A computer than can finally run Crysis?

[Darth Alec]

Crysis makes PC's cry.

[Power666]

Originally Posted by Deathmonkey7

There's no way around it?
My PC is far from what I would call the best, but it comes close to the mark set by bob. With all settings on Ultra (though this is with the changing of config files for DX9, which from what I hear only leaves out the object-based motion blur that's available in DX10) @ 1440 x 900, which is a mere 14,000 pixels less, at an average of 21 FPS.

But I have far from the greatest RAM and CPU, and spent around half that amount.

Is it really impossible to make it run 10 FPS faster with $1000 more?

I will say that running things under Windows XP is faster but as you said, you're missing an effect here or there. The goal is for maximum possible in game settings.

It is also worth pointing out that the high end multi-GPU systems like CrossFireX using two Radeon 3870X2 or triple SLI with Geforce 8800GTX require Vista. Now that I think about it, that type of hardware under Windows XP would have a chance of 30 fps with highest setting and a decent resolution if they actually worked. It'd also require every effect to be available under Windows XP.

[Fyrus]

Originally Posted by Newerest

To a PC gamer you aren't really running the game unless it's very high settings, 60fps, 2560 x 1600 resolution, 4x AA and 16x AF.

Crysis runs like dog on almost any rig.

Maybe the RV700's will be able to run it well....maybe

Dogs run pretty well.

[Yoshi-5up]

My PC runs Crysis fine:

Setup:

Dell XPS 410 (IT ISN'T SHITTY)
Windows Vista Home Premium
Intel C2D 6600 @ 2.4 GHz
2 GB RAM
Nvidia 8800 GTX, 768 MB VRAM
500 GB HDD

Pretty much everything except the processor and GPU are generic.

Price: $1900.

Do I win?

[Darth Alec]

You might run it, but not with all the settings on Ultra.

[Ghost334]

On 1680x1050 with a bit of OC, why not.

[Power666]

Because even with the most high end hardware today, it chokes when settings are set to their maximum regardless of resolution?

....

I still dont understand this....
In Vista I run Crysis with everything cranked (except motion blur I put on medium because it bugs me. But even at Very High it makes no difference in FPS) at 1920x1080 (highest res my HDTV supports) and I run at a respectable 50fps or better.

That said, in XP changing to High (because of DX9) the graphic difference isnt that big and I only gain about 10fps.

I paid a total of $800 for my system.

[Spindel]

Originally Posted by PhoenixKfz

....

I still dont understand this....
In Vista I run Crysis with everything cranked (except motion blur I put on medium because it bugs me. But even at Very High it makes no difference in FPS) at 1920x1080 (highest res my HDTV supports) and I run at a respectable 50fps or better.

That said, in XP changing to High (because of DX9) the graphic difference isnt that big and I only gain about 10fps.

I paid a total of $800 for my system.

The main thing with DX10 is that it is heavily optimized compared to DX9 not that it contains that much difference visuallly speaking that's probably why you don't experience that much better frame rates (they can also have gimped the DX9 version of Crysis in some cinematic super conspiracy together with MS do show off DX10)

Originally Posted by Spindel

The main thing with DX10 is that it is heavily optimized compared to DX9 not that it contains that much difference visuallly speaking that's probably why you get better frame rates (they can also have gimped the DX9 version of Crysis in some cinematic super conspiracy together with MS do show off DX10)

Oh I understand that spindel.

I am more speaking to the fact that people are saying that its hard to get Crysis running on a DX10 PC at full settings.... and nothing short of a $5K PC will do it.