Will Crysis 2 max settings run better than Crysis 1 max settings?

I'm just wondering since this game's multi-platform, will the game run better at max settings compared to Crysis 1 while looking even better?

 

more then likey it should run better... but their making it a console port this time so who knows what would happen

 

So far in DX 9 mode, you can run on all max on 1080p without having the FPS go under 30. However in DX 10 or DX 11 modes, we have yet to know what to occur. In general, it should be more optimized than Crysis 1 (which was by a long-shot horrifically coded).

 

yes. not only because of the engine itself, but because the environments appear to be smaller than what you'd see in Crysis.

 

what do you guys think will be the least required specs to run Crysis 2 max settings 1920x1080

 

Your sig probably.

 

The leaked beta is forced at medium quality, so imagine real maximum quality.. ouch! Look at Metro 2033 for example.

 

that's great news.

 

it's hard to say what you'll need to run the game at "max" settings. even though it's a console port, I could imagine the max settings for post-processing might include tessellation and/or ambient occlusion, which can bring graphically average games to their knees.

However, there is a general expectation that the game will run better overall than crysis.

 

it should be coded better than the previous crysis games..just like what happened to warhead. and this time crysis 2 is ported to the console. so we'll see about that.

 

This. There's a Youtube video of someone with a 5570, and it chugs worse than the original ever did on the same hardware and same settings.

 

I noticed but one thing to note that this is the "LEAKED" beta so who knows? Maybe the game will be better optimized on release.

 

Also thought about it. I have a 5730, I watched the vid of the 5570 : I run MUCH better at med settings ( 30-80 ), So I expect those FPS in high in C2.

 

I tried it in max settings and got better FPS than crysis 1 max settings.

 

Link please to that. The Radeon 5570 Desktop should be similar to the Radeon 5650M/5730M in performance.

 

check pm for info.

 

Thanks! Checked it out and as I said via PM, I don't expect it to run on 1080p and there isn't that much stuttering or lag on the settings that it is on. So it is an improvement compared to the Crysis 1 benchmarks I have seen people run with the 5570.

 

It should be better on final release, since the beta is incomplete and is limited to dx9 only, it might be better on dx10/11 when it comes out. Since consoles can run the game smoothly I would assume the 5570 would be better, the consoles are wayyy behind modern GPU's nowadays.

 

No mobile GPUs have a shot at maxing @ 1080p, outside of the 485M and 6970M.

 

5870M, 5850M GDDR 5 OC, GTX 480M and GTX 470M might. (Might!)

 

5850M, 5870M = 5770 = no chance
480M < GTX 465 = not nappening
470M = downclocked GTX 460 minus shaders = good luck with that

6970M and 485M are just at/below the desktop 6850, which gives them a shot at maintaining 30fps, but not a big one.

 

This is assuming you are running on DX 11... DX 9, the 5870M can run 1080p at 35 FPS on the highest settings.

 

Bah, I hope I run at 1080p DX11 medium settings at 30 FPS...

 

Isn't the pirate copy on medium settings? I haven't really kept up to speed on that.

 

If I remember correctly it only goes up to high settings (no directx 11).

 

Can I ask a question?
How do you think a laptop with;
QX9300
9800M GTX
8GB 1066Mhz

will handle this (@ 1440x900)?

 

Yea and also guys my res isn't 1080p :/ it's 1440x900

 

But you can see that the frame is consistently in the low twenties, sometimes the high teens, which to me, isn't all that playable.

In short, Crytek have a HELL of a lot of optimization to do.

 

And downloading it is piracy. Thus it's the pirate copy.

 

Precisely, leaked or not it is a pirated copy.

 

it was leaked, now it's a pirate copy. /endofthat

anyway, if you aren't running dx11, you won't be running on max.

the further down you go from 1080p (standard-ish resolution), the better your chance of maxing it out.

i suppose it also depends on how you feel about anti-aliasing and ansio requirements for "max settings"

 

Regardless if it is a pirated copy, the same people are still going to download it . Not me! I stay out of that kind of trouble by... not having a computer capable of running it, unfortunately.

 

Singest its definitely a console first game , and a pc after thought, this game will most likely run better in dx9 because of the effort they are making on the console side of the game. Next the game will be optimized at lower resolution for consoles, because consoles uprez the screen, not the same as running the game in 1080p on pc vs 1080p on console. It will be much more taxing because it will be poorly coded for higher resolutions. Not only that I bet DX10 and 11 will hardly be shown off versus dx9 (classic tale look at warhead), crytek has sucked at coding and this wont be any different, people need to stop having faith in this game being leaps and bounds better then console.

