Crysis performance

Alright (this is going to be a little long):

All files are located in CrysisSPDemo\Game\Config\CVarGroups\. There is a separate .cfg file for each setting (Shadows, Textures, Post Processing, etc.). Within the .cfg file, the first set of variables are the maximum possible values for each variable. After that are [1], [2], and [3] headings, corresponding to Low, Medium, and High.

-In sys_spec_Texture.cfg, there are three variables under "[3]" (AKA, what changes when you put Textures on High). Change the CloudMaxSize to 24 and SpriteMaxSize to 16 (the same values as Medium)

-In sys_spec_Shadows.cfg, under [2], change shadows_max_texture_size to 256 (instead of the default 512). This makes the shadows a little fuzzier, but helps performance (without having to resort to turning the shadows completely off).

-In sys_spec_Shading.cfg, underneath [3], I basically set all the variables to their corresponding Medium values, except for sys_spec_Quality, whose value should remain at "3".
But set:
-r_SSAO=0 (default is 1 - this is "Screen-space Ambient Occlusion", which has to do with lighting but I can't see a difference between off and on)
r_FillLights = 0 (from the default 14)
e_particle_lights = 0 (from the default 1)

Basically, I noticed that there was a huge improvement in the lighting (HDR?) between Medium and High Shaders (especially noticeable at dawn), but couldn't figure out what variable caused it. This way, I keep the awesome lighting but cut some of the extra stuff out (FillLights and SSAO), so it's closer to Medium.

In sys_spec_Quality.cfg, each number ([1], [2] and [3]) corresponds to the "sys_spec_Quality" variable in your Shader.cfg (I told you to keep it at 3).
So under [3], you can change which objects get the "bumps" of extra shading like on my screenshots above.


I'm still experimenting with which variables do what. You're basically choosing between High shading and Medium shading on a per-object basis. (if you put q_ShaderMetal=1 for example, Metal objects would get Medium-level shaders, and you would lose the roughness on the roof shingles).

Edit: Played around with more of the settings:
You can set every variable underneath [3] to a value of 1 except for General, Metal, Vegetation, and Terrain should be left at the default value of 2. (I can't see a difference with any of the other ones). And you still have the improved High-shader lighting. Having only those four variables with values of 2 improves performance while still shading where it counts.

Edit2: Comparison shots (all shots contain the tweaked High Textures - this is a comparison of shaders only).

Default Medium Shaders vs. my "Tweaked" High Shaders

vs.

vs.


All of those shots were at the same time of day. The Medium Shaders have a harsher bright light, while High shaders have a softer light that (I think, anyway) looks a lot better. (in addition to the bumps on everything). So tweaking the High Shaders gives me greatly improved image quality but only costs me about 4 FPS.



Phew! So... after doing all that, in the game set Textures and Shading on High, and all of the other settings on Medium. Set 1280x800 and try it out. You're getting higher res textures and improved shading, but with less of a performance hit usually associated with the default High Textures and Shading. You should get around 20 FPS, give or take depending on the situation.

Another note: since I love motion blur, I set the r_MotionBlur=1 under the [2] heading in the PostProcessing.cfg, so I can use Medium post processing but still have motion blur.

 

Thanks Joga. I get about 13-23fps average with those settings. I may switch texture back to medium but keep shaders on high just for a few more fps.

 

I don't get how to edit the variables. I'm in the cvargroups.

EDit: nvm, I'm a moron.

 

Has anyone else noticed that when you overclock the game kinda stalls, starts jerking around, or just totally bombs out?

I have a go7700 and have tested it overclocked to 530mhz, ram to 550mhz, and backed down to 500 and 500 - no difference. This occurs on both the 169.01 and 167.26 drivers.

Also, for people that have vista and can't bring up the console - what version do you have? I got home premium and no console.

 

Crysis on M1330.

(quick vid i recorded, suprisingly smooth - 169.01 - dx9 - 800 x 600)

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=GvczXFYiVPk

Also, I get away with med textures for those with 8400m gs

 

Anyone know how Crysis performs on an ATI Mobility Radeon HD 2600?

 

Here are my results with Mobility Radeon X1800 (quite powerful card for laptops), 2GB ram, CD1,83GHz: http://forum.notebookreview.com/showpost.php?p=2621838&postcount=363

So in short, it was hardly "playable" even at 1024x640 resolution (which is lower than 1024x768 for gods sake!). My native resolution is 1440x900, at which the demo is totally unplayable, even at low settings. At 1280x800 it ran at ~20fps, which was suprisingly smooth, but I still think ~30fps is the target here. And yes, my system is well optimized: drivers, background apps, services, etc. are all set.

I think the demo is better optimized for Nvidia cards OR it's not optimized well for anything. What do you think?

 

I get weird **** with crysis no matter what driver.


