Here Are The System Requirements for Crysis 3

[sayantan]

Maybe crysis 3 is utilizing the compute performance of 7970 to compensate for the fx 4170. Also 680 is not very good in compute , so it has to be paired with a quite capable CPU. Just guessing though!!

 

[matt_b]

[citation][nom]nao1120[/nom]Not worried about it. Crysis 1 was so poorly optimized even a high end rig chugged on some levels. Very poor game dev in my opinion.[/citation]
I agree with you to an extent here. The point that sticks though is that over 5 years later after release, it still stands up very well graphically to games released today. Poor optimization no doubt had some play in it, but the larger effect was being advanced for its time.

My take is more like if your computer can play the console-port that is Crysis 2, then Crysis 3 shouldn't be much more of a hassle seeing as the same console-friendly engine is being used.

 

[nao1120]

Holy hell, Just because the AMD chip is 20 FPS less in usage doesn't mean its a sub-par chip. You guys should be lucky there is a bit of competition to lower the prices of intels. Owning one, I'm giving the 8350 a change since its only 1 tier down from the higher end intels. And really when you see 1-2 tiers less, barely noticeable. If you can reach 60 FPS (which AMD can) its good enough. Not everyone needs to be extreme. Its your choice to pay up the nose for a top tier system, But at the end of the day, Is it needed? Perhaps? I would rather invest in my house then spend 2000 on a system.

 

[jn77]

I know my dual LGA 2011 with 96gb of ram and 4 7990's will run this game, but I don't play games so it is a mute point.

 

[kellybean]

[citation][nom]nao1120[/nom]Not worried about it. Crysis 1 was so poorly optimized even a high end rig chugged on some levels. Very poor game dev in my opinion. If they really expect a user to buy a 680 off the bat just to play 1 game they have another thing coming. I've played various games with my Q9550 and it plays just fine even though it recommends a i5. Its some sort of scare tactic to make people purchase a new rig. Nontheless, i stand that the 6950 will be just fine. If it plays like crap, I don't need to play it.[/citation]
I second that with my Q9650 and 560Ti

 

[alidan]

you know, i really hate many of the graphical effects that come out today,

i mean sure, if i had a head mount display, i may like motion blur and DoF but as i don't, i despise those settings. i also dislike many of the graphic effects like bloom, and i turn them off almost across the board if i have the option. i also dont like ssao shadows because during gameplay, i will almost never notice them, with the exception of deus ex where almost everything in the environment was handled with ssao exclusively. i also dont like lenses flares, yea, sure, they can be used for cinematic effect, but my eyes dont see lense flares, why would i want them in a game?

i mean, once i tear out every obnoxious graphic effect i dont like, or want to use, how would the game end up playing?

 

[lpedraja2002]

Hah! I just RMA my 8800gt for the first time in 5 years to EVGA. Maybe they'll give me back something good enough to play Crysis 3 lol.

 

[Star72]

[citation][nom]nao1120[/nom]Holy hell, Just because the AMD chip is 20 FPS less in usage doesn't mean its a sub-par chip. You guys should be lucky there is a bit of competition to lower the prices of intels. Owning one, I'm giving the 8350 a change since its only 1 tier down from the higher end intels. And really when you see 1-2 tiers less, barely noticeable. If you can reach 60 FPS (which AMD can) its good enough. Not everyone needs to be extreme. Its your choice to pay up the nose for a top tier system, But at the end of the day, Is it needed? Perhaps? I would rather invest in my house then spend 2000 on a system.[/citation]

I agree. The AMD chips get bashed pretty hard around here most of the time despite the fact that many of them are perfectly capable of playing games at good fps.

 

[Murissokah]

What you really need:

Any half-decent PC. It has to run on X360 and PS3 too, you know.

What we recommend:

Top-notch PC so you can waste its potential on poorly optmized graphics code.

 

[WithoutWeakness]

[citation][nom]jn77[/nom]I know my dual LGA 2011 with 96gb of ram and 4 7990's will run this game, but I don't play games so it is a mute point.[/citation]
So your imaginary computer has 8 GPUs? I bet it's an ultraportable laptop too and gets 24 hours of battery life. I know any imaginary computer of mine would.

 

[sincreator]

Oops I thought it was an article about Farcry 3, since it's coming out today. lol.

 

[atminside]

Those requirements seem unusually high for a console port. It is as if they made two different games or the console version is going to look really bad in comparison to the PC. I believe it when I see it. Crytek has lied to us before.......

 

[bossferas]

With a 2500k @ 4.5, 8gb 1600 ram, and an hd 7970 3gb, i should be able to run it at low right?

 

[somehowyellow]

[citation][nom]jn77[/nom]I know my dual LGA 2011 with 96gb of ram and 4 7990's will run this game, but I don't play games so it is a mute point.[/citation]

It is called a "moot point" you hardware braggard

 

[sliem]

Bah I'll just play it on lowest settings. I'm not a graphicphile or whatever you call it.

 

[azraa]

[citation][nom]sayantan[/nom]Maybe crysis 3 is utilizing the compute performance of 7970 to compensate for the fx 4170. Also 680 is not very good in compute , so it has to be paired with a quite capable CPU. Just guessing though!![/citation]

+1 to the 680 part.
Heck they (nVidia) mowed down compute performance to about half in this 6xx series designs so it could be more focused on 3D graphics, there is no doubt, it was proven here at launch.

 

[fil1p]

"Can it run crysis" is back!
I'm looking forward to the game, and can't wait to see how it runs on my rig.

 

[atikkur]

GOOD.. PC now exciting again... i love graphics.

 

[deepblue08]

Typo alert: Under Recommended Build, it says Quad Core GPU. Unless Quad-SLI is really recommended, in which case this is one of those games I will be unable to play until 4 years from now.

 

[deepblue08]

[citation][nom]WithoutWeakness[/nom]So your imaginary computer has 8 GPUs? I bet it's an ultraportable laptop too and gets 24 hours of battery life. I know any imaginary computer of mine would.[/citation]

Give this man a medal!

 

[Jprobes]

Hmm... Now to see if this game is worth the $600 price tag.

 

[nao1120]

[citation][nom]Ninjawithagun[/nom]i7 3930k @ 4.8GhzAsus Rampage IV Extreme16GB G.Skill 2400Mhz DDR34 x 256GB OCZ Vertex 4 SSDs in RAID 0EVGA GTX680 FTW 4GB GDDR5 3-Way SLIWindows 7 64-bit UltimateBring on the pain Crysis 3!! I'm ready[/citation]

Chumpstyles lol

 

[quilciri]

Here's a question....

If they're reccommending a 2600k over a 2500k, implying that crysis 3 can use a full 8 threads, why the hell are they reccommending an fx 4150 over, say an 8150 (or a 4170 for that matter)?

 

[darkchazz]

[citation][nom]Murissokah[/nom]What we recommend:Top-notch PC so you can waste its potential on poorly optmized graphics code.[/citation]
You are talking out of your arse

 

[Dax corrin]

[citation][nom]jn77[/nom]I know my dual LGA 2011 with 96gb of ram and 4 7990's will run this game, but I don't play games so it is a mute point.[/citation]
That would be "moot" point, so thumbs down to "mute" you.