Support NeoGAF

[Smokey]

I was under the impression that the nvidia cp didn't had even close to the amount of tools and customization options that inspector offers - hence why I totally neglected/forgot that option.

It doesn't, but that's what I've been using. For some reason I've been having issues with 3rd party GPU tools so lately I've just been sticking to the Nvidia CP. Been forcing AF, Triple Buffering, and V-sync through it and haven't had any issues.

Hmm, any suggestions for a better card?

I've been able to play almost everything just fine @ 2560x1600. I can't always max out games, but the vast majority I do. A lot of benchmarks I looked at seemed to indicate that you can get 50-100% FPS increase with 570s in SLI.

Only thing better would be a 580 (3GB model). I'm really kicking myself for not holding out longer and going with a 3GB 580, but I really wanted quietness/cool for my 580 and I am extremely satisfied in that regard with the ASUS DCII.

C2 ate up 1.4GB of memory from my card and I'm at 1080p. I'm in the same boat as you with regards to SLI. I think at this point on the Nvidia side if you're playing at high resoultions, 3d gaming, multi-monitor etc, it would be better to hold off until Nvidia's next round of cards. They are sure to offer at least 2GB of RAM and will of course be a bit more powerful.

 

[Alxjn]

Just booted it up. The Power Out level in DX11 is the most incredible looking thing I have ever seen in a game.

 

[scitek]

Use CCC and try to lower the Tessellation to 8x, read it still gives enough tessellation, with a little less performance drop.

This, this, a thousand times this! Locked that shit to 8x with RadeonPro and my framerate at the beginning of Corporate collapse--which is the worst spot I've found in the game--shot up from 10fps to mid-30s. Perfectly playable now locked at 30fps, and I still get the tessellated bricks, etc.! AMD's "optimized" option forces 64x tessellation. No wonder.

 

[delta25]

Based on some of the pics posted I'm not seeing anything mind blowing, don't get me wrong, it does add some nice improvements, but was it really worth the wait?

By the way, whats the performance hit like?

 

[Lostconfused]

The improved motion blur was definitely worth it.

 

[Smokey]

Based on some of the pics posted I'm not seeing anything mind blowing, don't get me wrong, it does add some nice improvements, but was it really worth the wait?

By the way, whats the performance hit like?

Should have been there day 1 IMO, but it's nice that it's out. Game needs to be seen in motion to appreciate how good it looks. Running the game at max (ULTRA) with the hi-res pack is killing rigs. SLI machines are able to stay in the 50-60fps range, but single card machines are in the 25-40fps range. Game is moneyhatted by Nvidia so AMD performance is lagging behind right now.

 

[Corky]

Based on some of the pics posted I'm not seeing anything mind blowing, don't get me wrong, it does add some nice improvements, but was it really worth the wait?

By the way, whats the performance hit like?

It's more mindblowing in motion, especially particle/effects heavy action scenes. Worth the wait? Well I doubt there were people holding off and expecting a different game, but considering it actually came out within a relatively decent time span then it most definitely is.

The performance hit seems to be roughly 50%

 

[Veal]

Based on some of the pics posted I'm not seeing anything mind blowing, don't get me wrong, it does add some nice improvements, but was it really worth the wait?

By the way, whats the performance hit like?

I think it was worth the wait, but I don't think it was worth all of the crying and downright nastiness of some people proclaiming that Crytek wasn't doing them justice as PC gamers or some shit.

 

[dark10x]

This, this, a thousand times this! Locked that shit to 8x with RadeonPro and my framerate at the beginning of Corporate collapse--which is the worst spot I've found in the game--shot up from 10fps to mid-30s. Perfectly playable now locked at 30fps, and I still get the tessellated bricks, etc.! AMD's "optimized" option forces 64x tessellation. No wonder.

That's great. Sounds like I should be able to run the game at Ultra settings with the framerate limited to 30 fps and achieve a smooth experience.

 

[Stallion Free]

I was under the impression that the nvidia cp didn't have even close to the amount of tools and customization options that inspector offers - hence why I totally neglected/forgot that option.

