Crysis Demo Out, Total of 10 Frames Rendered Thus Far

Want to just shoot the breeze? Forum 42 is the place!

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
benheck
Site Admin
Posts: 1880
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm
Location: Wisconsin - Land of Beer and Cheese and Beer
Contact:

Crysis Demo Out, Total of 10 Frames Rendered Thus Far

Post by benheck » Sat Oct 27, 2007 1:22 pm

I was looking forward to this but DAMN. The rumors are true, this game is a beast.

Running the demo at 1280x720, with everything set to Medium I get 20-30 FPS if I'm lucky. Setting is HIGH is about 15 FPS, VERY HIGH is a fricking slideshow System specs:

QuadCore 2.4 gig CPU
4 gigs RAM
Nvidia 9600 265 meg video card, DV10

Same specs run Bioshock smooth as butter with everything all the way up, Orange Box just screams.

So, um, yeah. Not being a fan of $400 video cards, probably won't be picking up this game [Crysis]. According to the "Vista Scoring System" Crysis requires a 3 rating, recommends a 5. My system is 5.5 and is still not what I'd call very playable. Lame.

Back in the day Far Cry was supposed to be a system-eater, but it ran fine on my then 2 year old PC and Wal-Mart cheapy $100 128meg video card.

What experiences have the rest of you had with the demo, if any?
Image

User avatar
bicostp
Moderator
Posts: 10491
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 5:47 pm
Steam ID: bicostp
Location: Spamalot
Contact:

Post by bicostp » Sat Oct 27, 2007 2:00 pm

Wow, and don't you have a Core 2 Extreme? :shock: That game would absolutely kill my puny 3 ghz P4 with 1 gig of RAM and 128 mb Radeon 9200. (Then again, almost any new game besides Diner Dash would... :lol:)

User avatar
lifeisbetterwithketchup
Senior Member
Posts: 2180
Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 12:08 pm
Steam ID: lifeisbetterwithketchup
Location: Illinois. Whee.
Contact:

Post by lifeisbetterwithketchup » Sat Oct 27, 2007 2:29 pm

He's got a Core 2 Quad. :shock:

My 2.4Ghz P4, 1GB RAM, nVidia MX 420 64MB, rolls over and dies on any newish game. It would probably explode on Crysis.
Rekarp wrote:
mako321 wrote:What makes you head ninja, anyways? :wink:
Cause I am Abe F#!@ing Lincoln. :mrgreen:

User avatar
CronoTriggerfan
Moderator
Posts: 4131
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2006 3:07 pm
Location: University of Michigan - Ann Arbor
Contact:

Post by CronoTriggerfan » Sat Oct 27, 2007 2:46 pm

Holy crap. I've got a Core 2 Duo Extreme clocked at 2.4ghz with 2 gigs of RAM, I thought all I'd need was a video card upgrade. Guess I was wrong! :lol:

CTFan
Image

User avatar
theelk
Posts: 323
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2007 9:48 am
Location: boring old connecticut
Contact:

Post by theelk » Sat Oct 27, 2007 5:42 pm

I'm getting a 7600gt soon and another gig, which'll push me up to 2 gigs of memory and and a 2.4gHz Core 2 Duo (which hasn't been overclocked yet) so I'm staying the f away from Crysis. And of course The Orange Box did well, the Source engine is renowned for its scalability.

BTW, this is great for figuring out what you can and can't run. Great tool.
Image
I don't want to make an "I'm leaving" thread, but I've sort of lost interest in this board. So if you notice that I'm gone, that's why.

Ecksem Diem
Posts: 188
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:13 pm

Post by Ecksem Diem » Sat Oct 27, 2007 8:29 pm

With all the settings at "low" and the newest nVIDIA driver installed (169.01, a beta driver released specifically for the Crysis demo, although I haven't encountered any problems with it yet, unlike that freaking driver they released for BioShock), my machine (2.2 GHz AMD Athlon 64 3400+ Venice, 2.5 gigs of RAM, 512 MB GeForce 8500 GT, Windows XP SP2 w/ DirectX 9) runs the demo pretty smoothly at 1440x900 (max) resolution in full screen mode, with a little slowdown when the action heats up and during checkpoint saves.

I have to say, I am damn impressed. The gameplay was very good and very clever, and unlike most FPSs now, it doesn't insult your intelligence; I found I had to actually assess situations before going in, and then again during them, having to work my way out of jams and tight spots. It's nice to finally see a game where whipping around the flanks works, and despite having all the settings at "low", it's easily the best looking game I've ever seen (sans Far Cry 2). Following the discovery the team makes at the end of it and the subsequent boss appearance, I almost lost my mind when the demo ended on the spot.

So, on the twenty-sixth day (of October), I saw Crysis, and I saw that it was good.

And I wept.

I can't wait to pick up another copy of my video card for some SLI action (and maybe a dual-core processr) to get this baby really looking nice.

P. S. - Ben, you seem to be having an inordinate amount of difficulty compared to me, though it looks as though the "low" settings would make it run like butter for you. I'll post again when I've checked it out myself with higher settings than "low". Or perhaps Vista is what's screwing you up? Do you have the 169.01 driver installed?

