4 and i love it, also ut3. If it wasnt for cod4 i'd prob spend a little more time with crysis, tweaking the settings a little so it does run better and giving the game more of a chance. But like you im a little annoyed with it and i just cant be bothered, cod4 is very addictive and i think thats where my attention will be for a while to come.

same here but don't say that too loud, a few weeks ago i did a thread on the COD4 thread called COD4 Vs. Crysis, and then i figured i was being biased so i did the same thread in here and people flipped $hit. and i agree why put the recommended settings:

OS - Windows XP / Vista
Processor - Intel Core 2 DUO @ 2.2GHz or AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+
Memory - 2.0 GB RAM
GPU - NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS/640 or similar

and then even these machines can't play it. much less yours or mine i have a duel core 2.6 and an 8800 GTX and 2 gigs of RAM and i can't run on highest setting either. and barely on high. i just got sucked into the hype, as did alot of the other buyers. but some of the posters on here just continue to bash people who point out simple FACTS about the game. it should not have been released (at least not with the system requirements on the website and the box) if they knew it was going to preform so badly. who wants to buy a game and set it on medium or low and then wait a year or two, upgrade, and then be able to play it on highest? not me, just wish i could my money back....

Lt_Hanley

12-24-2007, 03:07 PM

sniperghost666

12-24-2007, 03:29 PM

Again. STOP ****ing worrying about playing it on HIGH! Medium is amazing! I play on medium and i still love it. Play it with what you get even if it is medium! Serious stop think that every game NEEDS to be played on high it doesn't.

well i would like to think that for some reason that the game programmers put a "very high" setting in the game for a reason. and have you seen the game on very high settings? i have and it looks 10 times better than medium or high. and no it dosen't NEED to be played on high, but with the recommended seetings it SHOULD be able to be played on high, the game is a jip, plain and simple. and what about the people who play it on medium with the recommended sttings and it still lags out? pathetic.....:shakehead and though you may be satisfied with what you get, people who have dual and quad cores and 8800 GTX's who have to settle for medium or high, when the game settings say otherwise, we get the shaft. and it's not good business to me and i can almost certainly say that more than a few people would back me on this.

Speckled_Pants

12-24-2007, 06:08 PM

Again. STOP ****ing worrying about playing it on HIGH! Medium is amazing! I play on medium and i still love it. Play it with what you get even if it is medium! Serious stop think that every game NEEDS to be played on high it doesn't.

Meduim is far from amazing, but thats your opinion so your entitled to it.

This game was advertised as a graphical masterpiece, and thats why many people bought it (including me) Your right i could play on meduim settings, or high with a few tweaks, but then theres nothing special about the game, its just like all the other out there! Imo the only thing going for the game was the graphics and i just dont have them

Lt_Hanley

12-24-2007, 06:18 PM

It is a graphical masterpiece though. Thats the thing like you all are saying you think that this game needs to be played on high for it to be that masterpiece that fact is it doesn't. In fact it shows too. I play it on medium and then I put the shader on high that how I play it and I don't get any lag I play crisp it it IS Amazing!

sniperghost666

12-24-2007, 08:59 PM

well in 2 years when you're 17 and dig it out of your closet (and every other PC game looks exactly like it graphicly) and can play it on the highest settings, you will see the difference. i'm not saying that it's a bad looking game now by any means. but when you see it on it's futuristic game engine working on a computer that few people can afford today, and probaly dosen't exist now, i bet you'll be like "wow those guys were right". and if i'm wrong, which has been known to be the case more than i like to admit, and someone out there can play this game on very high settings and you happen to read this, please tell me what your PC specs are, if anything just to say that i'm wrong....

D3lit3

12-25-2007, 07:00 PM

Why is everyone getting mad that you can't play Crysis on high? You should be thanking the devs for making such a graphically beautiful game that'll last a LONG time.

Take Oblivion, for example. Same thing happened when it came out. Everyone was whining that they couldn't play it on high with the latest rigs. And now look at it! It still beats most games in the GFX department, even though it it 1-2 years old.

