'Official' Crysis Requirements

That's really quite impressive. Photorealism is coming soon ... what will we do with graphics when everything looks exactly like real life?

 

^ Yeah its scary when you think about it.

 

Yeah, well ... I can already predict a pretty obvious result. A lot more people are going to be admitted to mental institutions and other special treatment facilities for believing that being in a game actually is real life. It certainly happens now, but imagine when everything in the game looks like something you would see outside with your own eyes ...

It's weird just thinking about it.

 

Any idea if an Athelon 64 3800+ CPU will run it well with 2gb of RAM and GeForce 7950GTX graphics will do it justice? As in, high settings. I know that it will be fine with everything else, but I don't know about the CPU...

And also, I do not want Photorealism in my games, then it is no longer a game, it is merely a moving photograph. I like the feeling that games have that makes you know your just playing a game.

 

It's not a dual core processor, but 2 GB of RAM and a 7950GTX should be sufficient to play it. You won't have DX10 eyecandy, and don't expect to have many settings maxed out with full AA with the Athlon 64 + 7950GTX.

 

I'm planning on building a really nice system in late 2007 and hopefully grab a second gen DX10 card.

I'm talking dual-core or maybe quad-core.
3+ gigs of RAM
200gb+ of HDD Space
Top End Nvidia or ATI 2nd Gen DX10 card.

 

Have you been reading the desktop thread? Intel in Q4 this year / Q1 next year, with the Penryn release, will be drastically reducing quad-core prices (i.e. Q6600 = $266!) This is all just rumor, but considering Intel wants to make quad-core mainstream by the middle of this year, those price cuts definitely sound reasonable.

DDR3 will be out too, but it'll be expensive. That just means that 4 GB of DDR2 will be pretty darn cheap.

 

Meh, people wont go crazyer faster with realistic graphics, graphics aren't everything you know. I mean even if the graphics were perfect, until the interaction with the world/objects was perfect, then maybe we'd see people going crazy. I mean it doesn't matter how real the world looks, as long as you can tell its fake, which is very easy, think if you were to walk up, and couldn't pick things up, or if you could and you couldn't manipulate them as normal, you'd realise immediatly things weren't right, even though the graphics were perfect (real life=perfect graphics), no matter how good it looks, people aren't going to be going crazy, now once you can do anything at all in the game world, then we're going to see some people admitted to insane asylems.

 

Yeah, so im looking foward to that, ill probably just stick with DDR2 though.

But $266 for quad-core!? thats insane, I hope that rumor is true.

 

Once you get to photo realism.. I think that will open a whole new world of possibilities. You can make things that don't exist look as if they exist...

For example, in Oblivion there are zombies that you can see the ribs on the inside of? Well imagine being able to see all the organs in great detail realistically? Imagine elves in LOTR that look like actually existing beings in games? In an attempt to make everything more realistic I'm sure the interaction with NPCs will be super realistic. Perhaps we'll get to a point where you can use a microphone to interact with an AI that can fully intemperate what you say! Graphics aren't the only thing that need to become fully realistic... In games like Supreme Commander the commander will react as a human would.. instead of just playing the same style each game it will play differently and scout.. the AI will not be able to "see'' you like they normally are in Fog of War games.. they will have to scout just like you do to see you. They will also use weird strategies like massing or artillery rush.. kind of things you see humans doing.

And then you've gotta think of how controllers will eventually evolve.. there are so many possibilities with motion sensing hardware.

But you think that once we are able to achieve photo-realism in games, there is nothing left to achieve graphics wise.. but I think that game makers will start making games that purposely don't look realistic but in a way they are.. I don't know my imagination runs wild sometimes when it comes to thinking about the future

 

wow...i think this game will be a "crysis" for my lappie.......hahah need to upgrade soon

 

Well it's nice to know that my laptop will run it, and probebly fine. Also, since my desktop has a dual core processor, 2 gigs of ram and an X1950XT, I don't think I'll have any problems running this game!


I thought it was going to REQUIRE a DX10 GPU. Guess im wrong!

 

That's awesome. I haven't been keeping up much with Crysis...but that is very impressive.

If I start gaming heavily again I'll definitely be wanting a high-powered desktop system .