Im standing in this place when I first load the game --------- fps 35



I walk around a bit ----------- fps 28-30

I go back to same place as beggining ------------ FPS 20

I walk around a bit --------------------------- fps 10-12

After a few min fps back to normal, after a few min the cycle repeats it self....this is very irritating.

 

i was wondering if my computer can run crysis on ultra high everything
INTEL QUAD CORE Q6600 2.4GHz
SLI Dual 512 MB Nvidia Graphics Card 8700GT/GGR3 DX10
4GB Ram
Vista Home Premium

 

in all honesty im looking to buy Assassin's Creed more than i am Crysis....saw the trailer on gamestop.com and i fainted...

 

i hate to say this to you, because you probably spent a lot on your notebook, but no current configuration an play Crysis with everything maxed out...yes not even dual 8800 Ultras can. You will be able to play on high though most likely, which should be better than what most notebooks can do.

 

ok thanks but how about CNC 3 or Battlefield 2142 maxed

 

I'm not sure if those will be taking advantage of all of your cores, but IMO you shouldn't have a problem with any game out there besides Crysis at ultra high.

 

Crysis crashed my computer after the 3rd time i played it (it didn't look great to begin with, but it was still quite playable). I'm pretty sure that it is cause i'm using the last nvidia omega drivers, which are waaaayyyyyy out of date.

Does anybody know which laptop video 2 go drivers i should use for a 6800go mxm (there are so frikin many and the site warns that some might actually be bad for your system.)

 

Does CNC3 mean Command & Conquer 3? If so, i forced SLi on my last M1730 (Sli 8700's too) and it ran perfectly at native resolution with everything turned up high. Even with lots of units on screen.

 

people people, the new 169.09 beta driver from nvidia is out!!!!!!!!!! for crysis especially. waiting for laptopvideo2go inf......

 

YEA

Let's hope for another great performance boost

 

Yeah, i have the same problem, but it isn´t as serious as yours...my 8700gt defaults at 625/1250/100 and when i get past 740/1800/1000 the chances that the game will freeze go high.

 

Just in case anyone's curious. I ran the Crysis demo with med settings at 1024x800 resolution (I think that's it, I forgot) and it ran pretty good. This is with XP Pro and stock HP video drivers (the newest one). Interestingly, I only had major slowdown during the logos (EA and such) they pop up at the start.

 

Nope.

The Crysis demo is poorly optimized, we can only hope the real game will be better. It does NOT have support for Nvidia SLI. Vista doesn't help matters either. Your best bet for an SLI setup is using Windows XP and then migrating to Vista later when the driver support improves. Or better yet, dual boot.

 

hmm anybody tested these new 169.09 drivers yet?

 

Yup. No change. Not a drop. In the GPU benchmark thingy my average went from 17.97 to 17.99 FPS (within the margin of error - and actual gameplay has higher framerates than that benchmark... but anyway). Also while playing the actual game my framerates seem to be pretty much the same as 169.04.

I think this driver release was more for improvements with SLI, 64-bit, and DX10, none of which I have, so it didn't do anything for my framerate...

 

thanks for the info Joga ,

 

Retail Crysis runs much better than the demo in DX10.

 

I read that the retail version of crysis has improved framerates, but that was just a guy on a forum playing the leaked version. It also isn't reviewing as well as people have thought. 1up.com gave it an 8.0 out of 10.

 

how would the crysis demo runs on my rig?

installed the demo last time using stock driver was unplayable! havnt tried installing again.. have recently installed the driver for vista 32bit from laptop2go.com think its the 163.67 driver.. able to play cnc3 @ high settings but graphic cd is pretty hot.. citylife @ highest possible settings looked amazing! but fps around 25-40 rest of games havnt tried.. dont think the driver i installed is optimized yet..

 

Your rig is definitely capable of playing the game. First, update those drivers to 169.09:
http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=187742

Next, make sure the game is running in DirectX 9 mode. DirectX 10 has a negative impact on performance and you have to run it at reduced settings, effectively making it look better in DirectX 9 mode. Right-click the shortcut on your desktop, click properties, then at the end of the "Target" field, put a space after the last " and put -dx9. The game will now run in DirectX 9 mode.

 

I'm glad to hear the retail version runs better. I really need to go home to grab mine from the store.

 

dont see any improvements in terms of performance on teh retail... just do what chaz said - get the .09 driver and run in dx9

 

i am a bit however let down about the multiplayer - it wasn't quite what i expected. seems too dull to me for some reason and the whole sequence of events you need to complete to win is a turn off. anyone else have a negative view of multiplayer? (btw single player is AWESOME)

 

Single player is awesome indeed. The environments are the most immense and grand scale environments I've ever seen in a videogame. Simply stunning! I also love how HUGE the levels are, without any loading-related stuttering in sight.

 

It doesn't. Not for me, at least.

 

Same here, full version doesn't run better. Although it depends on the level: some levels are a little less demanding than others (inside the space ship my framerate droppes considerably for instance).