So in the long run, graphics that take a computer that you won't have for another year or two is a good thing :)

sniperghost666

12-25-2007, 09:21 PM

D3lit3

12-25-2007, 09:39 PM

i've never heard of the game...let me guess mmorpg? yes those do tend to last longer. but in the FPS community if a game dosen't make it in the first 6 months, it will fail. just like crysis will. maybe crysis 2 will be better....

Uh...no. It's a single player only RPG. And seeing as most people play Crysis for the SP, I don't really see how Oblivion's situation differs from Crysis's. Apart from the camera view :)

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/theelderscrollsivoblivion/index.html?tag=result;title;0

sniperghost666

12-25-2007, 10:00 PM

Uh...no. It's a single player only RPG. And seeing as most people play Crysis for the SP, I don't really see how Oblivion's situation differs from Crysis's. Apart from the camera view :)

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/theelderscrollsivoblivion/index.html?tag=result;title;0

RPG games are a totally different game types from FPS's, but i do understand your point. ;)

Lt_Hanley

12-26-2007, 02:28 AM

Vash2051

12-26-2007, 02:28 AM

I play with the rig below on very high just fine at 1680x1050. Don't know what all this hype about not being able to play is about. Only place i turned down was snow part. Turned post processing to medium and all was fine.

Thank you for understanding thank you!

He is right about oblivion too its a masterpiece!

I still play that game it rocks!

sniperghost666

12-27-2007, 08:18 PM

well i think bioshock is a masterpiece too, and i can play it on high and it's SP too, and i don't even need my 8800GTX

ATM743

12-31-2007, 01:30 AM

I can play Cryisis with everything on high no AA and its very smooth. 1get around 35-40 fps.

at 1680x1050

[WS] KillerStickMan

12-31-2007, 01:33 AM

HEFO

12-31-2007, 02:23 PM

And guys seriously, get over the fact that your ****ing rig can't play your favorite game on high...and yes the 8600 is a gaming card.

sometimes...

ATM743

01-01-2008, 02:57 PM

my rig plays it perfectly

heres my EPIC gaming set up.

CPU: E6750 G0 2.66Ghz(stock) OC To 3.44Ghz! (440 bus 8X Multi)
RAM: Corsair Dominator DDR2 1066Mhz 2X(1GB)
MOBO: ABIT IP35 Pro
GFX Card: EVGA 8800GTX At 625 ROP, 1010 Memory, 1575 Shader
PSU: OCZ GameXtream 700watt
CPU COOLER: Thermaltake CL-P0401 110mm
HDD: 2X Western Digital Caviar 250GB 7200 RPM 16MB Cache RAID 0
CASE: Antec Nine Hundred
MONITOR: 20" Acer 5ms Monitor 1680x1050
OS: Microsoft XP Media Center Edition 2005
MOUSE: Logitech MX-518

**NOTE** In the picture the ram stick i have is my buds ram, its a 1GB stick of Corsair XMS ddr2 800mhz (at 860MHZ) the ram i own (ocz dd2 667mhz) cant be detected with my motherboard so my bud lend me one of his sticks of ram. i ordered the ram listed and should be here Wednesday **NOTE**

Also pictured is my Xbox 360 hooked up to the right monitor which is the same as the one on the left but just silver but dose not have dvi. my Ipod Touch and pc games. Click the images to see full size pictures

http://img244.imageshack.us/img244/741/computer008un3.th.jpg (http://img244.imageshack.us/my.php?image=computer008un3.jpg) http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/4541/computer011kp0.th.jpg (http://img171.imageshack.us/my.php?image=computer011kp0.jpg) http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/6919/computer009kp7.th.jpg (http://img183.imageshack.us/my.php?image=computer009kp7.jpg) http://img172.imageshack.us/img172/1789/computer010zb6.th.jpg (http://img172.imageshack.us/my.php?image=computer010zb6.jpg) http://img183.imageshack.us/img183/1379/computer012vg1.th.jpg (http://img183.imageshack.us/my.php?image=computer012vg1.jpg) http://img182.imageshack.us/img182/4251/computer013io3.th.jpg (http://img182.imageshack.us/my.php?image=computer013io3.jpg) http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/5046/computer014er0.th.jpg (http://img262.imageshack.us/my.php?image=computer014er0.jpg) http://img293.imageshack.us/img293/7475/computer015sy2.th.jpg (http://img293.imageshack.us/my.php?image=computer015sy2.jpg) http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/8627/computer017nn1.th.jpg (http://img257.imageshack.us/my.php?image=computer017nn1.jpg)

HEFO

01-01-2008, 04:02 PM

Man, you should really tkae some time, and clean and change the tables, cause (sorry) it looks like a dump...