Nvidia Inspector is just an better interface for Nvidia CP. It makes everything much more transparent and lets you easily access all the finer tweaking that the CP makes it hard to find or doesn't show at all. You will get absolutely nothing out of trying stuff through the CP if you already use Inspector, all you will do is lose the ability to do finer tweaking.

 

[KKRT00]

Based on some of the pics posted I'm not seeing anything mind blowing, don't get me wrong, it does add some nice improvements, but was it really worth the wait?

By the way, whats the performance hit like?

I dont know what people were expecting. Screens show mostly assets and assets havent changed except of textures resolution [two times higher]. You can also see clearly better water and pom/tesselation but rest things like better shadows, tone mapping, reflections, ssdo, motion blur, particles, and other post process effects are not so obvious at screens, but are in motion.

 

[Smokey]

I think it was worth the wait, but I don't think it was worth all of the crying and downright nastiness of some people proclaiming that Crytek wasn't doing them justice as PC gamers or some shit.

Well they did sell out for consoles. If you look at Crysis and then C2 at launch, there was a step back in graphics and in some cases the "sandbox" nature from C1 that people really liked. I belive their president/ceo said recently that it may not have best thing to do to make Crysis 2 the way they did. Also have to remember how much Crytek was hyping the technology behind the game. Then to have it ship with no DX11 was sort of the final nail for many.

 

[Stallion Free]

Well they did sell out for consoles. If you look at Crysis and then C2 at launch, there was a step back in graphics and in some cases the "sandbox" nature from C1 that people really liked. I belive their president/ceo said recently that it may not have best thing to do to make Crysis 2 the way they did. Also have to remember how much Crytek was hyping the technology behind the game. Then to have it ship with no DX11 was sort of the final nail for many.

I still don't understand how people can actually say this with a straight face about release C2.

 

[dark10x]

I still don't understand how people can actually say this with a straight face about release C2.

Agreed. Even at launch, the overall visuals of Crysis 2 were simply better than Crysis 1. It may not have been hitting every technical bullet point, but the final results were impressive. With the DX11 patch it's not even a contest.

 

[scitek]

That's great. Sounds like I should be able to run the game at Ultra settings with the framerate limited to 30 fps and achieve a smooth experience.

Yeah, and now that I've tampered with it a little more, only when I have it set to "AMD optimized" or "Application controlled" does it dip to ~10fps. I set it all the way to 64x and I was getting 27fps right when Corporate Collapse first starts, same at 32x. Then at 16x my framerate went to 32, so I've got it there now.

 

[Red]

Is ultra spec new with the latest patch? I don't remember having the option before, and switching to it makes the game look better than i remember. Also seems to give me a frame rate hit (OCed 5870), and I had a usual steady 60+ fps before. That's without hi res textures and DX 11 enabled.

Anyway, the game looks daaaaamn good now, especially in motion.

Except for one thing: disabling AA doesn't seem possible, so I'm stuck with a blurry picture.

 

[Smokey]

I still don't understand how people can actually say this with a straight face about release C2.

My face is straight!

I personally wasn't as wowed by Crysis 2 graphics as I was with C1. I am now, but that's after the release of the texture pack and DX11.

Is ultra spec new with the latest patch? I don't remember having the option before, and switching to it makes the game look better than i remember. Also seems to give me a frame rate hit (OCed 5870), and I had a usual steady 60+ fps before. That's without hi res textures and DX 11 enabled.

Anyway, the game looks daaaaamn good now, especially in motion.

Yes.

 

[KKRT00]

I still don't understand how people can actually say this with a straight face about release C2.

Probably because those people havent played Crysis 1 at launch.

BTW Crysis 1 graphics was a step back from Crytek's presentations and we shouldnt even mention those fake promo DX 10 exclusive features videos ...

It may not have been hitting every technical bullet point

I think it actually exceed C1 in terms of technical points in every aspect except POM and particles resolution.