 

There's some better quality and bigger reference shots in the comparisons section of this page: http://www.crysis-online.com/Media/Screenshots/screenshots-other.php

 

Those are great as well. Thanks for sharing .

 

Also be sure to check those in-game screenshots on the same site: http://www.crysis-online.com/Media/Screenshots/screenshots-ingame.php
There's some shots that are taken at super high resolution 4000*3000, e.g. this one: http://www.crysis-online.com/Media/Screenshots/Screenshots/Village-05.jpg Just make sure your browser or image viewer doesn't shrink the image so that you can see how beautiful and detailed, almost photo realistic, the graphics are. Makes you wonder, where's this world going..

 

JAW DROPS LOOKING AT PICTURES............only one word to express================================="HOLY *%^*#%&^"

 

I put of buying a Zepto laptop with a 7600 and am planning to get this when it's announced (details have been leaked and stuff):

Merom 2.0Ghz
2GB 667Mhz
100 GB 7200RPM
Geforce Go 8600 512MB

How well will that run it? Is there a large increase in performance between a 7600 and an 8600, or is it just the ability to use DX10?

Also I think part of the reason those comparisons look so photo-real is that they are so lo-res that you can't really see any of the imperfections, but I haven't looked at the super high-res ones yet so I will have to see.

 

Erm in that huge picture how come there is no one piloting the helicopter XD I guess they have gotten too detailed?

 

Might be a helicopter controlled by a robot computer brain. You never know ...

 

Well that's not propably question about graphics, that's question about realism and how finished the product actually is.. But yeah, it's pretty funny though. Still the graphics look better that I have ever seen on any game.

 

I meet everything for minimum.... but i still doubt it will run playablely (thats probobly not a word)

 

You're gonna want at least a Core 2 Duo/Athlon 64 X2 with 2.0+ Ghz, 2 GB of RAM, and an 8600 or above to enjoy this game, IMO.

Building a computer out of those components won't be too expensive. By the time Crysis comes out, the prices on all three of those things should go down. You could easily build an easily affordable $1000 desktop to play Crysis.

 

how will this set up do?

Operating System: Genuine Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit

Processor Intel(R) Core(TM) 2 Duo processor E6400 (2.13GHz)

Memory 2GB DDR2-667MHz dual channel SDRAM (2x1024)

Hard Drive 320GB 7200 rpm SATA hard drive

Primary CD/DVD Drive LightScribe 16X DVD+/-R/RW SuperMulti drive

Front Productivity Ports 15-in-1 memory card reader, 3 USB, 1394, audio

Speakers Logitech X-530 5.1 Speakers

Networking 802.11 b/g Wireless LAN PCI Card

TV & Entertainment Experience No TV Tuner w/remote control

Graphics Card 640MB NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTS, 2 DVI, TV-Out

Sound Card Sound Blaster Audigy X-Fi, 24-bit Xtreme Fidelity

Keyboard and Mouse HP Wireless Keyboard, Wireless Optical Mouse

Productivity Software Microsoft(R) Works 8.0 edit

Security Software Norton Internet Security(TM) 2007 - 15 Months



Monitors HP 19-inch LCD Wide Flat Panel Monitor

 

in general, that setup should run crysis near maxed out, but it really depends on the resolution.

if at 1280x1024, yea, most likely you can run it maxxed out

at 1650x1080, maybe a little lower then max, but still run it at pretty high settings


you'll have a blast on that rig

 

Why do you even bother asking? ...

 

Agreed, seriously...

 

ha, just want to double check I have everything covered

but thanks guys, just ordered

 

if i were you, i'd go build my own, or at least old off for a week or 2


intel will be doing price cuts on the core 2 duo on april 22...

 

Well, the GF8800 is actually the most significant thing that makes that desktop system so great for future gaming. But if you care to know, there are still things that could be a bit better. You could have 800Mhz memory since it's priced about the same. Harddrives could be two 10000rpm WD raptors in RAID 0, making load times a lot shorter. Your monitor seems pretty small for desktop and what's it's native resolution? That Norton IS running in the background is never good for gaming. There are a lot better keyboards and mouses for gaming.

As 'hmmmmm' said you would have a lot better system at lower or same price if you had chosen your components by yourself or with some help.