And spend some time cleaning those wires in your PC, man its just... :dead:

Death Merchant

01-07-2008, 06:57 PM

my pc runs this on high 1680x1050 2aa on slingle player, from about 30-60fps,

but in multiplayer i have some problems, its fine for about 5 mins then lags for a couple of munites then the cycle repeats

Vash2051

01-08-2008, 10:29 PM

HEFO unfortunately SLI doesn't jut magically double the specs of your card. Its usually more of a 30% increase if your lucky.

sniperghost666

01-09-2008, 12:06 AM

8600GT 512mb
2.5gb DDR ram
3.4ghz AMD Sempron
DX 9

I run it at 800x600 med with lag because of my processor.

And guys seriously, get over the fact that your ****ing rig can't play your favorite game on high...and yes the 8600 is a gaming card.

LOL crysis is the FARTHEST thing from my favorite game...

and the whole point of this thread was that the recommended settings for the game fell far short for the optimization of the game, simple as that

HEFO

01-09-2008, 05:19 PM

HEFO unfortunately SLI doesn't jut magically double the specs of your card. Its usually more of a 30% increase if your lucky.

I know, i but i think it is 40%, pitty, but in the future when they will catch most of the bugs, maybe it will be an 100% boost...

Vash2051

01-10-2008, 08:45 PM

We can only dream...

HEFO

01-10-2008, 09:31 PM

We can only dream...

I think its more waiting that dreaming

Vash2051

01-11-2008, 11:23 PM

not if cards go multi core. Which they already are. SLI will just be a bonus no one uses...

C0M8AT STEVE

01-15-2008, 08:00 AM

I run everything on high with the dx 10 hacks (i'm using xp), 2xAA, 1680x1050 and is runs fine. I'll get an exact fps later. specs in sig.

Repulse

01-15-2008, 11:25 AM

I had SLi before (two 7900GTX) and the game ran pretty well, although I had to mostly use medium settings, got a 8800GTX and it runs like a dream :D. All high settings smooth as averages around 35-30FPS.

Vash2051

01-15-2008, 03:53 PM

For clarification when people say High I understand that as High not Very High settings. Just make sure you denote that right.

Sike

01-16-2008, 01:30 PM

specs in my sig, i play all medium, with a few bumped to high, x16 aa (i think)
1600x1500 plays very smooth, but only lags a little when either ALOT of **** is happening or, my game decides to go into window mode, + ima playing the SP demo, and ive heard te full games runs better YAY

w00dy

02-15-2008, 09:03 AM

I got Crysis yesterday and have installed it and the latest patch. But not had time to play it yet. What setting would you recommend I set it to, for good graphics/performance? Also what Resolution would be best for graphics/performance?

My system spec’s are:

Athlon 4800+ x2
2 GB Corsair ram
WD 320GB HD
Audigy es
OCZ GameXtream 700watt
HIS 3870x2 (Using 8.2 Cat drivers)
Samsung SM226BW 22"
Windows XP SP2

MrChris_CJ

02-15-2008, 02:09 PM

hmm well your gcard is very good, I would think High would be easily attainable but I don't know how well the cpu performs for the game and I have 4 gigs of ram with an e6600 and an 8800gts640 and I can run 1680by1050 high (bar 2 options I think) lower resolutions I can go much higher

JASONX.DK

02-21-2008, 06:18 PM

not if cards go multi core. Which they already are. SLI will just be a bonus no one uses...trust me we are some ppl there still gonne buy two cards hehehe ;)

Trevortt

02-23-2008, 08:10 AM

I run the Ultra High custom config (http://www.incrysis.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=17780&p=1) and averge 25 fps which is very playable, believe it or not.