 

[MaddenNFL64]

Is ultra spec new with the latest patch? I don't remember having the option before, and switching to it makes the game look better than i remember. Also seems to give me a frame rate hit (OCed 5870), and I had a usual steady 60+ fps before. That's without hi res textures and DX 11 enabled.

Anyway, the game looks daaaaamn good now, especially in motion.

You're getting localized reflections, the new shadows & tone mapping improvements.

This was a beautiful game out as it was. People need to remember that. Launch Crysis 2 was no slouch in the graphics department at all.

 

[scitek]

Is ultra spec new with the latest patch? I don't remember having the option before, and switching to it makes the game look better than i remember. Also seems to give me a frame rate hit (OCed 5870), and I had a usual steady 60+ fps before. That's without hi res textures and DX 11 enabled.

Anyway, the game looks daaaaamn good now, especially in motion.

Except for one thing: disabling AA doesn't seem possible, so I'm stuck with a blurry picture.

Yeah it's new. Try Extreme now. It looks the same to me, only it's now optimized as hell. I got 45-60fps at launch and now get a solid 60.

 

[scitek]

So where's TheOctagon? We need some shots from him.

 

[Takamura-San]

My face is straight!

I personally wasn't as wowed by Crysis 2 graphics as I was with C1. I am now, but that's after the release of the texture pack and DX11.



Yes.

The leap in graphics that C1 did at the time was higher. Still C2 looks better. It is an incremental leap, not significant, but better.

I don't think it would be realistic to expect C2 to double the bar when it came to graphical power with current technology.

I feel that with DX9 C2 I got the cake and got to eat it too. A amazing looking game that runs well on my computer. With DX11 I'm getting the frosting.

 

[BlackDove]

I am somewhat disappointed by the patch personally, though it is all within the confines of reason.

While I do understand they don't do wizardry at Crytek, one could surmise that with such castrated levels as C2's are in comparison to C1 in size and openness, one could elevate the fidelity by quite a large factor.

Obviously though, that's not how things work, and the reason for the castration is logically sound (ie running game on console).

Still, it's a perpetual disappointment. First time around when the game hit, and now when it turns out the improvement is marginal at best.

But this is just unproductive repetitive whining on my part. No matter the amount of whine, nothing will change, result will remain lackluster.

Hope you guys are getting enjoyment out of the upgrades, and that they're all you wanted them to be.

 

[Stallion Free]

While I do understand they don't do wizardry at Crytek, one could surmise that with such castrated levels as C2's are in comparison to C1 in size and openness, one could elevate the fidelity by quite a large factor.

There are so many other factors beyond raw level size and when it comes to potential fidelity.

 

[RedSwirl]

Is the texture pack worth upgrading from Vista 32bit to 7 64bit?

 

[Takamura-San]

I am somewhat disappointed by the patch personally, though it is all within the confines of reason.

While I do understand they don't do wizardry at Crytek, one could surmise that with such castrated levels as C2's are in comparison to C1 in size and openness, one could elevate the fidelity by quite a large factor.

Obviously though, that's not how things work, and the reason for the castration is logically sound (ie running game on console).

Still, it's a perpetual disappointment. First time around when the game hit, and now when it turns out the improvement is marginal at best.

But this is just unproductive repetitive whining on my part. No matter the amount of whine, nothing will change, result will remain lackluster.

Hope you guys are getting enjoyment out of the upgrades, and that they're all you wanted them to be.

Well when i booted DX11 C2 all that i saw was MAGIC.

 

[Stallion Free]

Is the texture pack worth upgrading from Vista 32bit to 7 64bit?

Kinda, but you should upgrade to Win 7 64 bit anyways.

 

[Kyaw]

Kinda, but you should upgrade to Win 7 64 bit anyways.

Yeah exactly, no point in sticking with the crappy Vista..

 

[BlackDove]

There are so many other factors beyond raw level size and when it comes to potential fidelity.

Yeah, of course, like I said that's not how reality works, it's just that I had unrealistic expectations.

