Home General Discussion

Crysis Warhead on my new rig...

polycounter lvl 14
Offline / Send Message
Havok polycounter lvl 14
Hey, guys. I just bought a new gaming system and I want to know what you think:

-Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 2.66ghz
-PNY XLR8 GeForce 9800gt Performance Edition (1024mb)
-4gb DDR2 RAM
-150gb HDD (not the biggest, but it works)
-Windows Vista Home Premium 32bit

I have a question though. Crysis Warhead works on Enthusiast (Very High) settings on this rig but my FPS stays from 20-30 and almost never goes over. While this is easily playable, it is not as smooth as it should be in my opinion. I think I should be getting 30+ FPS. My question is do any of you know how I can get better performance out of Crysis Warhead without lowering the graphic settings? Thanks for any help you can give me.

Replies

  • ae.
  • CrazyMatt
    Only 1 problem out of the whole setup, and that's Vista :(

    I would have just stuck with windows XP or Microsofts next OS that they'll officially make with no hiccups. Only because Microsoft is now only going to support it (Vista) for 6 more months then it's bye bye.
  • Havok
    Offline / Send Message
    Havok polycounter lvl 14
    Meh, I like Vista, and with XP I wouldn't be able to use DX10. While I will agree that XP is more stable/reliable, I am too used to Vista to stop using it now.
  • eld
    Offline / Send Message
    eld polycounter lvl 18
    If you're talking about the "dx10" very high settings in the crysis games,

    then yes, you can use those in XP, they're just blocked out in the game, and it's possible to activate them in the settingsfiles.
  • Michael Knubben
    Crazy(ooh, I'm so crazy! Look at me!)Matt: That sounds like bullshit. Of the type that's just been pulled out of your arse.

    You're not one of those guys who actually believes that Microsoft wants to abandon ship on Vista as soon as possible, are you? If so, you might be interested to find out that Win7 is (at the moment) still very much a slight tweak of Vista. Not the total abandoning you were hoping for?
    Also, telling someone to wait for the next OS and just switch immediately at launch is a far more stupid idea than telling someone to use Vista (which has had two Service Packs, the latter of which I believe is still in testing)

    So, yeah. Any sources you want to share with me to back up that claim?
  • East
    Offline / Send Message
    East polycounter lvl 14
    If Windows 7 is just a tweak of Vista, then it would make sense to switch to Windows 7 at launch.. Besides, Microsoft are (is?) trying to abandon Vista as soon as possible and get rid of the stigma which is that brand. I can't give you any official press statements about it, or drunk rantings of Ballmer, but anyone who's been following tech for the past years sees this as being quite obvious.

    That said, on a spankin' brand new machine, running Vista should be all right.

    As for the topic at hand, I think other than doing the usual thing of updating drivers, and tweaking the settings, you'd probably have to upgrade your CPU and/or your GPU. The E6700 and 9800GT aren't really enthusiast level hardware, and probably won't give you enthusiast level performance.
  • MoP
    Offline / Send Message
    MoP polycounter lvl 18
  • katzeimsack
    Offline / Send Message
    katzeimsack polycounter lvl 18
    MoP wrote: »
    It's Crysis.
    urban legend

    crysis(everything on high) runs actually faster on my workmashine than cod 4(everything on high) ...

    6 compared to 4 fps, or something like that ;)
  • Michael Knubben
    East: it's 'quite obvious' that everyone who comments on tech news believes this, and to some extent there is probably some truth to it. On the other hand, that should mostly be attributed to the stigma Vista carries, moreso than (and here I paraphrase from said comments) ''cuz Vista is a big pile of shit operating system that should have been aborted before it ever went to market and it gives you aids and herpes and kills puppies'.
    There have been issues with compatibility mostly, and people for some reason have forgotten that XP was never perfect from day 1, either.
    And really, east, would you recommend anyone switch to 7 at launch? Re-read what I said (especially the 'AT THE MOMENT'-bit). Every recent Microsoft OS has been based on a previous one, but did that guarantee instant stability? Ofcourse not, they still introduced a lot of new stuff.

    Why the fuck does it feel like now there's not only the MacOS vs Windows discussion, there's also the equally idiotic Xp vs. Vista one? Let's up the stakes a bit, shall we? Xp vs. leopard! Vista vs. snow Leopard! Xp vs. Tiger!
    And to get fully crazy: 'Lol leopard sux Cheetah 4 lyf'
  • ImSlightlyBored
    Offline / Send Message
    ImSlightlyBored polycounter lvl 13
    lol someones got a vengeance against... everything. Though I do agree.

