New to the pc gaming scene, so could do with some help!

Hey people, was browsing on the net and came across this site and it seemed to have lots of useful information, so thought id give it a try to see if i could get some help,

Basically im a bit of a noob when it comes to computers, i only really know the basics, anyway my setup is:

Samsung syncmaster t220
2Gb ram
600W power supply
E6420 @ 2.1GHZ
500GB hardrive
GTX260

My system is actually the packard bell ipower, it came standard with a 8600gts graphics card, so i upgraded to the gtx260 and whacked in a new 600w power supply, i have installed all latest drivers as far as im aware, anyway i am still questioning my computers performance, and yes you probably guessed it Crysis and recently crysis warhead!

crysis was a big factor in deciding my upgrade i had high hopes of running the game well.

so i downloaded fraps so i could get a reading.

i was running in dx9, anti-aliasing off, v sync on 1680x1050 all settings on high.

i am only really interested in the multiplayer so i did my benchmarking on that as opposed to the single player. anyway, my max framerate was infact 40 or 45 so, in confined areas, but when outside or when the action got intense framerates were hitting a rock bottom of 12-13, and the power struggle mode was simply unplayable. but on average and firefights etc, i was getting roughly 18-19 fps, anyway im thinking thats pretty poor consiering my rig, and thats aa off and not even very high detail, and the gtx260 is one of there latest and fastest cards available. The only thing i could perhaps think of was my processor being the bottle neck, as it is only 2.1 ghz dual-core, but on gamespots crysis hardware test, slower processors made hardly any difference as long as you had a dual core processor the game should run fine, i also did a 3dmark test, cant remember the figures but they were terrible, dont think i broke the 10k mark on the graphics ratings.

so yes basically if anyone could offer me some advice or perhaps pass on some help, it would be appreciated greatly, i feel a little gutted after spending near the 2k mark for my rig at the time,

thanks,

Hatch

Yeah your CPU isn't helping very much at all at 2.1ghz...you should grab at least a e7200 for that rig and clock it to 4ghz, they are pretty cheap now. What 600W PSU do you have? From the looks of your setup, your CPU is dragging you behind right now.

I guess we need to know what your intentions are. Are you looking to game and have fun w/ ok graphics, or benchmark and game, or be as state of the art as possible so you won't have to upgrade in the next year based on games coming down the pipline...

You can reduce the graphics detail in Crysis to a point that makes it playable for you at over 30fps w/ your video card but if you want the fully shinney then you will have to spend some cash. Crysis was just poorly writen and so it needs very powerful hardware unfortunately and even running 2,3 and 4 GPU's in crysis won't make that much of a difference. Games like CoD4 on the other hand do much better and look beautiful on full graphics detail.

DaPoets said:

Crysis was just poorly writen and so it needs very powerful hardware unfortunately and even running 2,3 and 4 GPU's in crysis won't make that much of a difference.

Click to expand...

Repeating that nonsense over and over won't make it true. Crysis is (still almost a year after release) the best looking game out there. It even runs well on lesser systems if you turn the details down to lower settings. People just assume it 'should' run better on their rigs and end up thinking it's poorly optimized. It's not. It's just made to scale for future hardware, the same way Far Cry did.

Crysis looks little better for much larger resource hogging. Thats what I feel, but people have different opinions, some like eyecandy and some feel gameplay is more important, but whatever it may be, this game got its share of limelight.

For most people, Crysis doesn't look much better because they don't have monitors that support high enough res and/or hardware that can play with the graphics maxed. Even with max detail, if you're running at like 1280x1024 res it won't look much better than other games. The higher the resolution/graphics settings get, the further the gap gets between Crysis and other games... but kind of hard to really run it playable at 2560 res with everything max...and then toss in AA, you get a major framerate killer.

I've noticed a big difference on it by going from a 1280x1024 to 1680x1050 monitor, while other games don't show as big of a visual improvement. Still, I do think it could be better optimized, for example Warhead runs a bit better... I switch between both games right away and can tell the difference. Even if the FPS on benchmarks doesn't look very different.

Like others said above, upgrade your CPU. That will make the biggest difference.

This is true Crysis looks better on medium or low than most games look on high

By the time the average computer user has a system that can play Crysis on settings that actually show what Crysis can do graphics wise, it will be an old dusty game that nobody plays anymore. This is why I said it was poorly writen. When crysis came out, in order to play it, you had to spend more on computer hardware than the cost of a PS3. This is sad. I honestly had not played Crysis since it 1st came out as the single player was simple... and the online aspect just made me want to play CoD4 and BF2 to be honest. Now Warhammer online can be played on a dirt old laptop or a high end 4GPU Quad core computer and you get Very beautiful graphics and it is fully playable on both ends of the spectrum.

Welcome to the forums Hatchermagic!!!

To the Forums!!

By the things you say I don't see you as a n00b. You know a lot. Only thing left is Overclocking & you have come to the right place!

It is obvious that your CPU is bottlenecking your Graphics card, that means it's lagging it down. Imagine your Vanquish (260GTX) with some hummer off road tires (E6420) in Spa-Francorchamps (Crysis)... I don't think you'll make good laps with that. So get a nice processor like E7200 or E8400 (Difference is the L2 Cache) and Overclock either to 3.6GHz or higher and you'll have the ride of your life.

don'tknow said:

For most people, Crysis doesn't look much better because they don't have monitors that support high enough res and/or hardware that can play with the graphics maxed. Even with max detail, if you're running at like 1280x1024 res it won't look much better than other games. The higher the resolution/graphics settings get, the further the gap gets between Crysis and other games... but kind of hard to really run it playable at 2560 res with everything max...and then toss in AA, you get a major framerate killer.

I've noticed a big difference on it by going from a 1280x1024 to 1680x1050 monitor, while other games don't show as big of a visual improvement. Still, I do think it could be better optimized, for example Warhead runs a bit better... I switch between both games right away and can tell the difference. Even if the FPS on benchmarks doesn't look very different.

Like others said above, upgrade your CPU. That will make the biggest difference.

Click to expand...

I also noticed a huge difference in crysis going from 1280x1024 to 1680x1050. The game looks like "real life" and i saw more details in everything.

thanks for your replies lads, im looking into buying a new processor atm, is it reletively easy to change it yourself? want to be as best equipped as theres so many good games coming, farcry2, fallout, dead space are just to name a few cant wait.