Just bought my first ever PCIE card

[hat]

Guess i am too lazy to buy one i guess, or maybe because i really have no need to buy one at this time

You're too lazy to buy a camera yet you're not too lazy to swap out between 2 different low-end video cards because one gives you better performance in a particular game than another? You say you have no need for a camera, yet you end up -scanning- hardware that you buy because people ask you for pics?

 

[RadeonProVega]

Here is my latest Bioshock video with my 9500GT
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gM8mI6Iejo0

The 9500gt did not perform as well in XP, like it does in Win 7, so thats why i got the performance increase.

You're too lazy to buy a camera yet you're not too lazy to swap out between 2 different low-end video cards because one gives you better performance in a particular game than another? You say you have no need for a camera, yet you end up -scanning- hardware that you buy because people ask you for pics?

Whats wrong with scanning hardware?

Enjoy your new gear u2konline. Happy gaming!

Thanks

I say he's using a modded Crysis to mess with everyone, or he actually has much better hardware than he claims. Either way, he's just a troll. /unsubscribe

Um no
[url]http://www.imagenerd.com/thumbnails/th_2009-10-09_114555-JKCR7.jpg[/URL]

 

[InnocentCriminal]

That's a tiny picture there on the end.

 

[kurosagi01]

can't see anything in that last link

 

[RadeonProVega]

 

[MilkyWay]

Clearly the performance he gets is dubious, but come on just leave him be in his own dream world as long as he doesn't tell people its "fact" and should buy this or that low end hardware he can say what ever performance he gets and we can just ignore it.
CLEARLY no one can get that performance from full options Bioshock and Crysis, its obvious so stop playing troll with him.

 

[kurosagi01]

http://www.imagenerd.com/uploads/2009-10-09_125655-AtxGx.jpg

that clearly doesn't show you did do any mods on crysis and so on..
Let me quote your youtube:

Recording 24-31
Without Fraps = WOW, 50-100fps. I am getting like 100fps in most areas just walking around.
If this is how my 9500GT plays it, wonder how my 4670 runs it, well i am using my 4670 again, and i get between 75-120fps.

thats called bragging there..

 

[ste2425]

Clearly the performance he gets is dubious, but come on just leave him be in his own dream world as long as he doesn't tell people its "fact" and should buy this or that low end hardware he can say what ever performance he gets and we can just ignore it.
CLEARLY no one can get that performance from full options Bioshock and Crysis, its obvious so stop playing troll with him.

this mans completally right

 

[LittleLizard]

 

[RadeonProVega]

I do not have a sound card at the moment, so there is massive massive sound problems going on in the crysis demo, so performance is off a bit, these are some benchmarks with my 4670 at 1280x1024 all high(water/etc) to very high(physics/texture/object/shaders) to low(sound/volumetic) dx10. Sound card may fix the sound problems, which i will add soon.

Clearly the performance he gets is dubious

Believe what you like i guess.

CLEARLY no one can get that performance from full options Bioshock and Crysis.

I have said all along that Crysis or warhead was never demanding, now of course i am playing at 1280x1024, you guys are playing at much higher resolutions, even so, crysis was never demanding IMO. Bioshock runs perfectly even with dx10 and all settings on, the game moves and runs just fine. You don't need a hardcore rig to game dude.

 

[LittleLizard]

the only results i believe are the bioshock ones (played all high me also and have good fps) BUT Crysis is the hell of a requiring game, your pc shouldnt give more than 35 fps at most with all on high on 1280*1024. i have a core 2 duo and at 1024*768 got 30-40 frames WITH EVERYTHING ON LOW

 

[RadeonProVega]

Well i did some testing with warhead, at 1280x1024 enthusiast to gamer to (minimum settings - sound and volumetic ) . It seems like with win 7 (or vista) recording crysis warhead or crysis is more demanding for some reason. The performance without recording is just fine, however the performance is about 25% worse in win 7 with my setup and cards from xp. Thats why i got great performance before using XP, now i get a performance from 15 - 35fps at the same mention above. So with the 9500gt or 4670 on my system, crysis runs good, but recording is well kinda impossible now at decent framerates. I do get around a solid 25-45fps at all gamer to mainstream settings at 1280x1024. But still recording is just too demanding.

Crysis / warhead seems to be the only game that struggles when recording for some reason in win 7 or vista.

Anyways peace

 

[hat]

Whats wrong with scanning hardware?

Umm... the pics come out like utter shite?

 

[Woody112]

I do not have a sound card at the moment, so there is massive massive sound problems going on in the crysis demo, so performance is off a bit, these are some benchmarks with my 4670 at 1280x1024 all high(water/etc) to very high(physics/texture/object/shaders) to low(sound/volumetic) dx10. Sound card may fix the sound problems, which i will add soon.

http://www.imagenerd.com/uploads/crysis_2009-10-09_15-02-50-44-uBBPr.jpg
http://www.imagenerd.com/uploads/crysis_2009-10-09_15-03-22-70-a2Slg.jpg
http://www.imagenerd.com/uploads/crysis_2009-10-09_15-04-43-05-MkWry.jpg


Believe what you like i guess.


I have said all along that Crysis or warhead was never demanding, now of course i am playing at 1280x1024, you guys are playing at much higher resolutions, even so, crysis was never demanding IMO. Bioshock runs perfectly even with dx10 and all settings on, the game moves and runs just fine. You don't need a hardcore rig to game dude.

