I don't understand this, that's all I hear about. "Yeah I got <insert specs here> and I can play Crysis full screen 1920x1200 at around 30 to 40 fps." Which is funny, because I always considered 30-40fps to be not that good.
Edit: Depending on the interlacing.
most the time if you can run crysis all very high you can run other games on max.
There's still the people that brag about getting 30 or higher fps. 30fps is shit to me. I hate seeing anything below 50fps.
Because Crysis is one of the most GPU heavy games on the market.
[editline]04:29AM[/editline]
And 20 fps is enough for me. :D
[QUOTE=xZippy;18073585]There's still the people that brag about getting 30 or higher fps. 30fps is shit to me. I hate seeing anything below 50fps.[/QUOTE]
30 FPS in Crysis actually looks reasonable thanks to the careful application of motion blur.
It is still used as a benchmark because despite it's age, nothing has come along to really challenge it in terms of resource usage (and image quality). Far Cry 2 is comparable in terms of system usage, but has presents less options/control to the user over image quality.
Whenever I here someone bragging about FPS in any game I always ask at what resolution and AA settings...they usually stop bragging at about that point.
I take that back, anything lower than 50fps in [i]Valve[/i] games, I hate.
40fps in World at War looks different than 40fps in Team Fortress 2. To me at least.
because crysis uses a variety of advanced shaders and lighting techniques. so it's a good alrounder
Is the OP trying to troll or something, but yeh Crysis is generally difficult to run like TheDestroyerOfall said if you can run that , not many other games should be a problem...
[QUOTE=xZippy;18073414]I don't understand this, that's all I hear about. "Yeah I got <insert specs here> and I can play Crysis full screen 1920x1200 at around 30 to 40 fps." Which is funny, because I always considered 30-40fps to be not that good.[/QUOTE]
Its a benchmark. Do you know the point of a benchmark? Its supposed to measure how your computer compares to others. 30-40 FPS isn't bad in crysis, anything under 20 seems to get pretty choppy. Motion blur can only do so much..
Because crysis seems to be the most demanding graphics card/system 3d benchmark, its one of the most used. it utilizes SLI the best, too.
Why people say "i can run @ x resolution @ x FPS" is because everybody strives to run crysis on the highest possible settings, and want to prove/show where they stand against everybody else.
Again, crysis is a game.
I'd rather use 3DMark Vantage as a benchmark though.
[QUOTE=xZippy;18073826]I take that back, anything lower than 50fps in [i]Valve[/i] games, I hate.
40fps in World at War looks different than 40fps in Team Fortress 2. To me at least.[/QUOTE]
Same I can't play them below 60 or 75 fps. In css it's 75 as I play at a lower resolution for the extra 15 fps and in tf2 I play at the highest resolution which only displays 60 fps as I don't take it seriously and competitively in css.
[QUOTE=Ubercharged;18073891]Is the OP trying to troll or something[/quote]
Uhh. No not really.
[quote=cheeseburg]Same I can't play them below 60 or 75 fps. In css it's 75 as I play at a lower resolution for the extra 15 fps and in tf2 I play at the highest resolution which only displays 60 fps as I don't take it seriously and competitively in css.[/quote]
At least I'm not alone in this thread.
[quote=dumdydum]Do you know the point of a benchmark? Its supposed to measure how your computer compares to others.[/quote]
Yes, I do know what a benchmark is. I was just asking why people used Crysis to do it. Me and Crysis aren't very close, so I wouldn't know.
Crysis wasn't optimized properly before being released, so it brings down even the strongest of systems. That's why it's the king of benchmark apps.
Woah, then you got to try Stalker Clear Sky with a graphics mod (Enhanced lighting, better textures, lightning makes volumetric lights, and so on).
It runs in 12 fps on my GTX 280. With antialiasing turned off.
Either somethings very wrong, or the graphics mod just ate away 40fps.
[QUOTE=paul simon;18074126]Woah, then you got to try Stalker Clear Sky with a graphics mod (Enhanced lighting, better textures, lightning makes volumetric lights, and so on).
It runs in 12 fps on my GTX 280. With antialiasing turned off.
Either somethings very wrong, or the graphics mod just ate away 40fps.[/QUOTE]
sounds like ENB Series?
[QUOTE=dumdydum;18074184]sounds like ENB Series?[/QUOTE]
ENB series?