Edit: Alright, with the settings at "medium" and the resolution set to 800x600 (windowed mode), the framerate was a tad choppy, and at the same resolution (windowed mode) with the settings at "high", the framerate made it borderline unplayable. The "very high" settings are ghosted out; I assume they're DirectX 10-only. Speaking of which, I can't wait to pick up another hard drive (I'm bleeding space) and install Vista on that so I can dual boot. But SLI and a dual-core processor are my first priority.:D

User avatar
cowsgoquack101
Senior Member
Posts: 1981
Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 9:21 am
Steam ID: cowsgoquack101
Location: Cold, grey Indiana!
Contact:

Post by cowsgoquack101 » Sat Oct 27, 2007 9:37 pm

I was running at 1024x768 and I got 15-30 fps on medium resolution. I'm sure things will get better when they release newer drivers and what not.

Core 2 Duo E6300 1.8GHz
1.5GB DDR2 667 RAM
256MB 7800GTX

So far it's a decent game, nothing I'd upgrade my computer over, but I'll do upgrades next year with a job. Any who, I got 20-30 fps on bioshock at 1280x1024 with high settings. It even played better than my neighbor's 360 (not crashing at spots).

teraflop122
Posts: 1212
Joined: Sat May 21, 2005 9:06 pm

Post by teraflop122 » Sun Oct 28, 2007 7:26 am

Thats really funny! I have:

Core 2 Duo clocked at 2.25Ghz
3GB DDR2 667
8800GTS 320MB (I know, I know)

I downloaded Crysis, and I got- a checksum error on Genera~1.cab. I can't install the demo. First try I downloaded using isoHunt and uTorrent. Now I'm downloading again straight from EA.com.

User avatar
ChrisS
Posts: 85
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 12:28 pm

Post by ChrisS » Sun Oct 28, 2007 8:55 am

You'll need a CRAY to run that game.

Image

teraflop122
Posts: 1212
Joined: Sat May 21, 2005 9:06 pm

Post by teraflop122 » Sun Oct 28, 2007 9:36 am

I finally got Crysis running, and I must say I'm at least mildly impressed. I might even put some thought into buying it, maybe. As for frame rates, with the configuration I mentioned above I'm running comfortably at all medium settings, 1440x900 native resolution. Even if I had Vista, I doubt I'd be able to enjoy Very High- unless DX10 is significantly more efficient than DX9.

User avatar
dudex77
Posts: 1499
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 10:43 am
Location: Spain
Contact:

Post by dudex77 » Sun Oct 28, 2007 2:12 pm

theelk wrote:I'm getting a 7600gt soon and another gig, which'll push me up to 2 gigs of memory and and a 2.4gHz Core 2 Duo (which hasn't been overclocked yet) so I'm staying the f away from Crysis. And of course The Orange Box did well, the Source engine is renowned for its scalability.

BTW, this is great for figuring out what you can and can't run. Great tool.
Are there any programs that I can download that do similar thing, my pc I use doesn't have internet.
Kurt_ wrote: I would use tact switches but I want the mushy feel. Mushy = God. (I typed that correctly).
Image

User avatar
Life of Brian
Moderator
Posts: 2867
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2005 5:55 pm
Location: Oklahoma
Contact:

Post by Life of Brian » Mon Oct 29, 2007 12:55 pm

teraflop122 wrote:I finally got Crysis running, and I must say I'm at least mildly impressed. I might even put some thought into buying it, maybe. As for frame rates, with the configuration I mentioned above I'm running comfortably at all medium settings, 1440x900 native resolution. Even if I had Vista, I doubt I'd be able to enjoy Very High- unless DX10 is significantly more efficient than DX9.
I've read some interesting stuff about DX10 (mainly in the most recent Pop Sci article about it) and it gets me excited about the possibilities of graphics in games in the near future.
dragonhead wrote:sweet. ive spent a third of my life on benheck!
Image

User avatar
Kurt_
Portablizer
Posts: 5748
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 10:32 am
Steam ID: kurbert
Location: Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Post by Kurt_ » Mon Oct 29, 2007 2:07 pm

Popsci also had an article on Crysis, boasting about how great the physics and graphics are.

But to them I say this: Who cares if each blade of grass moves individually if you need to set all the setting to low to be able to play it? Why not just get a lower-end game for half the price and put all settings on high? At least then it feels like your computer is great still.
Hey, sup?

Ari
Posts: 104
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2006 8:03 pm

Post by Ari » Mon Oct 29, 2007 8:12 pm

My PC barely meets the system requirements.

AMD 3500+ 2.2Ghz
1GB RAM
256MB Geforce 6800 GS

I expected to get a slideshow at 800x600 on low quality, but I actually got really good framerates at 1024x768. And 1280x1024 was somewhat playable. I do have a rather high tolerance for low framerates, though, since I played though Half-Life 2, Doom 3, and BioShock all at around 20 FPS. :lol: Or maybe I could get slightly better framerates if I borrowed that 384MB of RAM from my dad's old PC.
Optomists say that the glass is half full.
Pessimist say that it's half empty.
Engineers say that it's twice as big as it needs to be.

User avatar
daguuy
Portablizer
Posts: 3666
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 7:09 pm
Location: missoura

Post by daguuy » Mon Oct 29, 2007 8:32 pm

My compy would explode if it considered thinking about maybe trying this game.

But for everyone with a good processor but a videocard that doesn't quite cut it, Nvidia just came out with (or is about to, I'm not sure when) the new 8800GT for less than $300. It's almost as good as the 8800GTS 640mb but costs less than the 320mb.
http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.h ... VzaWFzdA==
ImageImage

Post Reply