Crysis 3 Performance, Benchmarked On 16 Graphics Cards

[corvak]

Seems like the story here is that Crysis 3 is a beast at Very High, but low settings still look very impressive, and will run well on a $300 card at 1080p.

 

[ubercake]

[citation][nom]s3anister[/nom]Cool article but every time I see an "ultra-mega-(insert specific game here)-gpu-performance-showdown" type article I can't help but feel that they are always lacking in comparison to older cards. It'd be nice if there were at least a few last gen cards tossed in for reference. Not everyone decided to upgrade from their HD 6970s or GTX 580s.[/citation]
I agree. This is the only reason I go to other sites for info. Performance is often overlooked gen to gen or a card is left out here or there that seem like it shouldn't be.

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]Novuake[/nom]The first graphics benching AA with GTX670????[/citation]

First bench is to compare AA impact *only*. Has to be a GeForce to show TXAA, as the Radeons can't perform it.

You need to read the accompanying text. It says this clearly.

[citation][nom]Novuake[/nom]Whats up with that? How can the minimum FPS be 30FPS but the average is 24 FPS?[/citation]

If the minimum is lower than average, it's simply a chart glitch. Fixed!

[citation][nom]Novuake[/nom]And its a little odd that the min FPS is so close across the the board... Explain?[/citation]

That's not odd at all. That happens all the time, when something in the game is platform (CPU) limited instead of GPU limited.

Once again, that's covered in the actual article. You should read it before asking questions. 😉

 

[damianrobertjones]

I have a feeling that people aren't reading the review properly... The fps in the charts or for a VERY heavy scene.

READ THE ARTICLE!

 

[Vorador2]

I have a 660 Ti and a i7-3770k.

Bring it ON!!

 

[pauldh]

[citation][nom]mayankleoboy1[/nom]I would politely suggest a Intel Core2Quad, clocked to a respectable 3.3 GHZ.[/citation]
In the queue already, be patient. ;-)

 

[oxiide]

It would be cool to have a demo to use as a benchmarking/stability testing utility, but as far as actually playing the game I've never seen the Crysis franchise do anything that made me want to buy $1000 worth of new video hardware.

Maybe I'll give it a playthrough in a year or three when mid-range hardware catches up to it, or if there's a miracle driver update.

 

[DryCreamer]

There is no way this game should bring current rigs " to their knee's" it looks great but not for the performance demand it brings. I mean seriously if anyone thinks about it, they got this to run on the xbox 360??

Yet you want me to believe I need a 1000$ worth of current graphics cards in my system to run this smoothly for a small bit of sharper graphics? They totally artificially inflated the requirements to boost graphic card sales, period.

They get it to run on the 360 by running at a resolution of like 1156x720 on VERY low detail settings... they can cut out everything that most players wouldn't notice while playing (like shadows and high texture details) and the game will still only run between 24-29 FPS.

Dry

 

[SuperVeloce]

Someone here on forums said that my criticism of dual cores for new games was unfounded and replied something like: "my G860 plays Crysis 3 very well". Now I see how full of bull**** he was, G860 just crashes and burns on every more demanding scene lol.

 

[jack1982]

Interesting to see the HD 7950 and GTX 660 Ti being generally very close in frame time variance. I was looking at the "Radeon HD 7950 vs. GeForce GTX 660 Ti revisited" article from The Tech Report and they showed the 7950 having massive variance compared to the 660 Ti in every game they tested. Did AMD fix this somehow in the last 3 months?

 

[darcotech]

This game is overhyped. I played it on my friends PC (i5-2500K, G680) on 1080p. The story is really bad for AAA title. Graphics are great but not out of this world as Crysis was. So,all in all, big disappointment.
I hope Crytek will stop trying to melt our PCs and start to melt gamers hearts with great story (they graphics, just to bloated)

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]s3anister[/nom]Cool article but every time I see an "ultra-mega-(insert specific game here)-gpu-performance-showdown" type article I can't help but feel that they are always lacking in comparison to older cards. It'd be nice if there were at least a few last gen cards tossed in for reference. Not everyone decided to upgrade from their HD 6970s or GTX 580s.[/citation]

We'd love to test every card out there, but it's just not possible.

Having said that, we provide the graphics card hierarchy chart in order to give you an idea of how your older card compares to newer GPUs:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.html

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]jack1982[/nom]Interesting to see the HD 7950 and GTX 660 Ti being generally very close in frame time variance. I was looking at the "Radeon HD 7950 vs. GeForce GTX 660 Ti revisited" article from The Tech Report and they showed the 7950 having massive variance compared to the 660 Ti in every game they tested. Did AMD fix this somehow in the last 3 months?[/citation]

AMD has targeted frame latency in their newest drivers. Unfortunately, only games that they have targeted are improved, so it will take some time before all games with Radeon latency issues are fixed,

 

[maddogfargo]

I did not see my CPU listed and it performed very nicely. So just posting this to share.

