Originally Posted by Xion X2
Jonelo is not some kind of guru that has some hidden wisdom about how to optimize Crysis. I've ran the game with high/medium settings without any AA/AF, and it will still struggle when you get open landscapes on the screen with allies/enemies. It does this both in DX10 and in DX9 w/ the DX10 tweaks. And this is with my Ultra overclocked to 702/1800/2300 with high settings, including shadows (medium shadows look terrible, IMO.)
The last page screens at 1680 x 1050 are of a friend, his played in high at , without AA . The framerate not is 60 fos or 30 fps solid stable in all maps , but is playable . In the bech the average is 25- 30 fps with some drops at 15 fps, not is ideal but this is playable . This is the fremerate of many games of console , capped at 30 fps .
I have a high resolution CTR and a videoproyector with the 360 - only at 720 p but accept 1080p - ,, and no problems with the resolution . The high resolution screens for PC gaming not are good
, you need a SLI or Crossfire for very high in the most avanced games . But for Crysis or other games in his time like Oblivion , Call of Juarez - in setember of 2006 in Europe . Two GT are more cheap than your Ultra
is one solution
With Shadows in mediiun the Crysis shadows look like Stalker in high but without grass shadows , better than Gears of War- more shadows - and same resolution , better than COD4 - better samplings .
In Crysis we have the artifacts in the shadows at very small distance , but this problem appear in other games with shadows maps like Gears - but Gears is in 3 person
- . For this cause, in Stalker , Bioshock or COD4 the caracter not has shadows , with shadows maps is very problematic the shadows system for the caracther in 1 person
My personal screens and videos are with shadows in medium
In mediun , high or very high you have the tipical artifact in the shadows of the character at small distance -
All setting in high
Very high settings will make around a 10 fps difference on your minimum; it's not a night and day difference like Jonelo is making it out to be. If he really wanted to prove something, then he'd go run a fraps benchmark with recorded logs/frames and post his results like these review sites have done. That will give us a more accurate average and also record the minimums which tell the story of true performance.
the perfomance at 1680 x 1050 is this in one GT overclockeck
CPU@3.4Ghz & 8800GT@770x1890x1900:
Harbor , strong map ,
CPU@3.4Ghz (425x8 ) y GPU@770/1890/1900
ICE - a very strong map
And with the autoexec ....
, probe you this autoexec
. Is with many settings of the very high in one GT at 1680 x 1050 . Is very playable , see the framerate
In this autoexec the physic of the vegetation has some limitation