 

Even after have watched videos, I haven't yet understood if there will be destructible environment like in the first Crysis. In the multiplayer sounds like a "NO", but in the SP?

 

I am sorry, aside from that one video that's being cited over and over again, there are many others that show the game running much better and handling lighting without slow-downs in a way that CryEngine 2.0 just could not. It's not a matter of faith, it's a matter of exploring all the evidence rather than a few select videos that only reinforce our general 'culture' of denigrating consoles.

If the game is designed to run on gimped hardware at 720p resolution, then you need not worry about your high-end GPUs with greater bandwidth, putting on a decent showing. Yes, it won't look as sharp as the original Crysis, but let's get over that drama. At least this one stands a decent chance of NOT excluding a large margin of PC gamers who aren't eager to get a state-of-the-art rig just to experience the full amplitude of this game.

F.Y.I.: I am talking about performance of the game. As in frame-rates. This has nothing to do with the other bugs and glitches, such as dodgy AI and bad sound that are being reported.

 

I'd also like an answer to this too

 

Without a destructible environment, it would not be the same. That was always one of the coolest things in Crysis.

 

i wasn't particularly talking about performance, but judging that its a dx9 build first that it will run aswell or better then warhead does for your card on max, DX11 adds a bit of tesselation, probably comparable to the amount AvP uses it so there won't be much of a hit or difference in using dx11 over dx9. The reason I was stating that it would run slower at higher resolutions is because they are focusing on a lower resolution on the console side, that one resolution will have the most work and support for over the higher resolution, it will still run fine I bet at higher res, but it will most likely run like warhead in dx9 mode for your card, maybe a bit better.

Now don't get me wrong DX9 is more than enough until developers really start using tesselation in meaningful ways, DX9 still looks great and consoles are partly to blame. Developers have to work with a limited set piece of hardware, so they optimize setting and find new short cuts that make the game look so much better and run on alot less resources. Take for example high poly texture models, they start by building a high poly models, texture it, pre-bake lighting effects and the sort, then take a picture of it, take the original polymesh and take away half a million polygons , reapply the texture and it looks just as good. This was created because of the limited hardware consoles have, but it works just as good as the super high poly model.

But I do feel we need a new generation of graphics, this generation is starting to get stale to me, It's been 5 years and not much has changed in gaming, other then tesselation. I don't feel dx11 is enough to garner a new generation, but it's hard to believe that within the last 5 - 6 years we haven't made any big changes in graphics, its kind of disapointing.

 

i7 920 @ 4.0GHz
6GB DDR3 @ 1528MHz
5870 1GB @ Stock

I hope I can max it out at 1920 x 1200 and that it looks better than Crysis.

 

There won't be performance issues at higher resolutions just because of the 720p console focus. The game is designed for arbitrary resolution, and the lighting and texture optimizations, etc, work across arbitrary resolution. I'd be more worried about major engine design compromises for the weak console systems that can't be adjusted per platform. Modern processors are way faster than the xbox/ps3 processors, there have been 2 major directx revisions for the graphics shader pipeline, graphics power has gone through the roof, and we have an order of magnitude more memory available...

Again, I would be more worried about major design compromises than optimization problems.

 

You mean you tried an old, pirated copy of the game. You opinion is invalid.

 

I hope you know that, in these forums, admitting piracy leads to a perm ban...?

 

The leaked version was nowhere near a final build. It didn't even include DX10 or 11 along with other higher graphics settings. Not to mention a bunch of bugged and incomplete stuff.

We should not judge Crysis 2 performance until the MP demo is released next Tuesday.

 

I've seen trees destroyed in the new game so some things still break... As for my past judgement I stand by it, I don't think the pc will much different from the console version, we will wait and see I guess.

 

You did say you tried it . Ah well... We all know many here have... most of them over at the Crysis 2 thread have...

 

Well, since my last post was misunderstood, I probably owe you a thanks for reiterating the point so well.

On the real valid point of contention, I am not too concerned about design compromises, so long as it runs well and plays out a decent plot. However, I do agree that this is where one should be concerned. The game itself performs fine; there's plenty of videos of that broken BETA where it's running nicely on decent high-end hardware that isn't the absolute cutting-edge.

 

the pirated copy I tried had so many glitches and crashes that I just stopped playing it after getting a small taste of how good it will be when I buy the full version, but it looked like it was wayyyy better looking PER performance. I am so pleased.
oh and btw I didnt really pirate the beta.

 

Yeah, no one actually pirated, right... they can not get banned, they... watched YouTube, or... played a... friends copy?

 

Haha GG sirs. There's no way you're backpedaling here. Don't bother editing your posts.

 

Drum roll......................