Fired this up last night and ran through 15 minutes of the intro level

1920x1080
All details maxed
2xSMAA
Low blur
8xAF

Phenom II x6 1090T @ 4.0 GHz
2 x Radeon HD 7950 Crossfired @ 1000/1250 with +12% Power envelope

After 15 minutes:
Min FPS was in the 40's
Max FPS capped at 60 (Vsync)
50-70% CPU usage on all 6 cores
60-99% GPU usage on both cards
Frametimes in the 10-20ms range

So you don't need a to upgrade to a top-end rig to play this and enjoy it. But it will help if you have good, solid PC with at least midrange components.

Also very happy to see this making effective use of multicore CPUs. This no doubt had a big impact on improving performance for me with the x6 @ 4.0 😉

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]ojas[/nom]MSAA?EDIT: i mean, that's compatible across all cards too...[/citation]

Line previous to your quote explains:
"Based on the AA image quality comparison and our performance data, we think 2x SMAA gives you the best compromise between image quality and performance impact."

 

[Guest]

i run this on Max with FXAA or MSAA 2/4x on my i5-3750k (@OC 4.4Ghz) with Crossfired 10% OC'd 7870s CFs at around 60-85fps at 1080p. This game scales very well to crossfire/SLI rigs. I suggest if you have a 7770 or a GTX 650ti if you want to play max or near max at 1080p get another card and crossfire and you'll be golden.

 

[pauldh]

[citation][nom]SuperVeloce[/nom]Someone here on forums said that my criticism of dual cores for new games was unfounded and replied something like: "my G860 plays Crysis 3 very well". Now I see how full of bull**** he was, G860 just crashes and burns on every more demanding scene lol.[/citation]
Ah, be very cautious drawing definitive lines in the sand! The CPU demands seen here are eye opening. But there are other factors at play here. How would a Radeon respond? New GeForce drivers? Game patch? There is no question the Pentium bombed here, however that doesn't mean it bombs equally on another system after those other factors all start to change.

 

[SuperVeloce]

[citation][nom]pauldh[/nom]Ah, be very cautious drawing definitive lines in the sand! The CPU demands seen here are eye opening. But there are other factors at play here. How would a Radeon respond? New GeForce drivers? Game patch? There is no question the Pentium bombed here, however that doesn't mean it bombs equally on another system after those other factors all start to change.[/citation]
yes, of course. It was about HT (and pentium vs i3) if I'm more precise, and I stated that dual cores with HT already benefit from it, without HT its quickly too much to ask (and the fact that i3's are clocked higher). Someone negated me, saying Pentium plays Crysis 3 very well, not adequate 80% of the time, but very well!

 

[Guest]

[citation][nom]Immoral Medic[/nom]I completed this game in 4.5 hours. I gotta say, having great graphics does NOT make a good game. It's sad when all you have to attract customers is "Best Graphics in a Game Yet". BUYBUYBUY. Don't even get me started on the absolutely terrible multiplayer...[/citation]
The game isn't made for exactly showing how great crytek is at making games(Although warface looks pretty good so far), it's about showing what cryengine 3 can do, and why devs should use it for their next game. They did make the game good enough so people can enjoy it, but it's mainly meant to be eye candy.

 

[eddieroolz]

I'm glad to see a game that can finally take advantage of hex-core. Way for Crytek to push the envelope!

 

[cleeve]

@cleeve: in the cpu benchmark chart, the llano apu is labelled as 'regor', core i3 3220 is called 'sb' - aren't those 'husky'(and quad-core) and 'IB' respectively?

Good catch, changed to Llano (quad) and IB. Thx! - Cleeve

 

[Sakkura]

On page 3, it says you're using Corsair Vengeance LP PC3-16000, 4 x 4 GB, 1600 MT/s, CL 8-8-8-24-2T. But PC3-16000 means it's rated for 2000 MT/s.

Did you simply run the kit at 1600 MT/s instead of its rated 2000 MT/s?

 

[Memnarchon]

[citation][nom]cleeve[/nom]FRAPS is only inaccurate for multi-card setups. We actually have the same hardware as PC Perspective now, we're using in in a in-depth analysis of the problem in the near future.[/citation]
Thank you. I will look forward to an article in the future .

 

[downhill911]

Glad I could play that game and did not pay for it.

 

[internetlad]

To be honest, the biggest negative for me is origin. I refuse to use it because of EA's little dick move, making all the games origin exclusives. If they really wanted to, they could have worked out a deal with Steam or another distribution service.

I've got Steam, Desura, and uPlay installed, I don't need another frickin babysitter program. Until EA either puts origin out to pasture, or gives me a way to launch my games independantly (unlikely) they won't have my money for any new "origin exclusive" titles.