People lying about Crysis 3 benchmarks

[blake1243]

My living room pc that i use for gaming has the following
HD7770
msi h61 mobo
8gb ddr3
pentium g860

When i play crysis 3 on medium settings@1080p i get 30 fps but it drops into 20's a bit. On low i get 45 fps.

I expected results like this as my system is nowhere near high, but was just to replace my console. But i look on the crysis forums and other people with 7770's claim to get high with like 60 fps. I even see videos with people playing crysis 3 on high and "saying" there using the 7770.

My question:
Anybody else with similar specs wanna share there FPS results from the Beta?

P.S
even at 45 fps the game does not feel smooth. everyother game i have the runs at 45 fps feels nice and smooth >.>. should i expect better optimizations from the official release? i don't really wanna but it if it runs like shi*t.

 

[DragonClaw]

So in short, we should upgrade our dual cores before 19th/22nd? To get 50+ fps.

 

[joeh_87]

Turn Vsync off.. screen tearing is not actually all that bad in this game & gained me some nice FPS though i'm one of those that has Vsync off in most games just because I want the best possible input response. cant stand slight delay even if i'm running a steady 60fps.

my system

Phenom II x4 965 3.8ghz
7850 2gb @ 1050/1200

with Vsync High settings = 30-40fps avg
Without Vsync High settings = 50-60fps avg.

tho i run Low just for 60fps+ 😀

 

[Motopsychojdn]

**So in short, we should upgrade our dual cores before 19th/22nd? To get 50+ fps**
Looks like, and maxing available Gpu ram is always useful 😛
Moto

 

[jessterman21]

CPU bottlenecking is completely dependent on the game - not the GPU. I had a terrible time running Crysis 2 DX11 on my old dual-core, but DX9 ran fine. Upgraded to an i3, and Crysis 2 DX11 and Crysis 3 Beta run smoothly. You definitely want the ability to run at least 4 threads if you're playing current games: check the stutters on the Pentium in this review: http://techreport.com/review/23662/amd-a10-5800k-and-a8-5600k-trinity-apus-reviewed/11

 

[iam2thecrowe]

My living room pc that i use for gaming has the following
HD7770
msi h61 mobo
8gb ddr3
pentium g860

When i play crysis 3 on medium settings@1080p i get 30 fps but it drops into 20's a bit. On low i get 45 fps.

I expected results like this as my system is nowhere near high, but was just to replace my console. But i look on the crysis forums and other people with 7770's claim to get high with like 60 fps. I even see videos with people playing crysis 3 on high and "saying" there using the 7770.

My question:
Anybody else with similar specs wanna share there FPS results from the Beta?

P.S
even at 45 fps the game does not feel smooth. everyother game i have the runs at 45 fps feels nice and smooth >.>. should i expect better optimizations from the official release? i don't really wanna but it if it runs like shi*t.

well there is a guy in another thread with a core 2 duo saying he gets 60fps constant, i would say there are people that BS about the FPS they get. http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/390892-33-dont-recieve-bottleneck-7870 < this guy here for example is claiming rediculous figures on a c2d e800, which is a low end cpu, much worse than yours. I think if you have a bottleneck anywhere its more likely the 7770, not the cpu. I would check with msi afterbuner that its clock speed is coming out of idle.

 

[blake1243]

well there is a guy in another thread with a core 2 duo saying he gets 60fps constant, i would say there are people that BS about the FPS they get. http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/390892-33-dont-recieve-bottleneck-7870 < this guy here for example is claiming rediculous figures on a c2d e800, which is a low end cpu, much worse than yours. I think if you have a bottleneck anywhere its more likely the 7770, not the cpu. I would check with msi afterbuner that its clock speed is coming out of idle.

Well i think i fixed it anyways. The bottleneck seems to be on low settings (more load on CPU). But 35 fps on average seems about right on high for a 7770. The 7870 is ALOT better so he might actually get 60 fps. It also seems that when i have a lower ping the fps seems more stable (obviously lol).

 

[blake1243]

Update:
I think TheAterix is pulling a fast one, because he claims 70fps in bf3 64 man multiplayer on the socket 775 pentium...

 

[jessterman21]

well there is a guy in another thread with a core 2 duo saying he gets 60fps constant, i would say there are people that BS about the FPS they get. http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/390892-33-dont-recieve-bottleneck-7870 < this guy here for example is claiming rediculous figures on a c2d e800, which is a low end cpu, much worse than yours. I think if you have a bottleneck anywhere its more likely the 7770, not the cpu. I would check with msi afterbuner that its clock speed is coming out of idle.

They're actually pretty close in games. http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/56?vs=404&i=50.49.48.47 The Pentium is maybe 10-15% better.

 

[blake1243]

They're actually pretty close in games. http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/56?vs=404&i=50.49.48.47 The Pentium is maybe 10-15% better.

The guy said he is using a e800 pentium. I don't know how socket 775 pentiums compare to socket 775 c2d.

 

[timil]

13.2 + CAP 2

 

[jessterman21]

The guy said he is using a e800 pentium. I don't know how socket 775 pentiums compare to socket 775 c2d.

Oh - read that E8400 for some reason.

 

[bowzef]

make sure v sync is off.. when on it caps it to 30fps...

 

[Rohan Rathi]

While people would say this is not a CPU bottleneck, I say otherwise! Anyways you can make sure if it is a CPU bottleneck or not by checking the FPS at high res and then try to play the game at low res like 800x600.

