HD4870 + Quad Core = Slow Crysis?

[Thrall]

I just got done building a phenom 9600, 4gb, 4870, vista premium machine for a friend and am distraught at the Crysis performance. When running 3dmark06 at default settings it scored around 10,500 marks but I can't get it to get a stable 20+ fps in crysis at 1440*900 with high settings. Now the reason i find this a problem, with crysis probably being the most power hungry game out there, is that i have the same exact gpu with a 2.4ghz core 2 and 2gb but i can run Crysis at 1920*1080 on high at 30-40fps, and i get around 9,500 3dmarks at default settings. Now i understand that vista is still a little slower than xp at gaming (whether amd/ati's fault or Microsoft's I'm not sure), that the drivers from ati aren't the best, and since it's a newer card they're still optimizing-but there has to be around a 40% difference in crysis (wild estimate). Now crysis supports quad cores, so i would assume that it should be faster there, and his machine had 4gb of ram for all the textures and and other stuff, so shouldn't he be getter better results? I messed around with turn on and off the tlb bug fix and turning off the amd cool and quiet technology but neither made a significant difference. Any tips or help you can offer? Thank you in advance for your help!

 

[Hybrid_theory]

The Phenoms were known to be overrated as a quad core and aren't as effective. My best suggestion here is to overclock the cpu along with the fsb. He should get more of a boost.

 

[Thrall]

Is it really the cpu that's holding it back? I went to toms hardware to compare a similar proc to mine and his 9600 and found a 1680*1050 crysis benchmark that shows my processor to be 3% faster (http://tinyurl.com/azvz3k), but with 3dmark vantage's cpu test giving the 9600 to be about 100% faster. This makes me wonder if crysis really is quad core supported-or it supported quad core systems in patch 1.2 or something, since 3dmarks are good at multicore support. As for overclocking he's using a gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2HP 780G (which isn't a bad $80 board), but i haven't seen any results on the overclocking of the board and have a feeling it won't get near the ~2.8ghz this proc has in it (especially because in his case it the proc gets to 52c on 4 instances of cpu burn-in with the stock cooler).

 

[Hybrid_theory]

After re reading these figures. Everything sounds right. The 9600gt is a tank of a card. About another 1000 points with the 4870 makes sense. As for crysis, ati cards have trouble with it. I'm suprised it's that much of a bother, but it's there.

Have him get a $50 cooler for his Phenom and overclock as much as he can. It's a lower end board, but a gigabyte none the less. So you should be able to do something. The raise in the fsb will help a lot.

 

[TRIPTEX_CAN]

Crysis is also a complete POS and should never be used to determine if a system is good for gaming.

Also dont bother comparing the Vantage score of an Nvidia card because the CPU tests use the physics power of the card and it complete defeats the purpose of a standardized test.

 

[Thrall]

I'm referring to a 9600 Phenom by the way, although i do agree the 9600gt is a tank. My ati 4870 has no problem with Crysis, which brings me to my first post-what's going wrong? A big reason he got this system was to play Crysis in all it's glory (albeit on a 1440*900 panel) and I wish i could fix it for him, but i have a gut feeling it's just the need for better vista drivers on ati's part.

 

[Marineborn]

are you using XP by chance?

 

[Marineborn]

sorry i just reread, hes automaticall enabling dx10 when playing it with vista while your using dx9 with xp dx10 destroys games fps

 

[newtekie1]

Well, first of all, he is probably running it in DX10 since he using Vista and you are using DX9 since you are using XP.

Also, there is a reason the Phenom processors are cheaper than Intel's Quads. Crysis is extremely CPU dependant, it is one of the few FPS games that is, probably due to all the physics. A Phenom 9600 is a lot weaker than a Core 2 2.4GHz.

Try switching Crysis to use DX9(there is little visual difference), and overclock that Phenom a little.

 

[TRIPTEX_CAN]

To force Crysis to run in DX9 make a shortcut in the desktop, right click the shortcut and add "-dx9" to the target line.

 

[Thrall]

Hm makes sense, the whole dx10 thing, but i thought only "Very High" was the dx10 settings, not all of them.

I am running xp home, while he is running vista premium.