I used [url=http://www.fileplanet.com/195559/190000/fileinfo/STALKER:-Clear-Sky---Jaco-CS-Graphics-Quality-Mod-v1.0]this mod.[/url]
I've uninstalled it of course, game wasn't playable with it.
Chuck Norris can put 4 HD5890 x2s together in [b]SLi[/b], and run Crysis at highest settings with 100FPS.
:cawg:
[QUOTE=Pixel Heart;18074557]Chuck Norris can put 4 HD5890 x2s together in [b]SLi[/b], and run Crysis at highest settings with 100FPS.
:cawg:[/QUOTE]
That would be Crossfire there tiger, not SLI.
Hey, we're talking about Chuck Norris here.
He can put ATI cards in SLI.
He can put an nVidia GTX 290 and ATI HD5890 in Crossli.
[QUOTE=paul simon;18074742]Hey, we're talking about Chuck Norris here.
He can put ATI cards in SLI.[/QUOTE]
Exactly my point. Daolpu ruined the joke.
Becuase Crysis has impressive graphics and huge requirements.
Also its a really well known game.
I like to use benchmarking tools such as 3DMark and Uningine.
They give you average FPS and a score.
[QUOTE=TurbisV2;18074862]I like to use benchmarking tools such as 3DMark and Uningine.
They give you average FPS and a score.[/QUOTE]
Crysis benchmark gives you an average fps too. (I haven't actually used the benchmark, or even played the game for that matter, but I have seen benchmark videos on Youtube and they have an actual benchmark tool.)
[QUOTE=TurbisV2;18074862]I like to use benchmarking tools such as 3DMark and Uningine.
They give you average FPS and a score.[/QUOTE]
?
[img]http://i38.tinypic.com/201dg7.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=ChristopherB;18073786]30 FPS in Crysis actually looks reasonable thanks to the careful application of motion blur.
It is still used as a benchmark because despite it's age, nothing has come along to really challenge it in terms of resource usage (and image quality). Far Cry 2 is comparable in terms of system usage, but has presents less options/control to the user over image quality.
Whenever I here someone bragging about FPS in any game I always ask at what resolution and AA settings...they usually stop bragging at about that point.[/QUOTE]
Except, unlike Crysis, I can run Far Cry 2 at a decent frame rate by lowering the settings to medium... [i]and[/i] it doesn't look like total ass when I do so. Crysis looks fugly if you're using anything below high and it still only runs at like 10fps.
It's used as a benchmark because anything that can run coding as shitty as that can run anything.
[QUOTE=Larikang;18079055]Except, unlike Crysis, I can run Far Cry 2 at a decent frame rate by lowering the settings to medium... [i]and[/i] it doesn't look like total ass when I do so. Crysis looks fugly if you're using anything below high and it still only runs at like 10fps.[/QUOTE]
well, that's your PCs fault bro :C
I have to admit you're sorta right about far cry 2. But Crytek didn't really give a damn about the lower settings. Compare two 2007 games (because Crysis came out in 2007)
Call of Duty 4
[img]http://www.artificialaiming.net/sshots/FW3-COD4-sshot013.jpg[/img]
vs
Crysis on Medium Settings
[img]http://www.aoaforums.com/forum/attachments/graphics-sound-cards-speakers-other-peripherals/23150d1224707229-nvidia-launches-big-bang-ii-beta-medium-1.jpg[/img]
and compare that to high (my screenie) (without anti aliasing)
[img]http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/27/crysis2009102803334069.png[/img]
Compariing a linear wack a mole console port to a open ended-ish pc game? D:
Because the graphics are almost as good as Crysis'.
Almost. :smug:
[QUOTE=dumdydum;18073930]Its a benchmark. Do you know the point of a benchmark? Its supposed to measure how your computer compares to others. 30-40 FPS isn't bad in crysis, anything under 20 seems to get pretty choppy. Motion blur can only do so much..
Because crysis seems to be the most demanding graphics card/system 3d benchmark, its one of the most used. it utilizes SLI the best, too.
Why people say "i can run @ x resolution @ x FPS" is because everybody strives to run crysis on the highest possible settings, and want to prove/show where they stand against everybody else.
Again, crysis is a game.
I'd rather use 3DMark Vantage as a benchmark though.[/QUOTE]
Synthetic benchmarks like 3DMark are completely useless in the real world.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.