But I'm still right, I mean, had they geared any part of their game towards today's systems, the engine could have shown significant improvements. The fact is that even with these enhancements, the game doesn't bottom out in the slightest. Not that I'm advocating that, but I mean, you can see the change in the design philosophy.

I suppose this new direction is more profitable for them, so it makes sense to pursue it. The previous one was kind of crazy. But it did set records, and gathered a faithful audience, that's for sure.

 

[SapientWolf]

Is ultra spec new with the latest patch? I don't remember having the option before, and switching to it makes the game look better than i remember. Also seems to give me a frame rate hit (OCed 5870), and I had a usual steady 60+ fps before. That's without hi res textures and DX 11 enabled.

Anyway, the game looks daaaaamn good now, especially in motion.

Except for one thing: disabling AA doesn't seem possible, so I'm stuck with a blurry picture.

Why wouldn't it be? Can't it be disabled through the console or a config file?

 

[scitek]

disabling AA doesn't seem possible, so I'm stuck with a blurry picture.

r_useedgeaa 0
r_PostMSAA 0
r_PostMSAAEdgeFilterNV 0

Make an autoexec.cfg with those commands or enter them in the console and you'll have no AA.

I have postmsaa on 2 and the other two on 0.

 

[MrBig]

I've never seen a youtube video that has the "original resolution" as an option. :O

It's for videos that aren't at the standard TV resolutions. That vid is at 1920x1200

 

[RedSwirl]

Yeah exactly, no point in sticking with the crappy Vista..

Would upgrading really see that much of a performance boost from a 3GB system?

 

[Stallion Free]

But it did set records, and gathered a faithful audience, that's for sure.

What records? Shittiest performance for 4 years running?

 

[thetrin]

Man. Turned down tesselation to 8x in CCC, and my performance has gone way up, even with everything on Ultra. Fantastic!

 

[sp3000]

What records? Shittiest performance for 4 years running?

Give it a rest. Just because you tried to run it on Very High with whatever hardware you had back then rather than actually scale it to your PC doesn't make the engine unoptimized.

Crytek actually made a future proof engine in contrast to every other company and then you have everyone whining because they don't have the sense to turn down the settings. Heaven forbid you run the game at something other than max. You act as if the game didn't even allow you to turn down all the computation heavy shaders.

 

[Mr_Brit]

Notsureifserious.

What about SSAO, POM, DoF, object motion blur etc which have been used to great effect for a few years now.

I meant most high end PC graphical techniques are usually only properly implemented after consoles that can run them come out.

 

[JaskoX1]

What would this game do to my Gigabyte HD6850 - AMD radeon hd 6800 Series

 

[Stallion Free]

Give it a rest. Just because you tried to run it on Very High with whatever hardware you had back then rather than actually scale it to your PC doesn't make the engine unoptimized.

Crytek actually made a future proof engine in contrast to every other company and then you have everyone whining because they don't have the sense to turn down the settings. Heaven forbid you run the game at something other than max. You act as if the game didn't even allow you to turn down all the computation heavy shaders.

I'm still curious as to what records it set? Can you lock Crysis 1 at 60 fps today, all settings maxed, including AA?

 

[Veal]

Well they did sell out for consoles. If you look at Crysis and then C2 at launch, there was a step back in graphics and in some cases the "sandbox" nature from C1 that people really liked. I belive their president/ceo said recently that it may not have best thing to do to make Crysis 2 the way they did. Also have to remember how much Crytek was hyping the technology behind the game. Then to have it ship with no DX11 was sort of the final nail for many.

While there was a step back graphically, it wasn't one that warranted the endless bitching the game received. The game at launch blew 90% of the games out there out of the water(graphically)! There was a definite step back in scope, but rendering and scale of the city, the destruction and the fact that the game runs waayy better than the first while looking better for the most part don't make me lament that some sacrifices were made for consoles. I'd imagine the city wasn't easier to make than the jungles of the first but I don't make the games, so I can't say.

 

[SapientWolf]

Give it a rest. Just because you tried to run it on Very High with whatever hardware you had back then rather than actually scale it to your PC doesn't make the engine unoptimized.