Anyways, we are a bit off topic here, since this is a forum mostly dedicated to laptops.

 

You don't need Ultimate, don't ever spend money upgrading to it. Vista Home Premium/Vista Business are the two best Vistas. Ultimate just has a lot of features that really nobody will have use for. It's also not going to make your computer run faster.

The 8800GTS 640MB is currently top of the line, behind the 8800GTX. Overclock an 8800GTS and you'll have benchmarks that resemble a stock 8800GTX, and even a stock 8800GTX is just ridiculously powerful.

 

Do any laptops under $4,000 even have a 2.8 processor?

 

2.8 is a single-core processor. Any dual core processor that's Core 2 Duo or Turion 64 X2 should be fine. Their actual clock speeds may be lower than 2.8 Ghz, but their effective power is more than 2.8 Ghz.

 

I see, that's cool. I was in the market to buy a notebook, so it seems I should just wait for the go8600 notebooks to come out.

 

Like this one - http://www.evesham.com/products/info.asp?e=9C288AE9-17F9-4138-9706-63C884DDF270
So is it better to buy a notebook with 8600M or 7950GTX for Crysis?

 

The "2.8GHz" requirement refers to a Pentium 4. Any Core Duo or Turion X2 would probably have no problem playing Crysis. A 1.66GHz Core Duo from what I understand is about a 3.0GHz Pentium 4 or so.

That's a tough decision, but I would take the Go7950GTX because it is so much more powerful running DirectX 9 code. Crysis in DirectX 9 @ high settings may look better than @ DirectX 10 with lower settings. You'll also be able to run at a higher resolution with the Go7950GTX.

 

Would a 1.73 ghz pentium meet the 2.8 ghz requirement?

 

well...at least i'll be able to play it lol

im glad u can use dx9 instead of full blown 10

medium-low settings for me lol

 

motion blur_off
shadows_low
trilinear filtering
resolution_800x600

apply changes.

 

Since pc gamers aren't that big market, I'm sure it will be ported to PS3 and Xbox, EA after $

 

It will be able to play the game; a 1.73GHz Pentium M is probably about as fast as a 2.8 - 3.0GHz Pentium 4.

 

Have you noticed we havent talked about the new 8600M GT?

How would you say this Vid card would run the game? i barely think it will run at med-low at 1024x768.

This is depressing.

 

I think it would. But like someone said a 7950 GTX would run the game maxxed out but on dx9 and the 8600M on medium on dx10.

In my opinion maxxed out dx9>medium dx10 and also if you are going to play games like BF2142, BF2 and high end dx9 card is better.

 

What do people think about scaling down the direct x you decide to use? I'm sure lots of people didn't bother, but it was an option to scale down directx in hl2. Maybe we'll be able to go down from dx10 to dx9 on our 8600s for a little boost?

 

possible. it might turn out that the directx10 shader path doesn't damage performance in the same way that we have seen early dx10 demos do.

i will run crysis in xp first- just because vista is going to suck away 10% of my precious frames- dx10 or not.

 

That's going to be exciting! I can't wait to see how well my dual 8800 GTX video cards (SLI enabled) will go with this, along with my Intel core 2 extreme quad core overclocked to 3.2 ghz! ^_^


By the way, which laptop video cards would run Crysis pretty well? 8600/8700m GTs?

 

Well DX10 cards are supposed to run DX10 cards better when compared to its DX9 counterpart. That was the whole point of DX10 cards so they could benefit from the new features of DX10 cards? If they don't run DX10 games better then DX9 card someone is going to pay!!!!

 

1 simple question. Would an overclocked GO 7900GS in the dell m1710 be able to handle crysis on HIGH setting? Any confident guesses would be nice.

I cant aford anything better than the 7900gs after spending £2000/$4000 on the ultimate laptop that i had stolen 2 weeks after gettin it. i had saved up for years and had it nicked at college. I was even planning to get theft insurance on it the same week! No words can describe my pain... lol... but seriously, ouch

 

A moment of piece for your fallen laptop..............................................................................................
But seriously man that sucks, damn thieves I hope the comp explodes in the persons face.

 

lol i would 2 but its such a piece of engineering perfection, it doesnt deserve to blow up. lol. yay 100th post