Building a Crysis PC, Part 1

[Tmas]

This is the rig I'm planning on building for this game

Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit
Q6600 CPU Oc'ed with Arctic silver 5
320Gb 7200 Harddrive
EVGA 680i A1 Mobo
XFX 8800 GTS 640 GPU
2 gigs of DDR2 800Mhz Ram


Think I'll be able to ran this game with decent Frame rates at 1680x1050? or will I need to lower the Resolution?

 

[kstrat2001]

I don't understand what everyone is saying about the performance issue being so huge. Look at what the game is doing. Your card can only do what your card can do, so what if you can't pick all the highest settings in this game but you can in others. With those settings on other games they aren't going to tax your comp as much as this game is considering what it is doing. This is open for discussion but if you really think about it's not the games fault.

Mind you I do think that the game on a world wide sales point of view won't be huge or gigantic because of the system demand, and I think Cevat is hinting at the right thing, that he'd be happy if cysis does 5% (I think he said this) better than Far Cry. But Oblivion did good and when it came out not many systems could play it, and just now can you justify turning everything as high as possible at a high resolution.

You don't understand because you are sitting pretty with an 8800GTX. Not the kind of card I's expect someone to have if they were willing to accept low quality settings. If I can barely play Crysis now, what will I possibly be able to play in a year? How about 2 years? My current PC has lasted about 2 years in terms of playing games with high graphics settings and a solid 30-60+ fps. Now we are talking about barely getting those framerates with real expensive machines.

 

[Johnno117]

I would really like to see Crysis runinng on the 3 PC's recently compared on Toms (someting RobWright alluded to), which should answer most of the questions above. I also think that the differences between Vista and XP have to be determined, as Vista obviously takes a hit on system performance, which can only hurt framerates in a game such as Crysis. Nice job on the idea guys - I look forward to the results as well.

 

[enewmen]

I'm running XP SP2. In a situation like this I don't want to speculate what might work. The problem these days is expense. Video card prices don't seem to be dropping like they used to. I guess it's because we are all waiting for DX10 stuff to come out to buy. The problem is DX10 is a waste. I'm not upgrading my OS so that I can see an extra particle or two on a screenshot of a game that I'm playing. I'm sorry but Vista = crap. Almost all of the amazing demos we have seen of Crysis are DX9 based anyway. All I want to know is how much of an increase in FPS I would get with one of the cards you mentioned.

My biggest problem is probably my monitor which has a native res of 1680x1050. I would like to run at this res but so far see poor performance in other games like Bioshock and Jericho.

I have a feeling that Crysis will flop due to this performance issue. Only a select few of the PC gamer community will be able to play it with its full feature set enabled. When Doom 3 and HL2 were the big performance benchmarks for games a system for under 1k could easily handle the games. Now it's a different story. I see many people are spending 1k on just their vid cards in SLI.

You don't need to speculate. The cheap x1950XT runs 2.5x faster than your 7800GTX and the 8800GTX is 4.7x faster. Oblivion is a good benchmark to test and get a rough guess because of the large area, foliage, and HDR. It's worth spending a lot on the video card because that still makes the biggest performance impact in games. If you want to play Crysis @ 1680x1050 with 4x AA and MAX setting and get 60+fps, you need a card with unearthly performance. Play with the benchmarks below.

http://www23.tomshardware.com/graphics_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=859&model2=714&chart=297

 

[Sengoku]

Revised card classes: Budget, Midrange, High-End, Crysis?

And I haven't even thrown out the box to my last video card yet.

 

[bruce555]

When do you plan to have this build done by? There is alot of hardware coming out before Crysis comes out so should we shoot for what is available now or available at / near release?

If now here's my go...

CPU: Intel QX6850
Mobo: Asus Extreme Striker
Mem: Mushkin XP2-6400 Xtreme 2x2GB
Vid: 2x Evga Superclocked 8800 Ultra's
OS:Vista Ultimate 64bit
CPU Cooling: Thermalright Ultra-120 extreme + 120mm fan. (for major overclock)

+ 1 pillow to cry in after you spent this rediculous amount of money.

 

[Rabidpeanut]

I think to run this game you guys at toms are going to have to build at least something with sli or corssfire, since this is a budget test i say use 2x hs2900pro cause they are fast and cheap

http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&N=2010380048+1305520549+106792278+1067931819&name=Radeon+HD+2900PRO

then a goodish crossfire mobo like an asus m2r32-mvp

some good ram and a 6400+

ii think this will be able to run it at about 30fps constant on high. plus it will work out a lot cheaper than an intel + nvidia.

