NP5796 Crysis Performance

I dont have any benchies yet but Ive run crysis at 1680x1050 on high in dx9 mode and it runs silky smooth so far. 9800m gt is the real deal. ill try to get some numbers up here soon.

 

rad, do you thin 4 vs 2 gigs of ram makes a difference? im waiting til the prices drop to pick up another 2 gb stick

 

what about at 1920x1200? tell me if is playable thats all i want to know

 

@phoduma, 1920x1200 is not playable, unless you want med settings.

 

@h575309

You might want to consider changing your signature...it is no longer "Coming soon"

 

so when is it coming?

 

It's already there!

 

it is available

 

im curious how low u have to put the resolution to get playable frames in very high settings. (with mods like natural/ccc/etc. or not)

 

I know Crysis doesn't support it, but do you have PhysX running on that beast yet? What kind of fps do you get at 1280x800 all Very High? Your running with the 1.2 patch and latest Service Packs?

@vestibule: Running 4GB in crysis has seen a couple fps increase in every bench I've seen in Vista.

 

here is what you should expect for scores. this is with my rig with 2.4ghz cpu. a faster cpu will yield better frames since this game is only dual-threaded. since 9800m gt is the same as 8800m gtx this is very accurate. i think for single card you should be playing in 1440x900 as you want to achieve 30 fps average framerate with the game's internal benchmark utility on the first level.

crysis internal benchmark utility full screen mode Benchmark_GPU batch file;

800x600 all high dx9 = 49.16 fps avg. single gpu

1280x960 all high dx9 = 31.91 fps avg. single gpu

1440x900 all high dx9 = 29.62 fps avg. single gpu

1680x1050 all high dx9 = 23.37 fps avg. single gpu

1920x1200 all high dx9 = 18.86 fps avg. single gpu

800x600 all high dx9 = 43.50 fps avg. sli card

1280x960 all high dx9 = 41.67 fps avg. sli card

1440x900 all high dx9 = 38.56 fps avg. sli card

1680x1050 all high dx9 = 35.19 fps avg. sli card

1920x1200 all high dx9 = 30.28 fps avg. sli card

 

sounds awefully different than what the op posted...

 

What is the OP?

 

I wouldn't even get Crysis if I had DX9... Anyone have across the board DX10 scores? Or is there a approximate percentage points you can take off a DX9 framerate of Crysis to estimate what it would be on D10?

 

Original Post/er

 

i will test dx10 for you right now.

i actually have a dx10 hack CVarGroup to enable the effects since i am running windows xp.

 

Thanks ARGH, looking forward to the benchies. I'm kinda hovering between a desktop and laptop (I REALLY like mobility, but I don't truly need it, but I don't truly need the super best that a desktop could bring, either), and from what I've heard about the coding in Crysis, it isn't that very efficient, so I kinda consider if it's playable that that's a side of a bit of future-proofness.

 

Time to upgrade to vista...

Get the NP5796 from XoticPC. Even the base model will kick the trash out of 95% of any desktop out there. Crysis patch 1.2 fixed a lot of the bugs in Crysis. I think it could use some optimization still, but overall, its getting really good. Perhaps Crysis Warhead will resolve some of the existing issues.

 

Actually, if I'm getting a laptop, it's going to be the 9262. If HIS rig can do it, I know my 9800GTx2 rig can, and maybe a little more.

 

--1920x1200 all very high dx10 = 21.44 fps avg. sli card

--1280x960 all very high dx10 = 30.75 fps avg. sli card

1280x800 / 1280x960 provided the same results and are the maximum res you can play this game at if you have sli. non-sli you will be forced to play in 800x600, that is, of course, you like slideshows

 

i will do all the other benches now, just wanted to get these to you guys first as this takes some time to do.

 

how well does the dx10 hack work on XP?? any problems?
if not then i would not have to buy vista and just use XP

 

I think the 9800m GT is actually a rebranded 8800m GTX. See http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=272886&page=2 and Gophn's post here: http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=280880

The 9800m GTX should score a bit better, though.

 

Yeah, I remember that now. How much better is the 9450 vs the 6600?

Thanks alot man, I didn't even know it was possible to get DX10 on XP without screwing alot of stuff up, but I haven't kept up with this stuff for awhile now.

 

Yeah i have returned to playing crysis....again. Now there are some good .cfgs out there, Xconfig being one of them. 1.2 patch helped out alot as well as 175.95 drivers over the stock i was using in this game.