Does crysis support quad core, because if it does i can't comprehend how a quad core could get outran by a dual core with only slightly higher clock speeds (although more efficient clock speeds)and very little cache (I'm using a pentium Dual Core, not Core 2 Duo). It seems to me like saying a 2.8ghz pentium 4 can outrun a 2.3ghz dual core in multithreaded apps (maybe I'm just naive?).

 

[newtekie1]

DX10 is a global thing, it affects all the settings. "Very High" is only available in DX10, however DX10 enhancements also effect the lower settings also.

With my main rig, with the settings on high I get an average of 34FPS with DX10, 44FPS if I force DX9.

AFAIK, Crysis only uses 2 cores.

 

[Thrall]

Crysis only using 2 cores makes sense, studying the toms hardware charts a little more...which make me wonder-why make one of the most intensive pc games ever made not support quad core and have problems running multiple gpu's? Anyway, thanks for the quick replies and all the help!

 

[TRIPTEX_CAN]

Crysis only using 2 cores makes sense, studying the toms hardware charts a little more...which make me wonder-why make one of the most intensive pc games ever made not support quad core and have problems running multiple gpu's? Anyway, thanks for the quick replies and all the help!

See the first line of my first reply.

 

[Thrall]

Crysis does have great graphics and good game play imho, but the developers just make me wonder sometimes...

 

[RadeonProVega]

Most people expect too much from a game, when you have the visuals at extreme levels you expect to get 60fps or something. Sorry but its not going to happen. Crysis is not a demanding game, but if you try putting the graphics up too high, don't expect to get a solid 60 frames per second, its not going to happen.

With a 4870+Quad Core, you should be get anywhere between 50-60 without trouble. Sounds like something is wrong with your setup, rather then the Quad.

 

[newtekie1]

Crysis only using 2 cores makes sense, studying the toms hardware charts a little more...which make me wonder-why make one of the most intensive pc games ever made not support quad core and have problems running multiple gpu's? Anyway, thanks for the quick replies and all the help!

Because there are far more dual-cores in use than quad-cores, and when development of Crysis began, quad-cores in home use were next to nothing. You have to realize that the game was released in November 2007. Intel had just introduced their Quad-Core processors 10 months earlier and Prices were still $500+ for one when Crysis was released and AMD's Quad-Cores had just hit the market the same month Crysis was released.

Optimizing for Quad cores wasn't on game developers minds at all during Crysis's development. And by the time quad-cores were starting to even hit the market, it was already way to late to go back and try and re-code the game to utilize 4 cores.

The game runs fine with a decent dual-core, so I'm sure there were not worried about it. The problem comes with AMD releasing underperforming quad-cores that stuggle in games that only make use of 2 of the cores, and a lot of semi-older games like crysis are like this. I don't think anyone predicted that there would be quad-cores released, that when only 2 cores were usable, would actually be weaker than comparable dual-cores.

 

[CDdude55]

Warhead is optimized for Mulitcore, weather there talking only Dual or Quads to. So Warhead may take adavntage of all cores, but on the back of the box they dont go into detail of how many cores will be fully used nor does it say ''optimized for Quad core CPUs'' but it does say ''Mulitcore'' meaning anything.

 

[wiak]

correction
anything + crysis = slow

 

[johnnyfiive]

The Phenoms were known to be overrated as a quad core and aren't as effective. My best suggestion here is to overclock the cpu along with the fsb. He should get more of a boost.

My 9600BE at 2.5GHz & a 3870 did a wonderful job with Crysis.

High settings I got around 35fps @ 1680x1050.

As for overclocking the 9600.. MUCH easier said then done.

To the original poster, I think I know exactly why the performance is lacking. The TLB bug. In Vista SP1 it is by default turned on no matter what your BIOS settings are. I highly suggest you use Sam's TLB fix to take care of that issue.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=180338

 

[Thrall]

Hmm, I'll try and turn off the TLB bug in vista-thanks! Thanks again guys!

 

[TheMailMan78]

Listen to newtekie1 on this Thrall. He knows his stuff when it comes to this.

 

[3870x2]

correction
anything + crysis = slow

I wouldnt necessarily say so, my 9800GX2 and e8500 can max the game out 1920x1200, very high settings, and still do 30+ fps. Depends on what you have, and how you use it.

My guess is that you should drop back to DX9. DX10 is too big of a hit in performance for the little it provides.