 

[critty]

Maverick7 wrote: your telling me you got all of that, and you forgot the quad core??

the prices of a quad core at the time was a bit too much!
the price for a quad core was 4x more than the core2duo i have at the moment.
i will be upgrading the cpu in a few weeks, the prices are better now!
but as i stated before, the mp demo runs great!

 

[Rabidpeanut]

You guys are so lucky for the price i pay for a

6000+
hd2900
550w psu
4gig ram
and crossfire mobo

you can get quad cores with sli/crossfire

dont you just love africa

 

[stemnin]

It's all about selling the engine $.

 

[mitch074]

I wonder why game programmers put up with DirectX - the need to program 2 rendering paths (DX9 and DX10) and alienate customers (gotta buy Vista!) cost them more than just programming their app in OpenGL...
What? Integrated Sis chips can't render OpenGL? Oh, OK then, that explains it...

 

[daskobold]

The developers are not forcing anyone to upgrade to Vista 64bit or Dx 10. You will still be able to play on XP and Dx 9, but if you want to play at the higher settings you may need to need to upgrade, but you shouldn't sell a kidney to afford the ultimate upgrade for just one game, it is as simple as that. Without games that push the spec limits we would never have gotten to this level of detail in the first place.

I think I should be in good shape to play the game on high to very high detail at a decent frame rate. I get over 60-70fps, max for my monitor refresh rate, on Bioshock at 1920 x 1200 on max detail so I should be ok with Crysis. It all depends on how well they code the game. Look at the Half Life 2 engine and UT2004 engine those games run and look great on the minimalist of hardware.

CPU: Core2Duo E6600 Oc'd to 3.5
Mobo: Asus P5W-DH Deluxe
RAM: 4gb G.Skill DDR2 PC800
VID: Sapphire 2900pro 1gig OC'd 850core 1000mem
OS: XP and Vista 64 Dual boot
Sound: X-FI Fatality
HD: 2 36gig Raptors Raid 0 with 250gig xtra storage
Case: Thermaltake Armor w/ custom water cooling
Weight: Very heavy

 

[bruce555]

You don't understand because you are sitting pretty with an 8800GTX. Not the kind of card I's expect someone to have if they were willing to accept low quality settings. If I can barely play Crysis now, what will I possibly be able to play in a year? How about 2 years? My current PC has lasted about 2 years in terms of playing games with high graphics settings and a solid 30-60+ fps. Now we are talking about barely getting those framerates with real expensive machines.

What I'm getting at is with your card, you can expect what your card can do now in other games as with Crysis.

The people at Crytek aren’t miracle workers and they can’t make your card do anything different than what it can do now. Let’s say you play Crysis on med/low settings or whatever settings so that the graphics are comparable to other games (Fear, HL2, ect) you should get those same performance results.

They can’t make your current graphics card do more than it can do now. Otherwise why don’t we just complain that developers aren’t making all the DX9 cards play DX10 games?

 

[Rusmurf]

First, max settings on in this game, are meant to push the enevelope. That's why they have so many programmers working on it, and so much invested. The hardware guys want this game to force people to upgrade, again.

Build it yourself, and you can build that 3k machine for 2k. Partially upgrade your system, sell your old parts on ebay. You won't spend as much as you think, be patient and watch for sales on parts.

 

[bobert866]

I'm looking to upgrade to quad core here soon. I would like to see the scale from 1 to 4 cores. As I've read that crysis will be able to utilize the extra cores. I would like to see what these high end cards can do with the right cpu power. The requirements sound crazy and are starting to make me doubt my system now. And I only run at 1280x1024. Hopefully an Intel quadcore overclocked like crazy will give my gtx all the data it needs.

 

[bruce555]

It would be only speculation on what would happen with the extra cores. I think though that you would be better off (not knowing your budget or what GTX you're talking about) making sure you have an adequate vid card with a dual core over opting to spend more on a quad core.

EDIT: Just saw you have a 8800.

 

[andrazz90]

well i run crysis on 1280x1024 no aa and a mixture of high , medium and a few low settings, im running on xp 32bit, a q6600, 2gb xms2 p800 ram and a xfx 8800gts 320mb, now im supposed to be running on a pretty high end rig and i play most games on full gfx, but it still aint enough im afraid... only like 15-60 fps outside and i get many occasional pc lag spikes like everything freezes for a second, i get that like once every 3-4 mins, i kno it maybe software related but that game is too power hungry...

 

[Stickywulf]

Whatever system you build requires a really comfy chair, it might take several days and nights without sleeping. And don't forget the bar fridge full of ice coffe and coke, weeks supply of chocolate and most importantly, the colostomy bag and travel urinal.