With the xconfig (on very-high) i can play crysis @ very-high settings @ 1440x900 with the performance loss of only high. You should try the xconfig and choose very-high when it installs, you wont be displeased.

you can find it at crymod.com


here are som pics @ 1440x900, xconfig Very-high settings

 

ok done the full set of sli benches. this is with a stock config (meaning no tweaks) and with the dx10 cvar hack. got some surprising results.

if you have a faster cpu than mine, say 2.8-3.0 or better ghz, you will get better fps and will be able to play dx10 hack at wxga or even maybe wsxga resolution since i consider 30fps average to be the bare minimum.


--1280x960 all very high dx10 = 30.75 fps avg. sli card

--1440x900 all very high dx10 = 28.87 fps avg. sli card

--1680x1050 all very high dx10 = 25.24 fps avg. sli card

--1920x1200 all very high dx10 = 21.44 fps avg. sli card

 

it's just a config setting to enable the "dx10 features" on very high settings in windows xp. i would not expect any adverse side-effects besides reduced framerates.

 

if you guys go the extra step and bios-overclock the gpu's you will be able to play at wuxga with all very high settings from my guestimate.

 

so xp dx10 would have worse framerates than vista??
if so by how much?

 

i ran the dx10 hack in XP and able to maintained it under 1680x1050 with all high for 30fps

 

i have not been into this game for some time so am not up to date with everythng. but the dx10 hack i have forces the very high mod in windows xp. thats how you get the god rays and all other very high features. i don't think there is a difference in settings below that regardless if you are in vista or xp.

 

I don't think mine was forced to very high mod, neither were they available in menu.

 

So does anyone actually play the game, or what?

 

read the previous page please.

 

wow, those screenshots of xconfig high is really impressive for a single 8800gtx.
how are the frames when the action kicks in though naticus? still well playable frames?

 

thanks again ARGH. After looking at the power supply requirements of the new GTX280s versus this notebook, and what my new 9262 should achieve, I opted to stay with my 9262 (I'm only using Crysis as a benchmark for a little future-proofing). Actually, I was loooking to play Supreme Commander with no hiccups at max settings.

 

can anyone explain how to find the in game benchmarks for crysis? its like the bin32 folder doesnt exist for me

 

^^have you downloaded the crysis benchmark tool? if so just run it, should be a shortcut icon on your desktop.

 

1440x900 is totally playable , all very high, if you have a minor OCing. I know, I have

OCing pays off, ha?

You can also use fraps, it`s easier to get an idea of how smooth the game really is.

 

i was told that fraps can tax your system and lower your actual fps... is this true?

 

^^^yes 1-2 fps the most.

 

Nirvana is right, 1-2 fps max.

 

alright well to do it you hit tilde and write display_info 1 correct? so for some reason tilde doesnt open up the command screen....any clue what thats all about?

 

C:\Program Files\Electronic Arts\Crytek\Crysis\Bin32\Benchmark_GPU.bat

thats where the benchmark is located within the game. you don't need to download anything. you can set your graphic settings within the game, exit and then simply run the .bat file and it will do several runs. after it's done it will tell you the average fps for each run.

 

ok so I ran the benchmarks here we go

DX10 mode

Resolution: 1680x1050

All High - 20-22 FPS

All High except PP low - 25-30 FPS

Mix of High and Medium with PP low - solid 25-35 FPS (dropped to 25 when shooting missiles insanely into buildings and jumping around)

I was going to run all medium but im satisfied with that. I believe if i run in dx9 mode all high with pp low then it will run even better and solidly. I feel like dx9 makes a big difference.

 

it's best to post the best average fps for the 3 or 4 runs it did. the first run will always be lower fps because it is loading data into the game as it flys around. usually the last run is a good indicator of average fps.

 

It seems logical that fps will get better after more loads since its saved onto the ram, but it probably won't present an accurate analysis of in game settings since no one loads the same stage multiple times.

 

at this point i dont care anymore... i know what settings i need for it to run smoothly... id like to actually play the game...instead of just trying to find the best settings...the game is SICK and the physics are awesome and id like to finish it before warhead comes out

 

Gosh I have a terribly hard time playing that game... I always get caught up in the effects and physics and forget to actually follow the story.

 

I am playing Crysis in Vista with DX9 Very High Hack, actually I think it is more Ultra High than Very High. Screens here, average framerate in the GPU test at 31 fps. The game plays great.

http://img403.imageshack.us/my.php?image=screenshot0005tb6.jpg

http://img520.imageshack.us/my.php?image=screenshot0004nr8.jpg

http://img520.imageshack.us/my.php?image=screenshot0003ac9.jpg

http://img211.imageshack.us/my.php?image=screenshot0002ke9.jpg