Crysis on and older system and screens.

[Airbrushkid]

I've playing around. I installed it on my old system that I now use for my business. Heres the specs and screenshots.

Athlon XP Barton 3200 2.2
Asus A7n8X Deluxe 2.0
Corsair 2x1 gig 3200 DDR
Maxtor 60 gb, 300 gb, WD 250 gb
BFG 6800 GT OC 256 mb
Creative Labs 5.1 Platinum
Windows XP Pro

Res is 1024x768

average frames are 20

setting screen

Not bad. But it soes look a lot better on my new system below.

 

[Behemoko]

Well, here is my one screen from before the demo stopped working, high everything except for forced low objects:

 

[AddSub]

Hilarious! FarCry 2.0 at best.

 

[Rob!]

Well, here is my one screen from before the demo stopped working, high everything except for forced low objects:

How many FPS?

And it really does look like Far Cry all over again. Not to say I'm complaining, that game was awesome.

 

[Airbrushkid]

I decided to show screens of it but this time using my newer system.

Athlon 64 X2 4800
Zalman CNPS 9500 AM2
eVGA NForce4 SLI Edition NF41
eVGA 8800 GTS 320mb SC
Corsair XMS 2x1 gig 3200
WD Raptor X 150gb 10,000 rpm
Creative X-Fi Xtreme Gamer
Antec Trio 650W
Windows XP Pro​

Res is 1280x960 and all settings are set to high. No AA.

Average frames are 30

The screens where cut to 800x600 for file size.

 

[Behemoko]

How many FPS?

And it really does look like Far Cry all over again. Not to say I'm complaining, that game was awesome.

19 FPS, but I can explain some of why it doesn't really look all that great even though I set everything to high.

1: While I set everything I could to high, objects for me are locked @ low, yes that is gay, I know..

2: I am using an x800 Pro VIVO. If that doesn't make sense as to why it isn't spectacular yet, not only am I running DX9, but the x8XX series only has shader model 2.0, so I am not even using good shading by DX 9 standards..

3: Think about how old my card is, it renders not quite as well as newer cards do. This game doesn't look as great on my system as it is supposed to, but I have Farcry, and when playing, the difference is like a punch to the face!

4: No AA or AF. I know alot of people don't have AA, but so far I am the only person I know who guaranteed has no AF turned on.

 

[ex_reven]

So many crysis threads lol. Its gonna need its own subforum soon
Nice to see it going on a system similar to my old rig
..not looking too bad either

 

[newconroer]

As soon as you drop the shader level to medium or below, the brightness is noticeable. I bet with a little tweaking of gamma/contrast ratio you could dim it down some and give it less of that 'far cry 2.0' look.

 

[wiak]

i get ~20 fps
X1800 XT 512MB, X2 5000+, 4GB DDR2 PC6400, 74GB Raptor, Vista x64, Crysis x64 edition
on medium settings
looks like 6800 gets 20fps, 8800 gets 30, and so on ^^

 

[Chicken Patty]

As far as the screenshots from AirBrushKid. Although it might be far cry all over again, the game still does not look bad in my opinion. Well anyways, here are my screenshots. Everything is very high, I have the mod done. Anti-Aliasing is off, I can play it at 8x but I Rather have the extra FPS during battles so I keep it off.

AND MY FAVORITE ONE THAT I'VE TAKEN SO FAR

 

[GLeN]

In the pic above in crysis everything you see you can go too? so can you go to the top of that mountain?
That game never tops to amaze me :O

 

[Chicken Patty]

In the pic above in crysis everything you see you can go too? so can you go to the top of that mountain?
That game never tops to amaze me :O

maybe there is no way to get up there, but as far as going anywhere, yeah, you can go anywhere you wish, there is no point where the level ends, whatever it renders you can go to. Thats why I like it better than Call of Duty 4. Although its a great game and I love playing it as well, but i believe the levels in COD 4 are linear levels or something like that, your walking and all of the sudden boom, thats it, you can't go there.

In Crysis, your free to go where ever the hell you feel like going.

 

[Darkmind]

maybe there is no way to get up there, but as far as going anywhere, yeah, you can go anywhere you wish, there is no point where the level ends, whatever it renders you can go to. Thats why I like it better than Call of Duty 4. Although its a great game and I love playing it as well, but i believe the levels in COD 4 are linear levels or something like that, your walking and all of the sudden boom, thats it, you can't go there.

In Crysis, your free to go where ever the hell you feel like going.

If you don't have a missile/torpedo coming at your face

 

[J-Man]

Some nice screenshots here dudes

I play all on very high with shaders and shadows on high with no AA @ 1440x900 (I get around 30 FPS average, it's playable). When I have shaders and shadows on very high, it gets choppy and my FPS goes down to about 22 FPS and lags a bit.

 

[Chicken Patty]

If you don't have a missile/torpedo coming at your face

hahahahha, so true!!!

 

[Chicken Patty]

how can I check out how many FPS im getting in Crysis????

I also run at 1680x1050, so even though I still get really good FPS. Or at least it seems like I do.

 

[Black Panther]

ChickenPatty - I do it with Fraps.

Here are mine - it's on very high settings running on XP (tweaked) if I did it correctly!

My brother played the demo on my rig and now is wanting Crysis for his birthday. I wonder how it'll run on his Sempron 2Ghz, 1GB RAM and 8600GTS 256MB....... Well he'll be happy if it is playable - I'm guessing medium settings on 1024x768?

 

[Chicken Patty]

ChickenPatty - I do it with Fraps.

Here are mine - it's on very high settings running on XP (tweaked) if I did it correctly!

My brother played the demo on my rig and now is wanting Crysis for his birthday. I wonder how it'll run on his Sempron 2Ghz, 1GB RAM and 8600GTS 256MB....... Well he'll be happy if it is playable - I'm guessing medium settings on 1024x768?

kool kool, thanks a million. Haha its funny how like mostly all the screenshots are in that level. It does have nice scenery.

 

[Graogrim]

I guess my system qualifies as "older". It's a P4 550 (that's a Prescott running at 3.4 GHz), 2 gigs of so-so RAM, and a Radeon HD3850 operating in XP. Running the supplied benchmark batch file at my normal resolution of 1440x900 (no AA) yields 18fps minimum, 28 fps average, and 40 fps peak with settings a mix of medium and high. Multiplayer seems to average even faster. I'm very pleased that the next-gen look is available at playable framerates even with not-so-uber hardware.

 

[choppy]

you know what, im managing to average 20fps on my system, 1024 x 768, all medium settings and its playable.

you only need high end parts if u wanna go all out and play it on very high, i think if i upgraded to c2d exxxx and a hd3850 512 im boxed and that aint even high end, budget ftw!