 

That's right where I am right now and I'm waiting for a possible SLI patch and/or better drivers so I won't have to turn my settings down just to play this one level. :/

 

wait is SLI isnt supported in this game?

 

I second that.... some say yes, some say no.... i get the SLI visual indicator in the demo, but some say that's impossible, so maybe it's a glitch and not really SLI... very curious, anybody know?

 

Well, SLI works, and has worked for me, even with the demo... but my framerate fluctuates like mad. I've just always assumed that's related to the lack of "real" SLI support in Crysis, which nVidia claims is fixed in 169.09, but I saw worse performance after installing the newer drivers. So I'm playing the waiting game.

 

I turned down my Volumetric effects quality during that level, which really helped.

 

But I want my volumetric effects.

 

You may have to buy a new computer then

 

i am having a hugeeee problem, right now my laptop (asus f3) has a hd 2600 and its not even letting me play with playable framerates on low, i have no idea why, and i was wondering is there a way to play in directx 9 mode on vista rather than directx 10, please someone help me.

 

Maybe upgrade to the latest catalyst...Don't mean to be an a-hole, but I see that Ati GPUs have just the same problems as the nvidia ones...so I guess that Crysis has issues,since it's a general related problem..
I played the demo on 1280 , all medium, and ran 25-45 fps. very playable, and looks great :d Can't wait to get my hands on the retail version

 

Not sure if this was posted but still a good read on the video memory specs and a slew of other tweaks;

http://www.incrysis.com/forums/viewtopic.php?id=11614

 

As I noted a few pages back, DirectX 10 is a let-down. It reduces performance enough that you have to reduce the detail settings, which effectively makes DirectX 9 mode better because you can run with higher detail settings. DirectX 10 is really not amounting to anything.

To make the game run in DirectX 9 mode, right-click the shortcut icon on your desktop and click Properties. Then at the end of the "Target: " line, put a space and then type -dx9 after the end quotes.

 

I'll start the discussion. I'm running the 169.09 drivers with the toshiba inf file to support the HD DVD software. I have SLI mode set to AFR1 in both the drivers and the Crysis profile. To my dismay, just like the demo I don't think SLI is working. I'm running at 1024x768 with most settings to high right now. Even 1280x800 with medium settings is choppy as hell. I hear there is a patch coming out next week to help SLI issues. Can anyone confirm this? I can run Gears of War and Call of Duty 4 at max settings fine. Those two games look incredible and play smooth. This laptop is sweet. Thanks.

 

Haven't tried the 169.09's yet, still using the 169.04's, but I'm running 1440x900 or 1280x800 (still playing with the settings) with med/high settings in DX9 mode and it runs smooth, and with the SLI visual indicator on and everything apearing to be working properly... but, I do have the SLI settings in the Nvidia control panel set to the default CUSTOM for the SLI setting under the Crysis profile... have you tried that instead of forcing AFR1? I haven't changed it, just has CUSTOM in bold, and from what I can tell seems to work, game runs smooth. Maybe that might help?

 

how do i see what my fps's are?

 

I have the SLi3 for testing now as I mentioned, I'll get Crysis running on it and see what kind of FPS it gets. Unfortunately neither the game nor the demo support SLI at the moment but there will be a patch that adds support in the full game. All I have to say is that the patch had better be released soon.

FRAPS is a versatile utility:
http://fraps.com/
However it doesn't work in DirectX 10 games. If you are running in DirectX 9 mode then that's not an issue.

 

Ok, guys, I've been playing around with the Crysis demo lately. I've been running it on medium settings at 1280x800, but it runs like sludge. Sometimes it looks ok and runs at 20-30 fps, which is too low for my tastes, but bearable. But when I get to heavily populated parts or parts with lots of plants, I drop down below 10. That's just unacceptable. I even dropped the resolution down to 1024x640, which looks horrible, and it's the same deal. I don't gain any fps at all. Is this normal? I mean, I know my laptop isn't exactly new, but still... I thought a 7900GS would at least run medium on resolutions like that ok.

Could it be my drivers? I'm running 163.67 right now. Any thoughts from you guys?

 

1) Quadro is not a gaming card (Yes, I understand they're still based on the same G8X cores).
2) Using a none-quadro supported driver may not improved performance, but decrease it.
3) Try 169.04 or 169.09, they're supposedly optimized for Crysis (But again, read #2...).
4) Some games simply doesn't give you extra performance even if you lower the resolution. This happened to me in WiC as well. I'd play on 1280 x 800 and the average FPS is... 21, I think, and I'd lower the resolution to 1024 x 640 and the average FPS is still 21.

The reason here, I think, is because the CPU is the bottleneck (both are very physics intensive game).
By the way, a DX10 vs. DX9 comparison for Crysis:
http://www.gamespot.com/features/6182140/p-2.html

"Tweaked" Very High DX9 settings >>>>> Native Very High DX10 settings (in terms of FPS--they look almost identical otherwise).