My specs:
Windows Vista 32 bit
AMD Phenom 9500 Quad-core 2.2 Ghz
3 GB DDR2 RAM
Geforce 8800GT
500W power supply
So I was under the impression that Crysis should run pretty damn good on this system, right?
Yet I get a horrible framerate.
I have settings on high, AA and Vsync off, and resolution at 1680x1050. I'm running in DX9 as well.
I get 20fps at the very most. Usually closer to between 10-15...and quite often it'll even dip below 10.
I even tried lowering the resolution, as much as I can't stand how it looks, to no result. Even on some of the lowest possible resolutions, framerate did not improve.
I'm pretty ticked here, as the PC cost me close to $2000 and I was expecting far better.
Posts
I too have heard this.
it looks to me like your vid card is the problem. you only have like, the SECOND BEST video card out there. You need two or three of the BEST video card out there to run crysis well.
My Let's Play Channel: https://youtube.com/channel/UC2go70QLfwGq-hW4nvUqmog
My Let's Play Channel: https://youtube.com/channel/UC2go70QLfwGq-hW4nvUqmog
Yeah, you probably should be getting better performance, it's probably the AA, which absolutely kills the framerate because there's so much geometry. Also, the GTS 640 is worse than your card.
My Let's Play Channel: https://youtube.com/channel/UC2go70QLfwGq-hW4nvUqmog
It's possible that the high resolution is simply a huge performance hit. I don't think your CPU helps much there--that's all your graphics card and its RAM (I could be wrong about resolution being GPU-intensive, though). Try playing at High (in DX10! Why wouldn't you if you could?) at 1280x1024. If you get a solid framerate there, then the problem is your high resolution. I have similar specs (except a dual-core instead of quad-core CPU) and Crysis runs well on DX10 on High at 1280x1024.
If your framerate isn't always good (say, above 35) at 1280x1024, then something is wrong with your computer. Go through the usual driver updates, make sure the nvidia control panel isn't set to force certain graphics settings, and then see what happens.
Also, look for known issues between Crysis and quad-core systems. Before games supported dual-cores, dual-core CPUs would often have trouble with most games. You had to set the CPU affinity to one core for the game to work properly.
I tried some lower resolutions: no difference. Like, I even lowered it to some of the absolute lowest ones and gained maybe a frame or two at most.
Made sure things like Vsync and AA are off in the NVIDIA control panel.
I'll double-check the drivers, but I'm pretty sure they're fine.
I'm really starting to hate PC gaming. Every time I try to get into it, I always end up in a situation like this.
My Let's Play Channel: https://youtube.com/channel/UC2go70QLfwGq-hW4nvUqmog
It is what I play in on a very similar, but 4 gb dualcore computer and it runs smooth as throwing a korean into a house
But I guess it's a moot point right now. Do other games run well?
ehh? are we playing the same game here? i have played it on Dx9 and DX10 and i can tell you that the environment and buildings are just as destructible in both versions.
to the OP, i dont wanna sound like a vista hater but when i had vista home installed, crysis ran very much like yours did, on dx9 and 10. when i switched back to xp and dx9, it ran like butter, 1280x1024 @ 30fps constant with an almost similar setup. take that as you will
In any case, an optimized Vista machine runs games as well as XP--reviews from professional sites agree. Just make sure you read recent reviews.
Here's another possibility (an annoying feature of Vista, at first): how new is this machine? The first few days of using Vista tend to be slower than the rest because it's busy indexing your machine and analyzing your computer usage. Indexing isn't supposed to run while you're using the computer, but in my experience it does. Once Vista's done doing its thing, then your machine should run much faster.
If you've had your machine running Vista for a while, then I guess this possibility isn't likely.
And I have older PCs with XP, but they only came with recovery disks and not actual XP disks. Would one of these let me install XP on this PC?
Lowering the resolution does NOTHING. Or if it does something, it is so small an impact it is not noticable. Even going to the very lowest rez on the list(with the added bonus of making the game look like it's running on a PS2) did basically nothing.