Teh_Diplomat

03-12-2008, 04:37 AM

You can check my specs under my name.

I run it at all high settings @ 1680x1050 with 2xAA and around 25-30FPS.

CrAzY eYeD cAt =^O.o^=

03-12-2008, 04:57 AM

8800GTX, Q6600, Asus P5N-T Deluxe mobo, 4gb corsair Xms2 ram....runs like sh1t

L3adcannon

03-15-2008, 09:03 PM

radeon 3870, 2gb ram, get a steady 30-35 fps with all high (very high in config) with forced AA from the control panel.

{Truth}Peregrine

03-25-2008, 04:24 AM

CrAzY eYeD cAt =^O.o^=

03-25-2008, 12:27 PM

Ok Im thinking about getting this game. Can anyone tell me how I might run Crysis on my rig.

Here are my specs:
CPU: Intel Q6600
Video: Evga 8800GTS 640MB
Motherboard: Evga 680i
RAM: 4gigs of XMS2 800
Monitor: 1920x1200
Power: 750w Thermaltake

When or If I get it I would be running the resolution at 1920x1200. So any ideas on how it will run? Can I run it on high or Ultra High without getting bad lag while running at a good FPS?

no... settings all 'high'.. AA: off.. resolution: around 1200x900 mark.. FPS: avg about 30 and get as low as about 15 in more graphic rich moments..

although.. the ONE good thing i must say about crysis is its motion blurr conceals the poor frame rates u get :)

{Truth}Peregrine

03-25-2008, 08:14 PM

iQu'e

03-25-2008, 08:31 PM

How about if I get two 8800GTS 512MB (G92)? Will that work for what I want?
Also how about if I just throw in another 8800GTS 640MB (cant remember if the 640MB can be SLi or not)? Will one of those two ways work, or do I need somthing else?

Also one thing I hate is not being able to run a game at my screens resolution. So will one of those ways work or will I need more to run the game at 1920x1200 with everything high/ultra high?

Try the demo and see how the performance is there :D

The G92 88GTS is a great card (have one myself) but you wouldn't get that much better performance if you got two... I mean it would run a little faster but it wouldn't really be worth the money.

My rig can play the game all very high, no AA at 1680*1050 with around 30 FPS... It struggles at the later levels though.

CrAzY eYeD cAt =^O.o^=

03-25-2008, 09:48 PM

u will never be able to run crysis on ultra high with high resolution smoothly all the way through with the 8800 series.. just hold on to ur money.. wait for all the 9800 series to be benchmarked and see whats the best from there.. or even better wait for a few months and get the whole new range of cards there apparently releasing :) dont go SLI'ng the 8800 series atm :)

Trevortt

03-25-2008, 10:10 PM

Ok Im thinking about getting this game. Can anyone tell me how I might run Crysis on my rig.

Here are my specs:
CPU: Intel Q6600
Video: Evga 8800GTS 640MB
Motherboard: Evga 680i
RAM: 4gigs of XMS2 800
Monitor: 1920x1200
Power: 750w Thermaltake

When or If I get it I would be running the resolution at 1920x1200. So any ideas on how it will run? Can I run it on high or Ultra High without getting bad lag while running at a good FPS?

Well...if you had of read my post you would have realised that if i can play with a decent frame rate using the ultra high custom config you can certainly play with your system :nod:

{Truth}Peregrine

03-25-2008, 10:25 PM

Ok Im downloading the demo right now. I read your post and was thinking of trying that ultra high custom config also.

It would be awhile before I get a new card Gfx card. Right now Im holding off tell the MGS4 bundle. After that I will have some money to guy a Gfx card. The new GT200 card from Nvidia seems great from what I read but I just hope its not going to be like the 9800GX2, costing $700. $500 would be nice.

Anyways I'll report back here after trying the demo. Trevortt does that config work for the demo by any chance? If I like the demo and how it plays I would be most likley getting the full game.