Crytek actually made a future proof engine in contrast to every other company and then you have everyone whining because they don't have the sense to turn down the settings. Heaven forbid you run the game at something other than max. You act as if the game didn't even allow you to turn down all the computation heavy shaders.

Crysis wasn't unoptimized. It was just poorly optimized. I personally find that you don't have to sacrifice as much IQ to get Cry2 at 60fps but that's just my experience.

I'm still curious as to what records it set? Can you lock Crysis 1 at 60 fps today, all settings maxed, including AA?

You can with SLI'd GTX 580s.

edit: Wait, nvm. I think you have to stick to 2xAA. I think you'll need 3 $500 GPUs to run Crysis at those settings.

 

[sp3000]

I'm still curious as to what records it set? Can you lock Crysis 1 at 60 fps today, all settings maxed, including AA?

It was the best looking game ever released when it came out, and in many ways still is. I would think that's some sort of record.

And depending on the resolution, you can stay at 60 fps in Crysis if you have beefy enough hardware. What's your point anyway? The exact same criticism was leveled at Unreal in 98 because all the Riva TNT cards could barely run it and Epic was accused of an unoptimized engine. Not until the Geforce FX came along could the game stay at 60fps with AA.

Every few years you have a game that lifts the benchmark for graphics in games. Why should this be discouraged just because people can't run it at max when it's released

 

[RedSwirl]

What would this game do to my Gigabyte HD6850 - AMD radeon hd 6800 Series

I'm running this on the same card. I think my post on it is a couple pages back.

Man. Turned down tesselation to 8x in CCC, and my performance has gone way up, even with everything on Ultra. Fantastic!

CCC? How is that done?

 

[BlackDove]

It's also about the shit you could do in the game at that graphical fidelity. The sheer size of the levels, the vehicles, land, sea or air, the weapons and their range, the destructible shacks and so on.

Many many things it had and still has. I mean Crysis 2 hasn't topped it. We can talk about Metro 2033 being the benchmark today, but Metro is a dark game in constricting corridors for the most part, much like C2.

A lot of its gameplay elements and the visual fidelity under which it runs are unmatched even today, and four years ago, it set the standard. Those are the records I'm talking about.

 

[Dreams-Visions]

Man. Turned down tesselation to 8x in CCC, and my performance has gone way up, even with everything on Ultra. Fantastic!

Good news is good. Will try!

 

[knitoe]

CCC? How is that done?

Gaming > 3D Application Settings > Tesellation. Unchecked AMD optimization, and then, move the bar.

 

[Veal]

What would this game do to my Gigabyte HD6850 - AMD radeon hd 6800 Series

I have a 6870 and in the opening areas, I get anywhere from 58-20 fps depending on tessellation. I have yet to try some of the tweaks to the DX11 version. I'm hoping for a stable 30 in the end. In DX9 is another story. You can easily hit 60 fps with a few dips.

 

[aegies]

I cannot seem to get a consistent framerate in DirectX 11 to save my life. I realize that Crysis 2 is now the world-crusher that everyone wanted it to be, but is it ridiculous to expect at least 30FPS at 2560X1600 with a Core i7 at 3.2Ghz, 6 GB of DDR3, and crossfire'ed 6970s? Am I being unreasonable?

 

[BattleMonkey]

Just shooting up cars and watching them catch fire and smoking is gorgeous with the new particle effects on. I'm just fucking up peoples random cards on purpose for fun now.

 

[Corky]

I cannot seem to get a consistent framerate in DirectX 11 to save my life. I realize that Crysis 2 is now the world-crusher that everyone wanted it to be, but is it ridiculous to expect at least 30FPS at 2560X1600 with a Core i7 at 3.2Ghz, 6 GB of DDR3, and crossfire'ed 6970s? Am I being unreasonable?

Well that is quite the resolution, what's the state of crossfire efficiency right now in c2? Are both your cards @90%+ utilization? But I don't hink 30 fps is unreasonable at all given those specs.