I tried medium settings on DX10, and it did get a bit better. Still doesn't go above 20, stays closer to 15, but at least it doesn't drop below 10 all the time. It's a little more playable now, but precise aiming in the heat of combat is hard. I'll see what it's like in DX9.
And yeah, seriously, DX10 is pretty worthless, at least in this game. The differences are so small. Unless you've got a super-PC that can go to very high settings, there's no real reason to not just play on DX9 if you need a performance boost.
If I have to play on medium, I guess I will. But I tried researching as much as i can around different sites/boards, and as far as I can tell I should be getting a good 20-30 fps at least on high settings with my setup. Yet I have trouble hitting 20 even on medium settings.
The only other new game I've tried so far is The Witcher. It has some issues, but looking around it sounds like they're the game's issues and nothing to do with my system, in general it runs fine, maxed out. I plan on getting CoD4 and World in Conflict soon, so I'll see how those go.
My Let's Play Channel: https://youtube.com/channel/UC2go70QLfwGq-hW4nvUqmog
Really dissapointed here, and I'm really starting to regret trying PC gaming again.
My Let's Play Channel: https://youtube.com/channel/UC2go70QLfwGq-hW4nvUqmog
Don't let one game fuck with you like that! PC gaming is great.
Crysis Tweak Guide
8800 GT and Crysis Benchmarks
Looks like you should be getting at least 30 fps.
What happens when you lower the resolution?
Even going from high to medium settings only made a few frames difference.
This is one of the games I got a gaming PC for in the first place. I don't just have a couple grand lying around, this was a big investment that's really not paying off. How am I supposed to play games that come out this year if I struggle with ones that came out last year? *sigh*
My Let's Play Channel: https://youtube.com/channel/UC2go70QLfwGq-hW4nvUqmog
I have a 1900 XT, a card from last gen, and I can run Crysis just fine when I drop the resolution a little bit.
Have you tried reinstalling your graphics card driver? Is Crysis patched? Is Vista patched?
1. Uninstall the graphics card drivers.
2. Restart
3. Download and install the latest drivers from Nvidia's website.
My Let's Play Channel: https://youtube.com/channel/UC2go70QLfwGq-hW4nvUqmog
Only other new game I've tried is The Witcher. It runs pretty good, but I get framerate drops there, too.
I have yet to try CoD4 and World in Conflict, but I plan on getting them both
My Let's Play Channel: https://youtube.com/channel/UC2go70QLfwGq-hW4nvUqmog
Main test results
3DMark Score 9019 3DMarks
SM 2.0 Score 3375
SM 3.0 Score 4210
CPU Score 2827
Test Results
Graphics Tests
1 - Return to Proxycon 29.08 FPS
2 - Firefly Forest 27.17 FPS
CPU Tests
CPU1 - Red Valley 0.95 FPS
CPU2 - Red Valley 1.34 FPS
HDR Tests
1 - Canyon Flight (SM 3.0) 46.61 FPS
2 - Deep Freeze (SM 3.0) 37.58 FPS
My Let's Play Channel: https://youtube.com/channel/UC2go70QLfwGq-hW4nvUqmog
EDIT: Most of the updates are available individually--SP1 is just a compilation. Also, the versions available to the public right now are pre-release (RC?) versions, so you'll have to uninstall the build you have and reinstall the release version whenever it's launched.
BUT what I really posted to say is that if you've tried changing vid drivers you might want to search around to see if anyone is experiencing similar issues with the same mobo as you. The reason I say this is because I've had similar problems with vista (and source games, not crysis) and its because of a incompatability with my mobo.
Tofu wrote: Here be Littleboots, destroyer of threads and master of drunkposting.
It's so expensive and time consuming to get a game running 90% of what YOU would like it to.
Most but not all, and rather annoyingly you have to hunt out many of the hot fixes individually as they don't automatically download.
You picked the worst game to start PC gaming with again.
Crytek are the masochists of hardware requirements. Lloyd Case from Extremetech has gotten similar frame rates (12-25), and he's running SLi'd 8800 Ultras on a Core 2 Extreme Processor.