****EDIT****
Ok just got done playing the demo. Was playing with everthing on high at a resolution of 1920x1200. Its not that bad, and everything seemed to run ok. One thing though is that some of the cutscene took a lot out of my GFX card. Other than that everthing ran good.

Namakan

03-26-2008, 02:26 AM

I just went to 64bit Vista, I will post how Crysis runs on it later

Tomeis

03-26-2008, 06:56 AM

no... settings all 'high'.. AA: off.. resolution: around 1200x900 mark.. FPS: avg about 30 and get as low as about 15 in more graphic rich moments..

although.. the ONE good thing i must say about crysis is its motion blurr conceals the poor frame rates u get :)

That is very true. In most games, 25 - 30 FPS isn't good enough. But because of the motion blurr in Crysis, 25 - 30 FPS is playable. maybe not for multiplayer, but for singleplayer it's fine

Trevortt

03-27-2008, 07:11 PM

Anyways I'll report back here after trying the demo. Trevortt does that config work for the demo by any chance? If I like the demo and how it plays I would be most likley getting the full game.

I wouldn't know as the custom config was out after the game came out, worth a try tho.

is_don_is_good

03-30-2008, 03:07 PM

not mine, but this system is definitely a crysis killer
9800GX2... 2 of them!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=UXlR-Sjwg4w&fmt=18

HEFO

03-30-2008, 03:35 PM

not mine, but this system is definitely a crysis killer
9800GX2... 2 of them!

http://youtube.com/watch?v=UXlR-Sjwg4w&fmt=18

He should do a benchmark with 1 card, then 2 cards, to see how is SLi helping... + How can it kill Crysis when it only had 60FPS with no AA?

Btw: Is it me, or the cards are fu**ing BIG!!!

CrAzY eYeD cAt =^O.o^=

03-30-2008, 06:14 PM

^^the cards are fu**ing huge... im getting a single GX2... i wonder what ill get.. anyone seen any benchmarks for this card yet? i can never seem to find a decent benchmark..

shel10

04-03-2008, 05:28 PM

I run everything on High, full AF, no AA, VSync off, all other settings to application controlled. Res is 1680 x 1050, no lag at all. I'm still on XP, but I did try the 'very high' config file hack, it slowed down a bit, but still playable. I didn't notice enough of a difference to justify the lag, so I just put it back to high. Not sure what true DX10 very high would be like in comparison.

Specs:
C2 Duo 6750
2g of XMS 2
EVGA 8800GT - stock clock
EVGA Nvidia 650i - stock settings
Audigy 4

xXSniper1432Xx

04-03-2008, 07:38 PM

I run the game all high, 4XAA, 1024X768 resolution, and get 20-30ish FPS.

EVGA 590 SLI
AMD Athlon 64 X2 6400+ 3.2Ghz
3 Gigs DDR2
EVGA 8800 GTS 320mb
Windows XP Pro

http://i106.photobucket.com/albums/m251/ace5_2006/ScreenShot0004.jpg

Unnamed Assailant

04-12-2008, 03:16 AM

I run the game on all high, 4x AA, 1024x768 and get 20-30 FPS, except when I don't, and except when it just CTDs every other level transition. And when I load and don't have a weapon or HUD except for my minimap and even it has weirdness to it.

fs164

04-16-2008, 01:19 PM

Core Duo 2 E6750 2.66GHz
OCZ 4GB DDR2 PC2-6400
EVGA GeForce 8800 GTS 512MB
Vista

DX10 I can run Crysis all very high except shaders and shadows high, with 1440x900 AA 2x 25-35 fps.
DX9 Crysis runs all high and 1680x1050 no AA 30-40 fps.