The GPU would get better performance at low resolution (obviously) but if it is a CPU bottleneck, it would give same framerate, as even so the resolution is less, the CPU will have to calculate the same amount of data and would be at the same nearly the same load at High resolution gaming!

 

[meowmix44]

On my 2600K@4.2GHz with Gigabyte Windforce 3X GTX 670 OC I get stuck at 30FPS with Vsnync on

 

[Motopsychojdn]

Read the answer above the post above yours if you can't be bothered to read the whole thread, it kinda picks up on your issue
Moto

 

[meowmix44]

Read the answer above the post above yours if you can't be bothered to read the whole thread, it kinda picks up on your issue
Moto

No buddy read my moto 😗

 

[Pailin]

I did not really trust that very early Russian Crysis 3 benchmark myself...

It look quite different to this more recent one someone linked to me earlier:
(Translated from German, from a site I am also not familiar with but trust more, maybe wrongly)

http://translate.google.co.uk/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pcgameshardware.de%2FCrysis-3-PC-235317%2FTests%2FCrysis-3-Test-CPU-Benchmark-1056578%2F&act=url

provides some Very different results on CPU scaling!
(lower res and running Titan)

Going to have to wait for some trusted sites and see where things level out at.

 

[jrpatton]

This game is CPU bound, at least in open areas. I have an i5-2400, and when I got to the New York area my CPU usage was at 100% on all cores, and my GeForce 680 was at 50%. My framerate was around 30.

Definitely a poorly optimized game, just like Crysis 1 and 2. Hopefully it will be patched. Until then I won't play it, as it's causing my CPU too much stress.

 

[jrpatton]

This game is CPU bound, at least in open areas. I have an i5-2400, and when I got to the New York area my CPU usage was at 100% on all cores, and my GeForce 680 was at 50%. My framerate was around 30.

Definitely a poorly optimized game, just like Crysis 1 and 2. Hopefully it will be patched. Until then I won't play it, as it's causing my CPU too much stress.

 

[voiidwulf]

It is a quad core optimized game, so it makes sense that your dual core would have trouble with it. The 7770 paired with a quad core i5/i7 can do what the benchmarks say.

 

[HEXiT]

it will actually use more than 4 threads. yes its quad optimized but if you have ht it will use it.
seems to give a little more performance if you use an amd 8350. i get 50 average on 8 threads and 45 on 4 cores HT off.

 

[voiidwulf]

Interesting. I can't remember if I have HT on or off.

 

[alucard214]

AMD FX 6300 and amd 6850 I can run high with no AA and get 50 to 90 fps on average with v sync off i do notice some freezing at times which I am not sure what happens My cpu usage is around 50 to 80% not sure on gpu memory is 60 to 70% on DDR3 4 gigs. Also running windows 8.

 

[Motopsychojdn]

975BE at 3.6GHz and two 6950 2Gb cards at 810/1250 I'm getting 50 Fps avg in singleplayer and its using 75% on both cards
All maxed with Vsync off and no motion blur, Msaa on lowest setting, I could cheerfully drop settings and still be pleased with the pretties onscreen
I really want Mal to hit us with a res/texture pack soon though hehe, really make the rig cry 😛
Moto

 

[anubis44]

This game is CPU bound, at least in open areas. I have an i5-2400, and when I got to the New York area my CPU usage was at 100% on all cores, and my GeForce 680 was at 50%. My framerate was around 30.

Definitely a poorly optimized game, just like Crysis 1 and 2. Hopefully it will be patched. Until then I won't play it, as it's causing my CPU too much stress.

The game is not poorly CPU optimized, just the opposite; it will use as many integer cores as you can throw at it. The problem is, you and many others read the reviews showing that Intel chips had higher instructions per clock than AMD CPUs, and that most games up until a couple of years ago were poorly threaded, so you bought Intel. All of those sites said you were better off with Intel so long as the games were poorly threaded, and anybody (like me) who pointed out that better multi-threading optimizations were imminent were shouted down and called AMD fanboys. Yet the warning signs were in those few highly multi-threaded benchmarks that were available which showed the Vishera-based FX-8350 beating a 3770K, like this:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/2

This was the omen, plain for all to see, that those who bought Intel ignored, arguing that they didn't want to wait because they might 'grow old and die' waiting for better optimized software.

Well my friend, the chickens have come home to roost. The same basic optimizations that propelled the FX-8350 past even the 3770K in that 7Zip benchmark are now showing up in all of the latest graphically intensive games (Crysis 3, Battlefield 3, Far Cry 3), which have been highly optimized for multicore processors. AMD Vishera 6 and 8 core CPUs now provide more performance with these engines than a dual core+hyperthreading CPU like the i3, or even non-hyperthreading Intel quad cores like the i5 3570K:

Read this: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-processor-frame-rate-performance,3427.html

You bet against the very optimizations we're now seeing, and you bet wrong. The fact that all three of the next gen consoles will be coming with an AMD 8 core CPU only reinforces this. To make matter worse for those of you who only have dual-core or quad core CPUs with no hyperthreading, AMD has started to seriously focus resources to accelerate this process of optimizing software across the board to even more efficiently make use of their multi-core CPUs:

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2250848/amd-looks-to-software-optimisations-to-drive-chip-performance

So it's time for you to either drop an (overpriced) 3770K into your system to get more threads, or go AMD, and have a platform that'll provide the integer cores these new games crave, and be drop-in compatible with Steamroller near the end of this year.

And in this case, I ENJOY saying 'I told you so.'

But seriously, good luck!