Why am I NOT having any issues playing crysis? dx9

[technoViking]

Hey guys,

I just assumed my system couldn't handle crysis on my system so I never jacked up everything to HIGH (not very high its grayed out because I'm running xp not vista). I also dont have AA turned on but
I have everything on HIGH and Rez @ 1280x1024 (my native resolution) my 22" I had to send back but a new one is coming asap but when it does come back I'll try it at 1680x1050.

Anywho the game runs fine, I don't notice any lagging in the game at all even in busy areas.

Whats the command to show FPS in the game? I'm only playing the demo not the retail.

I'll take a screen cap if someone posts the command to show FPS.

Are people having issues when they are playing DX10? Because dx9 seems great. Even though I don't' like the game, I just wanted to see if my system could handle it.

[Hazaro]

You have a GT lol...

r_displayinfo = 1
or
r_displayinfo 1

typed in from the ~

[technoViking]

I know I have a GT, but I thought Crysis was one of those games that where CPU intensive, I guess not.

Thanks for the tip! I'll test it out to see what my fps is.

[technoViking]

Not bad, doesn't look that great though when you compare it to some of the screenshots ou t there, (direct x 10 must make a big difference).

In action it will drop down to 18-20 but still not terrible when some people say they can't even play it at 24? I guess I'm use to lower quality stuff.

In this image my fps is 27

http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/8440/crypn3.jpg

http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/7807/cry8pp4.jpg
I'm going to jack up the AA and see what happens
EDIT: the 2nd picture is with x8 AA, and everything else the same.


I lost a few FPS going from NO AA to 8x AA which is weird I thought, I would think it would kill my FPS a lot worse.

comparing the 2 images I can't even tell a difference, why is that? Is it because of my ****ty resolution or is it just because I don't have Direct x 10, If I get bored I'll boot into vista and compare dx10/dx9 on my system.

[UnrealAlex]

Nothing suprising really, I got my Crysis Smooth with some Very High's at 1440x900, the GT is awesome.

[hUMANbEATbOX]

In action it will drop down to 18-20 but still not terrible when some people say they can't even play it at 24? I guess I'm use to lower quality stuff.
I'm sorry, but FPS that drop to 18-20 (actually, I believe they will drop a LOT more than that for you, you are just on the demo, with the full game there are much more intense scenes) and hover around 24fps when looking at nothing IS terrible, I would not call that playable.

[Hazaro]

Kill the AA, then you can get pretty pictures like mine :D

CCC High settings: It's amazing to watch it in motion

http://image50.webshots.com/650/4/9/6/2242409060102628332LWOoqg_fs.jpg

I recommend you trying the medium settings in CCC's pack of customization...

http://www.incrysis.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=14544

[Goateh]

Wow, lucky you. I have to play it on medium and even then its in the low 30s - high 20s :(

[technoViking]

Thanks for the links hazaro but I'm just going to leave this game alone, I'm enjoying cod4 a ton and World in Conflict is keeping me busy as well.

[Satsumomo]

I honestly think that anything over 1024x768 is not really necessary, and is only diverting precious FPS to the trash.

[Megalo]

I honestly think that anything over 1024x768 is not really necessary, and is only diverting precious FPS to the trash.

That may have been true for CRTs, but with LCDs alot has to do with your natave resolution.

[vixro]

That may have been true for CRTs, but with LCDs alot has to do with your natave resolution.

Yep, I used to play 1024x768 on CRT and it was great with AA everything looked ok. Once you go to LCD, you are almost required to run your native resolution of things looked stretched, blurry, or unplayable. While I don't mind the higher res's, to say you should only play on 1024x768 these days is pretty ridiculous so I agree with megalo.

[redrumy3]

dont have problems with dx9 at all mostly in 35-40 fps in some areas low as 30

dx10 on other hand is around 15-20fps lol. Hope patch comes out that gives a bit of a boost in dx10

dx10
http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/1451/crysis64200712092324318gb8.jpg

dx9
http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/972/crysis64200712092334040ux6.jpg

[PhysX]

cause to took the name of a popularvideo.

[squads]

I'm sorry, but FPS that drop to 18-20 (actually, I believe they will drop a LOT more than that for you, you are just on the demo, with the full game there are much more intense scenes) and hover around 24fps when looking at nothing IS terrible, I would not call that playable.

Playable frames is a subjective issue.

I would have no problem playing at the frames listed by the OP. Granted, I wouldn't go any lower than that, but 18+ is good for me in a singleplayer fps.

Different strokes for different folks.

[hUMANbEATbOX]

Playable frames is a subjective issue.

I would have no problem playing at the frames listed by the OP. Granted, I wouldn't go any lower than that, but 18+ is good for me in a singleplayer fps.

Different strokes for different folks.

Of course, if you find it ACCEPTABLE, then it is acceptable. It's like if I go to a restaurant, and I ask for a medium rare steak, but instead they give me a medium steak. Sure, I can eat it (and I would), but it is not ideal.

The human mind needs something in the order of 30fps to be tricked into thinking separate frames constitute fluid motion, and that is on T.V. and in movies where they employ motion blur between frames to lower the FPS needed. In a game without this blurring, it is actually quite a bit higher than 30fps. If you can play a SP game with noticeably choppy performance (18fps would be described my most as 'choppy') then by all means do so. To me, anytime it dips under 40fps or so, I really notice and it ruins any immersion the game might have achieved otherwise.

[SteveLord]

I use to think my Voodoo Banshee played Quake3 at an acceptable rate.

Then when I first ran the timedemo, I got 19fps.......

There's many points in the SP where framerate will drop. Medium has the best balance of quality and speed in my opinion.

