Over 30 fps on Veryhigh with 4xAA/16xAF in 1600x1200 * WOW!

[Bman212121]

Originally Posted by CaptNKILL

30fps average is unplayable for me

No thanks.

And I just don't understand the obsession with antialiasing either. Why the hell would you be running 4x AA at 1600x1200 if you're only getting 30fps average?

I don't even run AA in multiplayer games when I'm getting 85 fps constant because it gives extremely inconsistent performance when there are scenes with lots of explosions, smoke, or transparent effects. I really rarely use any AA at all, which is why I play most games at 1600x1200 or 2048x1536 at 60+fps constant.

Turn off the freaking AA in Crysis and it'll run significantly better.

It all depends upon what part of the spectrum you're on. I know some people that would turn the game down to 1024 x 768 if they had to just to get 90fps+. On FPS games I usually strive to keep around 60fps because the game will be smoother when you need to make quick shots. For Crysis I think it's less about playing the game and more about the eye candy, so not having AA would really bring it down a notch. I'm perfectly happy with playing the game at only 30fps, but I only play single player so should it dip into the teens it really doesn't matter.

[Nanosuitguy]

Originally Posted by jAkUp

With the new patch, I get 30-40FPS at 1920x1200 Very High, I consider this very playable, I was pretty surprised with the performance.

Also 30FPS is very good, you guys do realize that most console games run at 30FPS right?

Unnecessary resolution u play on, 1600x1200 or 1680x1050 is more than enough, especailly if you add AA. By the way, what framerates do you get if you put 4xAA on while still having 1920x and veryhigh?

[Bokishi]

That's not an unnecessary resolution. Anything your monitor's native resolution is, is the necessary one

[Bman212121]

Originally Posted by Bokishi

That's not an unnecessary resolution. Anything your monitor's native resolution is, is the necessary one

+1 Once you get a monitor that can run a higher resolution it doesn't make sense to lower it.

[Gaco]

This is just depressing.. Oh please give us the G90 now

[CaptNKILL]

Originally Posted by jAkUp

Also 30FPS is very good, you guys do realize that most console games run at 30FPS right?

One reason I don't play console games.

Playing a slide show game of Halo with 2 xboxes linked at a game party was like sticking nails in my eyes.

As far as AA, its all personal preference I guess.

I prefer extremely high resolutions so I can actually get more detail out of the scene (rather than just blending out other details). At 2048x1536 the aliasing is barely noticeable and I don't get the fluctuating performance and mouse lag that tends to come with anti aliasing. Don't get me wrong, AA looks great. I just don't really notice it anywhere near as much as low framerates.

This is why I haven't moved to an LCD yet. The resolutions are too low unless I spend $500 on a 24" or larger.

Anyway... 30fps average is not smooth as silk. It may be smooth enough for some, or even most people, but you can't just say that because Crysis is "special" that fluctuating between 10 and 40fps is perfect.

[SH64]

Originally Posted by jAkUp

With the new patch, I get 30-40FPS at 1920x1200 Very High, I consider this very playable, I was pretty surprised with the performance.

Also 30FPS is very good, you guys do realize that most console games run at 30FPS right?

Jacob for SLI 30fps is not good. i tried that myself (not Crysis but other titles). at least ~40fps would be considered smooth (assuming Crysis uses 3-way AFR).

[Nanosuitguy]

Originally Posted by Bman212121

+1 Once you get a monitor that can run a higher resolution it doesn't make sense to lower it.

Yes it does, because that high resolutions is not good for demanding games like crysis, if you are forced to play on 1920x1200 for example u have to lower some of the other settings. There are quite a difference between 1280x960 and 1920x1200 performance wise. Also, why even get a 24" widescreen? I think it sucks that u have to play it in the native resolution, really. 21" CRT monitors FTW...

[Gaco]

I must say that Crysis somehow plays more smooth that it runs somehow. IMO 25 FPS in Crysis feels like 30FPS in any other game

BTW jAkUp are you talking about SP or MP performance? Because i didn't notice any change in MP, it was horrible as ever, but I haven't tried SP post-1.1.

[CaptNKILL]

Originally Posted by Nanosuitguy

Yes it does, because that high resolutions is not good for demanding games like crysis, if you are forced to play on 1920x1200 for example u have to lower some of the other settings. There are quite a difference between 1280x960 and 1920x1200 performance wise. Also, why even get a 24" widescreen? I think it sucks that u have to play it in the native resolution, really. 21" CRT monitors FTW...

I found Crysis playable at 1440x1080 (4:3 res for a CRT) with tweaked high settings in DirectX 9 with no AA and 8xAF, but I didn't play that far into it.

It was "pretty smooth" at 1280x960 with the same settings... but still not close to perfectly smooth. I didn't expect it to be though.

I just wish they would show some 3 Way SLI numbers with realistic graphics settings. People shooting for 30fps average in their benchmarks is worth absolutely nothing to me since I wouldn't play the game like that. That's why I stopped reading [H] reviews.

Maybe I'm just a freak but "smooth" movement looks a hell of a lot more realistic to me than smooth lines. You can crank up the settings all you want, but at some point you are no longer playing "real time"... you're watching a pre rendered scene from half a second ago. I prefer my games to be as far from that as possible.

[Bokishi]

man just wait for better hardware, that's all we can do

[CaptNKILL]

Originally Posted by Bokishi

man just wait for better hardware, that's all we can do

Definitely.

I'll play Crysis once my graphics card can do it justice.