Alex98uk

04-16-2008, 01:20 PM

fs164

04-16-2008, 02:37 PM

OC that CPU to squeeze some more FPS out.
I really like to do that. Im affright if something goes broken. I have keep looking at this guide for month now. Is this really safe to do with stock cooler. If it is I will perhap overclock this.
Before overclocking
Disable All CPU features like Enhanced Speed Step, C1E(Enhanced Halt State), TM2....Etc
Set Vcore to manual and set it to about 1.25 volts (Standard Vcore for ur CPU)
1. Lower the DRAM frequency to 667MHZ from 800Mhz so it will be FSB:RAM=1:1
Update : Set ur PCIe frequency to Manual and set it to 100MHz just to be sure it wont go high and do Video card Probs
2. Increase the FSB to 400MHz from 333Mhz(your stock speed) dont change the multiplyer leave it at 8 or Auto.
When you do this ur DRAM frequency will increase to 800MHz so itll be running on stock speed, No OC on Ram
3. And u got a overclock of 3.2GHz
4. And if ur system is not stable enough Increase the Vcore just a little bit and itll all be fine...
5. Keep ur Eye on the CPU temp all the time, dont let them pass : CPU temp>65 Core#0 >75 Core#1 >75...use speed fan or Core Temp to monitor the Temps
6. Run Orthos for a few hours to test the Stability..if it dont return any errors u are all done
My idle temps are both cores 32-34 C

CrAzY eYeD cAt =^O.o^=

04-16-2008, 07:59 PM

I really like to do that. Im affright if something goes broken. I have keep looking at this guide for month now. Is this really safe to do with stock cooler. If it is I will perhap overclock this.

My idle temps are both cores 32-34 C

i personaly wouldn't do any overclocking with a stock cooler.. im not saying u cant.. but i would ALWAYS advise to getting a decent aftermarket cooler for ANY overclocking project :)

Alex98uk

04-16-2008, 08:02 PM

No, i wouldn't do it on a stock cooler.

Here is a good guide:

http://files.totalgamingnetwork.com/files/file.php?user_file_id=524

fs164

04-17-2008, 08:56 AM

Ok, thanks. I am going to buy new cooler. I have about 70 euro to spend. What do u prefer? Noctua?
If I am not getting that new coller soon, is it safe to clock to 3.00 Ghz with stock.

CrAzY eYeD cAt =^O.o^=

04-17-2008, 10:28 AM

Alex98uk

04-17-2008, 10:49 AM

Ok, thanks. I am going to buy new cooler. I have about 70 euro to spend. What do u prefer? Noctua?
If I am not getting that new coller soon, is it safe to clock to 3.00 Ghz with stock.

For the best technical advice, make a new thread here (http://www.totalgamingnetwork.com/main/forumdisplay.php?f=175)

And, no, don't overclock with the standard cooler.

xXSniper1432Xx

04-17-2008, 12:41 PM

lol i just tested Crysis with my new updates (check system specs) and i STILL only average around 30 FPS on high settings and medium resolution, no AA. some points in the beggining level dropping to as low as 11-19 fps... waste of money i guess.

P.S. yes i do have the new drivers ;)

Because no matter what you get, Crysis will still run the same. :p

Edit:

This guy has almost the same system in a way and get 57 fps on the stress test lol..
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QGqEp9irDuE

CrAzY eYeD cAt =^O.o^=

04-18-2008, 06:33 AM

Because no matter what you get, Crysis will still run the same. :p

Edit:

This guy has almost the same system in a way and get 57 fps on the stress test lol..
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QGqEp9irDuE

i cant get the benchmark to work for some unknown reason.. and to avoid me throwing this $4500 pile of sh... into the pool i have given up trying.. but im sure a benchmark will give u a nice score.. its actually playing the game with fraps going thats the real test..

Eagle101

04-20-2008, 05:56 PM

Runs fine with my rig, hell it ran fine on my laptop lawlcakes all high no AA and shadows on low (figured shadows meh who needs them).

annihilatorape

07-06-2008, 04:06 PM

i have tried it at all levels (low,med,high and very high) and plays pretty good for me, but i prefer medium lvl for some reason...

TrooperJac

07-08-2008, 01:25 PM

I have a widescreen LCD. I think you'll have trouble playing at native resolution unless you knock the game down to medium.

I played at 13xx*8xx (cant remeber the exact numbers) at high and with sunrays turned on, no AA. Was smooth 90% of the time - certainly playable. GPU Benchmark got me avg 33+ fps, only the carrier level really chugged. Lowering the res slightly is a bit like cheap AA as the scaling blurs things slightly.