Seriously, the only Crysis build needs to be the best hardware which money can buy. Sell a soul or two and use HARDWARE FROM HELL. You guys already know what the best is - qx6850, 2x8800ultra, 2x2GiB, Vistax64, King Kong monitor, 5.1 sound. If better hardware is released then use that.

It's more interesting to know what is possible if I spend a months pay on upgrades, I can find out how well my current hardware works when I buy the game.

Interested to see results comparing:
Vistax64 v Vistax86 v XP
Quad v Dual core

 

[bruce555]

@ stickywulf

I second this. Probably what I'm mostly interested in

"Interested to see results comparing:
Vistax64 v Vistax86 v XP
Quad v Dual core"

 

[randomizer]

What kind of PC hardware are they going to use when building the PCs for the "older hardware" test?

 

[bobert866]

Capital One is going to love me this winter!!! I have a brother i split the cost with though, so that helps. I'm now just hoping an overclocked q6600 will give me the boost i need now over my 4600+. Now everything i play runs great at my res and 16xaa. But i know crysis is going to be a different story. Theres still work to be done on the game though.

andrazz90: Does the game "look" like it should be that power hungry? I know the game has the capability of looking spectacular. I was just wondering if the looks are going to be worth the lower frames.

 

[cembandit]

Take everything you read about the crysis beta needing insane computers with a grain of salt. A lot of the issue was with nvidia drivers...useing the latest beta driver gives a *huge* performance increase. We are running the beta on two setups in my household.

System 1
----------
Athlon 64 4000+ @stock
2 gigs of low latency ram (cas 3)
7800 GTX 256m
windows xp
Results: Great gameplay on low settings @ 1280x1024. A few placeholder textures for the first 5 minutes of play.
EDIT: Low settings look very good, better then BF2 IMHO. Placeholder textures are small and non noticeable 95% of match starts, and after a few minutes they are gone. I would rate the fun factor with this setup a 9/10.

System 2
-----------
C2D 6600 @ stock
4 Gigs of Cas 5 gskill stuff
8800 GTS 640
windows vista 64 ult.
Results: Overall, the game looks very, very nice. When going to vista 64 from windows xp on this rig we gained about 20% in fps, but for some reason more got more stair stepping on distant objects. AA cost too much fps. All settings on high.
- The kid reports he noticed a large increase in performance after going from 2 gig to 4 gig ram.

Conclusion: Its all about post beta optimizations and drivers. This game already scales well in beta.
Counter thought - Sure its "only" beta but with a release date so soon I am wondering how it is going to turn magically deliciouses overnight.

I am upgrading the 1st setup to

Quad 6600(g0) @ ~3400 target overclock $270
asus p5ke mobo $150
Thermal Right 120 ultra ex. (cooling) $65
4 Gigs ram, DDR2 2x2 setup $150
geforce 8800 gtx $500 -GTS here if you want more $ savings
windows vista 64 $😛
-also replacing all case fans and optimizing air flow
-quads and 8800 gtx's run hot hot hot

- if your going to run SLI 8800 instead of upgrading your cpu,mobo,ram your either an idiot, or are in a totally different class of machine power then the mainstream price area.

If your not going to overclock, the E6850 will probably give you more performance then the q6600 on crysis....

Myth busting - Crysis Beta is does *not* take advantage of the following YET

1) 64 bit OS (other then maxium allowable ram increase from 32 bit) - we need the 64 bit version of crysis to see the performance gains here, I expect them to be sweet sweet sweet.

2) Direct X 10 - crysis beta is DX9 only.

3)Dual/Quad cores - beta doesn't take direct advantage of these. You will see some gains from background tasks being shuffled off to the other cores though. This area is really something everyone is waiting for with baited breath! As the E6850 and Q6600 cost about the same, everyone wants to see them duke it out on a level playing field.


If you get one thing out of my post, let it be this:

Crysis plays and looks fantastic even on Low settings with a decent resolution. The game scales great with hardware.

 

[Sengoku]

What kind of PC hardware are they going to use when building the PCs for the "older hardware" test?

I would guess parts left from one of the previous builds you've seen here.

If you've got any requests, you should make them earlier rather than later.

 

[rammedstein]

i want to see what my x38, 2900xt xfire system buys me.

 

[Ironkidz]

This game at max settings puts a strain on even the best PC's and the highest potential settings along with DX10 is locked in the BETA!!

My recommendation to run this game at its best

Q6600 OC'd - Save money and get performance

At least 1 8800 gtx OC'd or an Ultra - Preferably 2 gtx's or ultras

4 GB of 1066 ddr2 - I still dont see the need for ddr3

WATER COOLING - CPU and video cards to handle the cost effective Overclocking

680i Mobo

2 150 gb raptors

1000-1100 w power supply