    As for the problem? I do agree with crazymatt, vista can be a bit of a bugger when playing games. First off, forget about DX10, for all the urban legends that are being called in this thread, this is the biggest one. No real difference imo, for the hit.

    But I do like Vista myself, use it myself, so im not biased. I just feel vista causes a little more performance hit on games than XP did. Aside from that, I do agree with East, also. But man, keep the big picture. Enthuasist, I assume, is the highest. Just knock it down to the next step and no doubt itll still look amazing and run better. I know what its like, (I got my new rig completely owned by Crysis instead of a gentle telling off like you) but it still holds up real nice on slightly lower settings.

    BTW, are koreans still pretty much immortal?
  • Psyk0
    Offline / Send Message
    Psyk0 polycounter lvl 18
    I guess it depends on your budget but i would have picked different hardware for a gaming rig.

    For CPU choice it's ok, but you could have gotten more power at least for gaming. A duo 8600 3Ghz outperforms any quad on crysis @ 1680x1050, except the QX9770 which is a real bargain at 1319$! ;)

    http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-q3-2008/Crysis-1680x1050,818.html

    The pattern changes for UT3, the quads are in the lead but the 8600 is still in there with the big boys:

    http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-q3-2008/Unreal-Tournament-3-1680x1050,819.html

    As for the video card, it depends on your gaming resolution, but if you pick something that can run as high as 1920 then you shouldnt have problems getting great performance at a more reasonable res.

    I would have recommended the "new" Nvidia GPU, the GTX 280. The 9800 is just a slightly modified g92 if i'm not mistaken, nvidia milked that processor 'til the end and then finally came out with the "real one".

    http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/gaming-graphics-charts-q3-2008/Crysis-v1-21,758.html
  • East
    Offline / Send Message
    East polycounter lvl 14
    MightyPea, I have to confess to trying to wind you up a little bit on purpose. Though seriously, at the moment, the way things are looking.. yes I would probably recommend people switching to Windows 7 on day one later next year, but I reserve the right to change my opinion on this as we get more info about it.

    And yeah, XP vs. Vista is a dumb discussion. Anyone who knows anything about computers knows Vista is shit, and XP is the shit. Yes. That's me being facetious.
  • ElysiumGX
    Offline / Send Message
    ElysiumGX polycounter lvl 18
    I remember WindowsME. Glad to see Vista will soon join that pile. With the early timetable of 7, I'm glad they realized something needed to be fixed, and a lot of bloat needed to be removed. I'll be switching at launch.

    And to answer the topic: No. Your computer isn't good enough. Just give up.
  • claydough
    Offline / Send Message
    claydough polycounter lvl 10
    As for the problem? I do agree with crazymatt, vista can be a bit of a bugger when playing games. First off, forget about DX10, for all the urban legends that are being called in this thread, this is the biggest one. No real difference imo, for the hit.

    I dunno.. I always thought the unreal engine 3 was overhyped till I switched to dx10 and Vista. Nothing but love now.

    Is there a setting to get anti-aliased hdr in dx 9 using unreal?

    Another game that got a quality performance boost on my machine when making the switch was Assasin's Creed?
  • Havok
    Offline / Send Message
    Havok polycounter lvl 14
    Thank you Psyk0, thats the kind of post I was looking for, not this XP vs Vista shit, come on guys. Do you think if I overclocked my CPU a bit, the game would run better? I setup an autoexec.cfg with a few commands and now I am getting an average of 35 fps which is great. I have only tried it at 1024x768 though, I am hoping to get those frames on my max res (1440x900). I kind of want to bump up the HDR a bit but I am not sure how much it affects performance and I am not exactly sure which command it is. Is it the q_ShaderHDR command? Thanks in advance.
  • Blaizer
    Offline / Send Message
    Blaizer polycounter
    heh, "you're never happy with everything you have". Pc uses have their shit, like Macs do, and Vista is less shit than XP. I'm quite happy with Vista Ultimate, nvidia have now good drivers for my quadro and i can play now as well or better than xp. But that, is something to late, i builded a computer recently and i'm going to buy a new GTX 270 o 290 to play as king.

    Crysis is Crysis, don't ask much to your computer hehe.

    4gb ram and vista 32? 9800gt?

    What fails mainly is the graphic card, not so powerful for Crysis. You can have a gtx 280 and having x8AA x16Anisotropic and high quality at 1920x1280... won't be enough to play very well (280=too much noise, heat, and watts). No matter what cpu you have, if you own a bad graphic card to play crysis... don't expect much.

    The 9800gt is a great videocard to play too many games, but not for crysis at 24" as all pc gamers do.
Sign In or Register to comment.