You could have started with any other game other than crysis to start with. Crytek have literally said this game was meant for future computers.
I have a Core 2 e6750 running at 3.4GHz and an 8800GT running at 720mhz and I get 20-30 fps with everything on DX9 High, and the Natural Mod installed with depth of field and motion blur enabled. It dips to maybe 10-15 on the really jaw-dropping sequences later on.
But frankly anyone who thinks an 8800GT can't handle this game is wrong. The engine is simply built to last a few years, and it certainly will. I don't know why people expect to have everything on the absolute maximum setting with current hardware. There are ultra-high quality mods out there that you can try, which activate all these detail levels. But you need the serious SLI hardware to use them without getting a slideshow.
However he's running the game at 1024*768, and the store machine was running at 1440 on a 19" monitor. I'd suggest turning your resolution down and see how it copes then. I've recently bought a 22" monitor and as pretty as it is, running games at 1680*1050 is a bitch on my poor little 8500gt.
So how does upgrading the processor work, anyway? Like say if I wanted to upgrade to a faster quad-core(like I think one of the Phenom's is 2.8 or 3 ghz) would it make a big differerce? Would it be reletively easy to do? Would it cost me an arm and a leg?
My Let's Play Channel: https://youtube.com/channel/UC2go70QLfwGq-hW4nvUqmog
Really the only sensible options are: wait for SP1, try XP or come back later when there's a new patch,. Or move on. Spending money on it is throwing good after bad.
Seriously, unless you have 3 8800 Ultras in SLI with an 8-core mobo, don't expect to be even playable above medium in the last half of the game.
At high resolutions, you'll need an insane setup to play above medium/high, but if you play at "average" resolutions then you don't need bleeding-edge hardware, just high-end.
And I'm not on the later levels either.
My Let's Play Channel: https://youtube.com/channel/UC2go70QLfwGq-hW4nvUqmog
I'm using a Core2Duo E6750 processor with a PCI-e 8800GTS 512MB card, 2GB dual-channel RAM, and I can knock out 30-40 FPS on High 1280x1024 at nearly all parts of the game, excluding the terribly optimized cutscenes. It's not a machine breaker like so many people believe.
OP, your issues might stem from the quad core usage as opposed to dual core. I didn't see you respond to this quote:
so that may be a way to improve performance. I don't actually know how to perform such a tweak myself, but it sounds like fogey might. I've heard of issues with quad cores in some games, that could be it. The fact that you can't get a good FPS with DX9 and a much lower resolution means it's probably not your graphics card that's to blame. And see if you can't borrow someone else's current-gen games to see how your computer handles them; that will let you know if you need to be googling Crysis-specific troubleshooting or hardware-specific troubleshooting.
I JUST built a new PC three weeks ago. I am using an E6850, which is stock at 3Ghz. I have only 2GB of RAM. However, I bit the bullet and purchased 2 8800GT Cards, running in SLi. I use Windows XP, though, so... not sure how much variance this will cause.
I have the game set to 1680x1050, high spec, no AA. Things were "okay" until the 2nd level load, when you have to fight the tanks. I get around 25 - 50 frames depending on where I am. What I've noticed is that even if I drop the resolution to 1280x1024* my frame rates don't see drastic improvement. What's funny is that game is certainly playable. I only notice drastic choppy-choppy action when I zoom in with a scope.
One thing worth nothing, though, is that in comparing similar systems (via Tom's of Anand) is that processor speeds with the Extreme Editions do seem to provide better rates. I think once you get into a certain class of video card (in this case, the 8800GT) I think the engine looks for different resources to rape.
Also, how are you measuring the framerates? Fraps and I computer had a horrible breakup, so I use the internal monitoring system, which you can get to by opening the console (` key) and typing in r_DisplayInfo = 1
The bottom line is, I certainly expected far better frame rates with an SLi setup than what I'm seeing. Add to that, is that sometimes my SLi setup decides to just start flickering (seldomly, but nonetheless) but that's another story for another thread.
*And n'thly, why the fuck can't I select a 1440-based resolution? Why are there 4 default monitor resolutions, but only 1 widescreen?