Crysis – The Ultimate Graphics Card Performance Shootout : DirectX 10 Graphics Cards Pushed to their Limits – Tuning Tips Included
Source: Tom's Hardware UK – Keywords: Graphics_Cards, Geforce_8800GT, Crysis, DX10
Categories: Gaming, Graphics
DirectX 10 Graphics Cards Pushed to their Limits – Tuning Tips Included
The game Crysis represents the new top-class of benchmarks when it comes to graphics cards testing – and with good reason, too. It looks amazing and demands both a brawny CPU and a powerhouse graphics card. Tom’s Hardware compares the most important graphics cards from ATI and Nvidia in all quality settings and analyses the differences.
Before we dive right into the cold, hard data, let’s take a moment and look at the game and its options. The Crysis game menu offers four different basic settings, namely Low, Medium, High, and Very High. Of these, only the Geforce 8800 GTX and Ultra are able to handle the Very High setting. Electronic Arts and Nvidia have created a configuration file that selects a preset based on the graphics card the game finds and which should be seen as a pretty realistic recommendation. For the most part, anti aliasing is not an option in this game, as it makes high quality modes at high resolutions all but unplayable. Even a Geforce 8800 Ultra lacks the power to conjure Crysis at playable frame rates on a 24” display in the Very High setting with FSAA.
On the whole, there have been a lot of complaints regarding the performance hunger exhibited by Crysis. Let’s not forget that the situation was very similar when Oblivion was first released, though. At the time, practically none of the graphics cards available had enough power to render the game in its full glory while sustaining smooth gameplay. In other words, this is not a new situation.
For now, the SP demo of Crysis does not support SLI, and only the final version will shoe how well ATI and Nvidia have been able to tune, tweak and optimize their drivers. After all, we already know about the companies’ plans for three-way graphics configurations (and more), and the power of three GPUs and four CPU cores has to be directed somewhere.
All of the test results presented here were compiled with DirectX 10 under Windows Vista. While the game still looks very good in Windows XP, you’ll have to make do without some of the graphics effects. Some resourceful gamers have already begun spreading new configuration files that enable most of the Vista effects under XP as well through forums. However, most users quickly realized that XP’s performance advantage quickly melts away to levels similar to those under Vista.
Our test consists of several parts. Screenshots and videos show the differences between the global quality settings. A detailed performance comparison offers comprehensive information on the individual cards’ performance. The benchmark analysis then allows us to evaluate the interplay between CPU and GPU (graphics) performance. And the data-junkies among you will be happy to know that you can also find the exact minimum, average and maximum values in our tables.
- Next page Motion Blur and Bumpy Terrain
- AMD Phenom - The Spider Weaves its Web
- AMD Radeon HD 3800: The Empire Strikes Back
- BIOS Flash - Overclock Your Graphics Card in 5 Minutes
- Six Graphics Cards with Luxury Trimmings
- Workstation-Shootout: ATi FireGL V7600 vs. Nvidia Quadro FX 4600
- AMD HD 3800 To Support DX 10.1
- Nvidia's GeForce 8800 GT Reviewed
- DirectX 10 Shootout: Geforce 8x00 vs. Radeon 2x00
- DirectX 10 Cards on a Budget
- The Best Gaming Graphics Cards For Your Money: October 2007
Also since when is HD 1920x1200? Surely its 1920x1080 (hence 1080p).
Very useful breakdown of the game. Nice to finally see minimum framerates. Ideally would prefer to see to see graphs of framerate and less of those pointless low res. videos (they all look the same as they are such low res. and highly compressed)!!
So clearly I need a 1TB 9900 GPU... Perhaps I will wait to get the game till one exists!!
Thanks for a great review!!
Bob
You're right I think (unless there is a big memory breakthrough in the next 3-6 months!!) I meant the Nvidia 19x10^3 GTX Ultra with real-time 3D HDR ray tracing support :-) :-)
I might settle for a 1+Gb card though (heh, heh).
I would lauf if Nvidia releases a 9800 model!!
Bob
1024 x 768 = 786,432 pixels
1360 x 768 = 1,044,480 pixels
1280 x 1024 = 1,310,720 pixels
So roughly you will get half way between the 1024 x 768 FPS and 1280 x 1024 FPS for your GPU I guess...
Although the relationship is not linear I suppose... You will certainly get at least the 1280 x 1024 FPS for your GPU
Bob
Exhaustive test, but testing with aa instantly chops 30% of performance, and nothing but the ultra has power to spare at this time.
I am now trying to work out what I will get using an 8800GT 512MB at 1366x768 with no AA, no AF by working out the middle ground between 1024x768 with no AA AF and 1280x1024 with 4xAA, 8xAF.
Thanks BobWya but the difference between both settings is massive theres no way I can work it out and if I have to go with the 1280x1024 setting Im getting a PS3 or an X-Box for gaming I think no matter how I love rpgs/mmorpgs.
Also, where are the SLI benchmarks? Don't tell me you can't enable SLI in the demo because you can. Two 8800GTS 320MB cards in SLI work VERY well with Crysis
You would interpolate between the 1024 x 768 and 1280 x 1200 figures (both without AA and AF). Why would use figures with AA and AF if you aren't using them!!
As for consoles can they push out more than 30 FPS at HDR? I bet not!! The GPU in the consoles aren't that powerful right (X1900XTX equivalent in the XBox 360 - isn't it?)
Don't forget that Crysis is falling in lull between PC GPU generations!! You know like the 8800GTX was last big card release and that was like November 2006!! Its about time therefore for Nvidia to release a new series!! Hows about a shiny new 9900 Series in time for Santa's Christmas stockings in 2008!!
While ATI sit with their finger up their ass. Since they haven't done anything big since the X1900XT(X) series (when they last had the performance crown). Heck I'm still using a X1950 Pro (512Mb) - it's still an OK card (can play the Crysis demo at 1600x1200 @ medium settings)
Bob
As I have played the demo and know I can just about get 30 FPS on medium @1600x1200 I didn't really look at the charts in detail. Just noted that the FPS numbers were mostly completely unplayable or just barely - how does that help anyone??
What the hell!! Why are THG putting on high AA AND high AF settings on the higher resolutions... Have you guys lost the plot or what?? Most people like joneb will want to know whether they can play the game at all never mind putting the eye candy on!!
You are looking at the next gen. Nvidia card before you can pull a stunt like that!!
I can't even put on any AA on in Doom 3 yet (1600x1200 @Ultra) without my framerate dropping below 60!! I have upgraded to a W/C 512Mb X1950 Pro OC @607/708!! So for a game like Crysis which is a GPU killer AA & AF won't be an option!! With the 8800 Ultra folks will want the native resolution (TFT's), then the FPS, then the quality and the AA/AF eye candy last!! I know I would!!
Bob
This thread has been dead for over a month and the article refers to the Crysis demo!! All the stuff about 1920x1080 being HD has already been said...
Go back to sleep...
Bob