[technoViking]

Of course, if you find it ACCEPTABLE, then it is acceptable. It's like if I go to a restaurant, and I ask for a medium rare steak, but instead they give me a medium steak. Sure, I can eat it (and I would), but it is not ideal.

The human mind needs something in the order of 30fps to be tricked into thinking separate frames constitute fluid motion, and that is on T.V. and in movies where they employ motion blur between frames to lower the FPS needed. In a game without this blurring, it is actually quite a bit higher than 30fps. If you can play a SP game with noticeably choppy performance (18fps would be described my most as 'choppy') then by all means do so. To me, anytime it dips under 40fps or so, I really notice and it ruins any immersion the game might have achieved otherwise.

My system is pretty dated, I'm just impressed it can even get out 18 fps in action, I was thinking it was going to be unplayable on HIGH with x8 AA.

Tonight I'll see what direct x10 does to it and I also wanted to see how well bioshock runs in vista with my setup, it runs great on xp with max settings though.

I remember getting my first voodoo with 16megs ram, I was so impressed playing Myth the Fallen Lords.

I'll post screenshots and fps.
PS: anyone know the command to show FPS in bioshock?
thanks

[deathman20]

Well I got some Patch on Friday. Automatic update from EA with my download.

It improved my FPS alot in the final scene, going from 5-12 to at least 20-25FPS in the final cut scene. MUCH better than I expected. This is in DX10 with a mix of High/Very High @ 1280x720 with no AA in Vista running 32-bit (going to need to try 64-bit again to see if it will play)

[Terranova]

i hate to say it but, i gaurantee you that when you set it to 8x AA it doesnt actually set it for 8x AA, cause on my system i play at 1366x768 high settings and i get 45-60 FPS and 35-45 FPS during heavy combat and explosions, but when i set it to 8x AA i drop down to 5.7 fps....so you being able to play at 8x AA and getting 18fps is highly unlikely, theres really no difference in our resolutions...i play with the config file mod so i have everything on very high without AA and i avergae 40-55 and 30-40 explosions heavy combat...

[technoViking]

Terranova,

I hate to say it but I can FRAPS you the video and it will show I'm getting what I'm saying on my system.

If I have time today I'll do it. I'm at work right now

[Terranova]

i just find it awkward that when i enable AA max i get 5 FPS lmao but you get 18? im not trying to say i dont belive you i didnt mean it that way, i just find it odd i geuss....still a good looking game though, anyone runnin a 3870 that can give FPS?

[technoViking]

I also find it odd considering your system destroys mine, I got like a 8000 on the 05 3dmark. lul
Are you in direct x 10? I can see my system getting 4-5fps with x8 AA if I was using vista and using dx10, dx10 owns my system but dx9 works great.
In dx 9/windows xp I can max out COD4 with no issues, Gears of War no issues, UT3 no issues, bioshock no issues, world in conflict no issues, but as soon as I switch to vista ultimate my games start lagging like crazy probably because of my old processor.

[Terranova]

i dont want vista, at least not yet. i use xp pro. 8k in 05....my best for 06 was 14.1k.....odd lol i bought supreme commander, dawn of war plat edition, CoD 4 and star wars empire at war today. talk about 150 bucks down the drain lol it works though its cool cant wait to get home and play cod 4 i hear its freakin awsome

[xilix]

Of course, if you find it ACCEPTABLE, then it is acceptable. It's like if I go to a restaurant, and I ask for a medium rare steak, but instead they give me a medium steak. Sure, I can eat it (and I would), but it is not ideal.

The human mind needs something in the order of 30fps to be tricked into thinking separate frames constitute fluid motion, and that is on T.V. and in movies where they employ motion blur between frames to lower the FPS needed. In a game without this blurring, it is actually quite a bit higher than 30fps. If you can play a SP game with noticeably choppy performance (18fps would be described my most as 'choppy') then by all means do so. To me, anytime it dips under 40fps or so, I really notice and it ruins any immersion the game might have achieved otherwise.

I guarantee that it has more to do with how the game handles the inputs than just the FPS rate itself. When you go to the movies you're only seeing 23.97 FPS, but it doesn't ruin the movie. Games that sync input with framerates are generally "unplayable" at an FPS rate under 25fps because your input is now chopped up into those intervals, but games that don't do this are much more playable. Once you go below 20FPS it gets very difficult to provide smooth gameplay, but anything above 20fps seems to be smooth with games that have the inputs unsynced with the framerates, because the game still responds to your inputs the way it should even though it's displaying the results at a different rate.

It's hard to explain, but an example is Crysis vs GTR2. GTR2 is a flat out joke at anything under 30-35fps because the inputs are synced with the framerate. It gets very hard to control the car at under 30fps. In Crysis I don't notice any problems at all under 30fps when it comes to achieving what I want to do. Running it at lower settings and higher framerates, you can definitely notice smoother running gameplay, but it doesn't seem any more "playable" than when I'm pushing lower framerates.

[xilix]

but as soon as I switch to vista ultimate my games start lagging like crazy probably because of my old processor.

Vista has a problem with fluctuating game performance. I had issues with it, which is why I went back to XP until they fix it. There is a "hotfix" for it, but it didn't completely fix the issue. I'm sure your games would've run better with a better CPU, but wouldn't attribute 100% of it to that.

[Satsumomo]

That may have been true for CRTs, but with LCDs alot has to do with your natave resolution.

I honestly think that anything over 1024x768 is not really necessary, and is only diverting precious FPS to the trash.

Ah! I'm on a flatscreen CRT monitor. The motion blur and color leaking in LCDs can't make me switch from my huge and heavy CRT :p