Vaikyuko

09-21-2008, 02:39 PM

Hey, everyone!

I just had a quick question about how well Crysis will run on a system I'm building in the near future (around Christmastime). Please let me know if there's anything I neglected to mention that would significantly change performance (on a brief side note, I'm not really sure what I need to list, so I figured I'd list everything I thought was appropriate).

Specs:
EVGA 780i SLI
EVGA GeForce 9800 GTX+ 512MB
4GB DDR2 RAM
Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 3.16GHz
Windows XP Professional (will be running the Very High hack)

So, can anyone please tell me how well my rig will run Crysis? My monitor resolution is going to be 1680x1050, so I'm aiming for all Very High on that particular resolution.

Thanks for the help!

Alex98uk

09-21-2008, 02:48 PM

EVGA 780i SLI

Get an Intel based motherboard, P35 or P45. Nvidia boards on general don't overclock as well and are more expensive. Look at either the Asus P5K Deluxe/Premium or the Asus P5Q Premium/Deluxe

EVGA GeForce 9800 GTX+ 512MB

Poor value card. Look at either the ATI Radeon HD4850 or HD4870. Better performing cards and cheaper

4GB DDR2 RAM

Make sure it's equal to or above PC6400 800MHZ.

Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 3.16GHz

Nice CPU, worth overclocking higher though.

Windows XP Professional (will be running the Very High hack)

Get Windows Vista X64. It would enable you to use 4GB of RAM (32bit can't use a full 4gb). Also, with Service Pack 1, Vista runs better in games.

So, can anyone please tell me how well my rig will run Crysis? My monitor resolution is going to be 1680x1050, so I'm aiming for all Very High on that particular resolution.

You probably won't be able to play all high at 1680x1050. A lower resolution will probably be needed.

Vaikyuko

09-21-2008, 03:12 PM

Thanks for the suggestions!

I'll be looking over the part suggestions in detail. The RAM is equal to PC6400 800MHz, by the way. I will note that the lone thing I plan not to change regardless of suggestions (should have mentioned this earlier) is the OS; I find Vista too cumbersome. In addition, this rig is for general gaming and not necessarily Crysis in particular, and I've found that while Vista can play games just fine, I prefer XP in general. Sorry about having not mentioned that before.

I appreciate the help!

Alex98uk

09-21-2008, 03:17 PM

I will note that the lone thing I plan not to change regardless of suggestions (should have mentioned this earlier) is the OS; I find Vista too cumbersome. In addition, this rig is for general gaming and not necessarily Crysis in particular, and I've found that while Vista can play games just fine, I prefer XP in general. Sorry about having not mentioned that before

Well, that's a common misconception. Before Service Pack 1, Vista was slow and cumbersome.

With Service Pack 1 and 64bit operation, it's quicker and more stable than Windows XP. Plus, with your XP, you'll only be able to use 3gb of RAM.

Death Merchant

09-24-2008, 01:11 PM

with your XP, you'll only be able to use 3gb of RAM.

Unless you 1337 like me and have a copy of XP 64 bit :gob_icon_mrgreen:

best OS ever IMO, even more stable than windows 98 Second Edition

iQu'e

09-24-2008, 02:43 PM

The thing is that it's just a halfarsed port and can't use all features that true 64-bit OS's can (like Vista)

Alex98uk

09-24-2008, 03:02 PM

XP64 is the most half arsed attempt at a 64bit OS ever. It's simply a port with awful 64 instructions.

Finding drivers for some hardware is hard and the quality of those with it is awful...

Death Merchant

09-24-2008, 06:17 PM

The thing is that it's just a halfarsed port

XP64 is the most half arsed attempt at a 64bit OS ever. It's simply a port with awful 64 instructions.

Have you got credible sources for that?

Finding drivers for some hardware is hard and the quality of those with it is awful...