I'm by no means even attempting to troll your thread but this is just not at all possible without mods. I'm running a 4870x2 and a QX9770 oc @ 4.5ghz and I'm only getting around 45-55FPS if that, at 1920x1200 dx10 max settings with 4xAA. Their is no way in hell you are getting the fps your claiming with a legit install of crysis and no mods. I'm sorry bro but it just doesn't add up.
Here's what you do put everything on ultra high settings and run it again at you current resolution and you will see your fps drop like a rock. You say in you opinion it's not demanding you'll find that when you run it maxed out with at least 4xAA that it is. I know for a fact your not being truthful because in your screen shots it shows DX10 custom HDR setting. What I want to see and everyone else is "DX10 Ultra High setting", and 4xAA then maby you can bragg and claim that crysis is not demanding. But then again it still appears that your running a modded game with the setting that you do have.
Seriously it don't even have to be on ultra high. PUT EVERYTHING ON HIGH and run it again. Post back when your done, but I must say I believe you've done ruined your rep with this thread.

 

[T3kl0rd]

Post back when your done, but I must say I believe you've done ruined your rep with this thread.

Ruined his rep? His rep is to make claims like this and make everyone angry at the impossibility of them.

 

[pantherx12]

I don't understand why people are fussing so much, I managed to enjoy crysis the first time round on a HD4550, everything on medium @ 1400x900 I was getting around 15 fps.

 

[ste2425]

I don't understand why people are fussing so much, I managed to enjoy crysis the first time round on a HD4550, everything on medium @ 1400x900 I was getting around 15 fps.

haha before i got ma 4850 i was playing crysis all on high with a hd 2800xt, or was it 2700xt but either way that was my first experience with the game haha

 

[pantherx12]

I bet it was nice and smooth

 

[RadeonProVega]

But this is just not at all possible without mods. I'm running a 4870x2 and a QX9770 oc @ 4.5ghz and I'm only getting around 45-55FPS if that, at 1920x1200 dx10 max settings with 4xAA.

Wait, did you read that i was using DX9, because now that i am using Dx10 settings, well the performance is nowhere the same. Also, you sound like you are bragging , because i do not game at 1920x1200( i don't even use LCD Monitors )and if you are getting around a avg of 45-55fps at max settings ( very high ) with AAX4 at 1920x1200 what is the problem?
Thanks for bragging.

Here's what you do put everything on ultra high settings and run it again at you current resolution and you will see your fps drop like a rock.

Crysis Warhead 1280x1024 all enthusiast settings, DX10 / 4670 / avg of 15-25fps

" Settings "

http://www.imagenerd.com/uploads/set-39q1K.jpg
http://www.imagenerd.com/uploads/set1-TMksb.jpg

" Benchmarks "

http://www.imagenerd.com/uploads/crysis_2009-10-11_08-41-39-54-kAmE6.jpg
http://www.imagenerd.com/uploads/crysis_2009-10-11_08-42-09-30-R99jl.jpg
http://www.imagenerd.com/uploads/crysis_2009-10-11_08-43-27-78-8SfuF.jpg
http://www.imagenerd.com/uploads/crysis_2009-10-11_01-38-10-77-g4t84.jpg

I know for a fact your not being truthful because in your screen shots it shows DX10 custom HDR setting.

See above, because obviously you weren't reading a damn thing from the start, because i was using XP for all these benchmarks dude.

Umm... the pics come out like utter shite?

Recommend me a cheap camera from best buy and i will go from there.

I don't understand why people are fussing so much, I managed to enjoy crysis the first time round on a HD4550, everything on medium @ 1400x900 I was getting around 15 fps.

15fps is not playable to some people, now 15-30 solid is, but 15 all the time, nah. Drop down a resolution to 1280x1024 all high to medium and you should get around 20-30.

 

[p_o_s_pc]

here are a few cheap cams that will do the job
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=9446771&type=product&id=1218106370505
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=9266992&type=product&id=1218071905805 (have used that one personaly works great till you drop it once then it stops working)
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=9329675&type=product&id=1218085896762
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=9327089&type=product&id=1218085598212
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=9480448&type=product&id=1218112954292

 

[pantherx12]

I've got a 9800gt now so I get better FPS now dude cheers.

But I was just saying all the people calling bullshit are wrong to say so.

Also 15fps constant is not to bad, I find inconsistent FPS more anoying, for example with an HD4870 I had I was getting 25-50 fps and it annoyed me.

 

[T3kl0rd]

I've got a 9800gt now so I get better FPS now dude cheers...

...Also 15fps constant is not to bad, I find inconsistent FPS more anoying, for example with an HD4870 I had I was getting 25-50 fps and it annoyed me.

You went from a HD 4870 to a 9800GT? That is a step down, sorry to hear that. I would rather be annoyed with 25-50 FPS than a constant and constantly lower 15 FPS as well.

 

[pantherx12]

No I sold my AMD rig you see.

Had.

Phenom 2 905e
ASUS M4A79T Deluxe
HD4870
Same ram as now but 4 gb
Cheap EZcool 700w psu (strata)
NZXT Apollo


I plan on getting a HD5850 or 70 eventually, want to get myself back into college first.

Selling most of my stuff now

 

[DaedalusHelios]

haha before i got ma 4850 i was playing crysis all on high with a hd 2800xt, or was it 2700xt but either way that was my first experience with the game haha

Hey we all start somewhere. My first experience with crysis at launch was with a 8800gtx and later a 8800gt.

 

[p_o_s_pc]

Hey we all start somewhere. My first experience with crysis at launch was with a 8800gtx and later a 8800gt.

my first experience with crysis was with a highly overclocked 7900GS @690/1000 played nicely around 25fps most of the time.haven't played it since then