Ranting about Crytek Engine 2

Played the game for the first time. This game runs bad on my rig.

1680x1050, no AA, all mainstream settings... 10FPS

I need to turn half the settings down the Minimum to get smooth FPS.

Far Cry runs very smooth, and looks just as good!

 

yeah it looks just as good as crysis on low settings...your 8800gts it's definitely bottlenecked by the amount of memory, try setting the textures to mainstream and other options to gamer..and run it on xp dx9..because the game uses 2gb of ram on xp..on vista it needs more..i run it in 1280x1024, noAA, shader on gamer, shadows on gamer, no motion blur, and rest on Enthusiast, and it runs very good 25-60 fps...i'm not complaining at all..dx9 windows xp..

 

Gawd stop raggin out on crysis. **** dont people have anything better to do. If you could program something better, do it or dont pay for the game! Stop wasting internets. Crysis has an insane amount of polys flying around, massive draw distance, brilliant effects etc etc etc. UT3 looks like pus compared to this which **** all draw distance and low res textures etc. Best looking is gears and it cant come close! I was impressed by pures draw distance etc, but realised that its got alot of tricks to make it so smooth. CE2 uses no tricks....oh and come on farcry looks just as good? I am running warhead enthusiast and 1920x and it looks untouchable. A milestone in graphics. Of course its going to chug!

 

strange, i got the same card and can run easily everything on gamer(shadows mainstream), now i play enthousiast (shadow mainstream, object and textures gamer)

 

hmm maybe I should drop the resolution down to 1280x960. That way I may be able to use Gamer settings.
1680x1050 is stressing the card too much.

ps. Im using XP with 175.16. Does the latest Forceware version make a difference?

Very strange.
What Forceware are you using?
What resolution are you using?

 

lol... GTX260 isnt a mid range card?

 

Strange, I have almost the same setup as you, with the difference in gfx card and 4GB of ram. I run warhead at same resolution and on gamers settings, with a few options set to mainstream, at worst I'm hitting 20FPS. The level in the game that really hurt performance is "Adapt or perish" - I should set my settings on max and see how the level reacts - I fear it'll be a slide show. Oh and I run with no AA.

 

^ I had a quick play, its now smooth at 1680-1050 on all Gamer settings (except Textures on Mainstream)! Before, it was choppy with everything on Mainstream (except textures on Minimal).

All I did was jump down to 1280x960, then back up to 1680x1050. Perhaps the original settings were buggy or something.

I dont know what happened lol....

 

The engine is too over ambitious for it's own good. It looks great, but runs like crap. It is nothing more than a glorified tech demo and a game bolted on for good measure.

I think and hope Farcry 2 will show a game can perform well AND look amazing.

 

ROFL! The Unreal engine or any other engine for that matter looks like **** compared to Crysis:banana:

 

unreal engine looks ok (gears war etc), but UT3 looks awful

 

forceware 179.92

1280*1024
the gpu is running @ 650mhz core 1650mhz shader 2000mhz memory

 

If the HD4870 is a mid range card then that's not saying a whole lot for the GTX280

I never said that Unreal looked as good. I merely said it looks almost as good. Also, there is no eye candy in Crysis that can justify the game running between 19-35 fps, with a near 30 fps average, at 1024x768 on a HD4870.

 

You wasnt talking about the GTX280, u said the GTX260. The HD4870X2 is ATI/AMDs flagship card, not the HD4870. The GTX280 is a much faster card than the 4870.

 

It is funny that this happens everytime crytek makes a new engine. Look how hard farcry was on cards of its day when it was made. Technology is advanced alot since then so i would only assume it is going to take next generation cards to max out crysis and warhead. The 4870 is basically a lower highend card. It was made to compete with the 260gtx not the 280gtx. So don't expect these cards to push huge fps at higher resolutions. Crytek 2 engine is amazing engine and has alot of potential just like the doom3 engine did in its time. Both are amazing engines that will be around for quite sometime.

 

I didn't know that a 5-10% difference is enough grounds for something to be considered much faster

 

This thread is quite amusing......a couple of ATI fanboys larging it at Crytek for optimising for Nvidia cards......and before you start on me, I went from a 4870 to a GTX280 so I know what the difference is!!
The fact is, the engine runs perfectly well around 30fps cos of motion blur and you would perhaps appreicate it more if you stopped trying to run AA, which is not really needed on Crysis....but you will get decent frame rates without AA especially at 1024x768.
I know the engine is a bit off, but unless they let this new stuff out, we end up playing the same crappy looking games forever.

 

The difference between 4xAA and 0xAA is barely 10 fps.
Sorry, but that's just insulting.