I am of course talking about fully maxed out settings, which game is harder to run?
My friend thinks it's crysis 2, but I am certain it is metro 2033!
Could anybody settle this?
Metro 2033 is more graphically demanding, Crysis 2 just has large environments but it is really well optimised. Shit even Crysis 1 is harder to run than Crysis 2 as it has been also watered down to cater for consoles.
Metro 2033 is harder to run.
On slightly less than max, a single 580 is incapable of getting more than 35 FPS in Metro 2033.
Metro 2033, no question. As K1ngo64 said, Crysis 2 is exceptionally well-optimized, even on low-end PC's. Metro2033 is decently optimized, but the DX11 effects take it to a new level entirely.
I wish metro 2033 would let you specifically tweak your options.
[QUOTE=zombini;31459944]On slightly less than max, a single 580 is incapable of getting more than 35 FPS in Metro 2033.[/QUOTE]
My single 570 gets 40+ FPS on Ultra DX11.
Crysis 2 with the DX11 patch and high-res textures still runs (and looks better) maxed out than metro 2033 for me on my GTX480.
To put it plainly, they optimized the FUCK out of Crysis 2.
Metro 2033 IMO. If you can max the settings and still run smoothly you have a [I]very[/I] adequate machine.
Metro 2033 by far.
I seem to recall it running especially like shit on ATI cards, unless they've fixed that.
I didn't have many problems running Metro 2033 actually. Maxing out AA killed my FPS though.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