Again have you got any recent creadible sources i.e last 1 year for this? i have all the drivers i need, if theres vista 64 drivers theres always an xp 64 bit to accompany it, remember vista had bad 64 bit support when it first came out too. XP being the first shot at 64 bit would have had no drivers back in 2005 (release date) until someone actually had time to write some 64 bit code

i have all the drivers i need

Motherboard
Graphics
Sound card (yep even creative made an effort :shock:)
Mouse
Keyboard
Monitor
Phone
Joystick

the list could go on......and my system runs better than it did using vista buisness 32 a few months back

a lot of rubbish is spouted out by people who have never used XP 64 bit, theres only one program (software in general) that i cant get to work with 64 bit XP and thats windows live which MS purposly removed support for a few versions ago

plus the OS has never BSOD on me and i have some extra features from the windows 2003 server version and i can also run almost limiltless amounts of ram if i ever need too

I run vista on my laptop, and ok for general web surfing and document creating, but would i want to transfer this to my desktop no, it may look cool but thats about the only thing going for it over xp vista it just seems to me as if MS trying to be MAC esque with its newest release but they just made it into a kinda lazy piece of bloatware in the end, when i buy an OS i want something that is is fast and wont try to stop me doing anything, i dont want UAC to tell me my computer is at risk every 5 munites if my firewall isnt updated, or to warn me everytime i install any piece of software or update

And if you're worried about the security flaws MS is always talking about on xp getting your system infected, get Firefox, Opera or one of the many other free internet browsers none of these are plagued by security issues the same way IE. Thinking about this more its retarded that MS tries to justify security as one if its "big features" The thought of trusting my computer to Windows firewall is enough to give me a cold sweat. Why use Windows firewall when there are so many free alternatives that do ten times a better job

Im not sure why most people on this forum have switched to vista i would really like to hear you justifications on some of you spending $100 on it

Trevortt

09-24-2008, 07:45 PM

Have you got credible sources for that?

Isn't personnel experience good enough? Otherwise, go ahead waste your money!

Ralfie_s

09-29-2008, 07:17 PM

4gb OCZ 1066mhz
3.13ghz core2 Duo (e8500)
gtx260 896mb ocmaxcore

Running at very high 1680x1050..Decent enough FPS never gets unplayable, sometimes will be very high FPS around beaches, dense jungles lots of actions a good 20-30fps, good enough.

iQu'e

09-29-2008, 11:42 PM

Bit old and short article but it explains the goods about how XP 64 isn't all that dandy...

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1906396,00.asp

Search google for XP 64 fail and you'll find a fair bit of information as well haha

Wiki:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_XP_Professional_x64_Edition#64-bit_editions

If you like it, sure. But it's not the best OS ever :D

Death Merchant

10-07-2008, 12:55 AM

If you like it, sure. But it's not the best OS ever :D

Well i did say that it was "the best OS IMO" (in my opinion) a friend of mine says suise linux is the best operating system do i agree with him no, but i respect his opinion

IMO vista will be kinda forgotten in a few years once you OS junkies jump on the windows 7 bandwagon next fall (2009) im not moving to another os until its significantly better than what i have now, until them im with xp

The_Mad_MoShah

10-09-2008, 07:48 PM

Well i did say that it was "the best OS IMO" (in my opinion) a friend of mine says suise linux is the best operating system do i agree with him no, but i respect his opinion

IMO vista will be kinda forgotten in a few years once you OS junkies jump on the windows 7 bandwagon next fall (2009) im not moving to another os until its significantly better than what i have now, until them im with xp

I replaced my XP with Windows Vista and after using it since its release still wonder why.:laugh:

TrooperJac

10-09-2008, 09:36 PM

IMO vista will be kinda forgotten in a few years once you OS junkies jump on the windows 7 bandwagon next fall (2009)

Remember how underwhelmed you were when Vista was released. Prepare to not even notice the release of Windows 7

As far as I can tell - it is just Vista. I will be using it of course. As soon as it hits beta I will be running it. I'm just a sucker for anything 'new' :hmm:

As for Vista. For me it works pretty much flawlessly now. If XP had the Aero interface though there would be no real reason for me to run Vista. The only other aspect of Vista was DX10 which is a fail of epic proportions. A brand new API that looks exactly like the old one but runs worse :shock: