• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Crysis: and the specs are...

D

Doc Evils

Member
Lobster said:
I can play it on minimum specs but thats retarded..the main point of the game is its awesome graphics.
Click to expand...


lolerksate.jpg
 
F

Fallout-NL

Member
drizzle said:
Why does vista fails? It's a new operating system, it does more than the precedents. Obviously, it uses more of your machine to do that.

That's like saying Windows98 is better than Windows XP only because it's lighter.

That makes no sense.
Click to expand...



It fails cause I can't fucking keep it from checking wireless networks every 60 seconds (resulting in a ping anywhere between 1500 and 2500).
 
C

Chrono

Banned
^WHAT THE HELL IS THAT AVATAR.


So when is the next big PC game that's expected to be a graphics powerhouse? There has to be something coming up in 2008 that'll look better than Crysis?
 
F

Fallout-NL

Member
Chrono said:
^WHAT THE HELL IS THAT AVATAR.


So when is the next big PC game that's expected to be a graphics powerhouse? There has to be something coming up in 2008 that'll look better than Crysis?
Click to expand...



Alan Wake maybe?
 
M

MickeyKnox

Member
Chrono said:
^WHAT THE HELL IS THAT AVATAR.


So when is the next big PC game that's expected to be a graphics powerhouse? There has to be something coming up in 2008 that'll look better than Crysis?
Click to expand...
Nothing so far.

And with Crytek's plan to keep updating the engine as new tech is released, it's going to be a tall order for something to completely blow this away in the same manner it did to other engines.
 
F

Fallout-NL

Member
MickeyKnox said:
Nothing so far.

And with Crytek's plan to keep updating the engine as new tech is released, it's going to be a tall order for something to completely blow this away in the same manner it did to other engines.
Click to expand...


I don't know, I think Valve's Source engine is a lot more impressive. What's the point of having eyecandy when only 10% can see it. I bought my 8800GTS last week and already it's recommended for this game, thats a bit troubling.
 
M

MickeyKnox

Member
tedtropy said:
Apparently "very high" adds a sepia filter.
Click to expand...
And paralax mapping, sunbeams, ocean waves..

Fallout-NL said:
I don't know, I think Valve's Source engine is a lot more impressive. What's the point of having eyecandy when only 10% can see it. I bought my 8800GTS last week and already it's recommended for this game, thats a bit troubling.
Click to expand...
:lol

I love this post.
 
N

nincompoop

Banned
Darn, can't even meet the minimum specs! Though if single core pentium 4s @ 2.8 ghz are supported then there's no reason they couldn't support the 2.66 ghz Pentium Ds.
 
I

InsertCredit

Member
How much does this engine benefit from multicore procs?
I reckon my x2 4800+ should be enough to make it playable, but the 7900gt will suffer :(.

Having to play at 1680x1050 doesn't help either..
 
T

tedtropy

$50/hour, but no kissing on the lips and colors must be pre-separated
Let's sum it up...

Minimum Specs: Install Far Cry and wait for Crysis TC patch.

Recommended: Holy shit!
 
D

Doc Evils

Member
This is my system spec:

Intel Core 2 Quad CPU Q6600

4GB ram

NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GTX

2 x 500GB HDD

Creative SB X-Fi.

with a sexy Samsung 226BW monitor.
 
A

Awntawn

Member
Fucking awesome, I have to overclock my brand new PC just to meet the minimum spec.

Crysis is BOHICA to PC gaming. I remember the people going around claiming it would run just as good as the videos on a sub-$1000 system. Right.
 
R

rakka

Member
question:

have an imac. (can run xp/vista)
processor - intel core 2 duo @ 2.4ghz (above recommended specs)
memory - 4gb ram (above recommended specs)
gpu - Radeon HD 2600, 256MB <------- is this too weak?

thanks.
 
L

LCGeek

formerly sane
rakka said:
question:

have an imac. (can run xp/vista)
processor - intel core 2 duo @ 2.4ghz (above recommended specs)
memory - 4gb ram (above recommended specs)
gpu - Radeon HD 2600, 256MB <------- is this too weak?

thanks.
Click to expand...

Isn't that radeon the new generation of their line not the best I think 2900xxx whatever is but you should be to jack down the res and get something.
 
S

Shawn128

Member
I dunno about the other specs but I do know that Vista utilizes ram differently than XP. In a nutshell, it uses more ram so there's no ram sitting idle (i.e., its great to have more ram than you need, but then that ram is sitting there idly not doing any work). OSX works in a similar manner (and is the reason why I'm asked by friends 'WTF how is ALL of my ram being used???')

Is it possible that the increased ram requirements are due to this and will result in better performance?
 
D

datamage

Member
People stating that Vista's RAM usage is absurd, may not have used the OS for too long. Personally, I'd rather have the OS use more RAM if it's going to make the OS snappier and/or more reliable. The 'SuperFetch' feature of Vista is more noticeable after using Vista for a couple of weeks as its optimizing what programs you use.

Also, from my understanding, the Aero GUI is being handled by your GPU, so there isnt much impact on your memory. Actually, just tested this, and going from Aero to Classic, released 2% more RAM for use. Not a big deal IMO.

Anyhow, this thread should be more focused on Crysis, and not an XP/Vista war. Personally, I wasn't impressed with the performance of Crysis (MP Beta) on my rig (C2D 6700, 2GB RAM, 8800GTX.) We'll see how the SP demo turns out in a few weeks.


Edit: And yeah, as someone already stated, the recommended usually means the minimum required. (for decent visuals/perf)
 
F

Firestorm

Member
If I was running XP on my laptop I think I might have just scraped by. But Vista means my processor and RAM is doomed. 2.0 Core Duo.

Intel Core Duo 2.0 GHz
1 GB of RAM
120 GB HDD (probably 5400 rpm or something laptop-y)
256MB GeForce Go 7600

I'm not sure how my graphics card holds up since it's a laptop one... I don't PC game much.
 
F

firex

Member
it's funny that the system I was looking to build for Crysis (well, not really Crysis, it was like 5th on the list of big name games I wanted to try out on that new system) really would meet the recommended specs. Well, ok, it'd exceed them by a decent margin, but still.

However, Far Cry performed really well, even if the game itself wasn't that great, so they probably know what they're talking about with the specs on it. This is a crazy project where they want to make a game that uses so many graphical effects/physics and other features that it's way above the bar for most PC games that will be released in 2008, even.
 
L

lexi

Banned
I have an 8800GTS along with a 6750, 2gb of 1066mhz matched pair ram, an p5k-based board, etc...

And I'm thinking this game will run between 15-40fps on high.

I'd love to be wrong.
 
E

Ezduo

Banned
EviLore said:
The same system that tames Crysis will eat up Bioshock, run TF2 vsynced to 60 with full effects and 16x AA + 16x AF at damn near whatever resolution you want, kill UT3 and CoD4, etc.
Click to expand...

Sounds good to me.
 
F

Foreign Jackass

Member
EviLore said:
Heh, lot of folks with entitlement complexes. If the game had lower recommended settings, it would not look as good and you probably wouldn't even be as interested. You vant play it in full glory, get dual core + 2gb ram + 8800. So many great PC games this holiday and earlier this year so it's hardly a waste. The same system that tames Crysis will eat up Bioshock, run TF2 vsynced to 60 with full effects and 16x AA + 16x AF at damn near whatever resolution you want, kill UT3 and CoD4, etc.
Click to expand...

The system you're talking about will NOT play it in full glory. I have a kick-ass quad core, 2gb ram and a 8800, and I had trouble running the stupid beta.
 
T

thestopsign

Member
Looks like I just barely meet the standard requirements. I have 2gb of ram and a 2.4ghz Intel Dual Core. No idea about the specifics about anything else, but I think it should run it fine, which is a definite surprise for me.
 
C

Cryect

Member
Foreign Jackass said:
The system you're talking about will NOT play it in full glory. I have a kick-ass quad core, 2gb ram and a 8800, and I had trouble running the stupid beta.
Click to expand...

They were saying on the 1up Show last week the beta wasn't representative of the performance they saw from a later build at a Crysis event (because they were also quite disappointed in the performance of the Beta).
 
H

hellclerk

Everything is tsundere to me
actually, thats not too bad. short the recommended card, getting a standard computer without such an impressive graphics solution with the rest of the specs shouldn't cost more than $1000. the addition of the card shouldn't put the rig past $1500. would buy if i had the cash. i could use a desktop for media and games, but alas, i'm but a poor college student, with not much to my name.
 
W

wandering goat

Member
I actually just ordered an 8800GTS (640MB) today. Besides that, I have an X2 4600+ and 2 gigs of ram, so I should be okay. I hope I can pull it off at 1680x1050.

Maybe this is a good place to ask this, since I don't know shit about computers: How important is the RAM speed for these future DirectX10 games? Mine's not that great (PC4200) and I was wondering if this is going to turn out to be a bottleneck, especially since I don't play much PC games and want this computer to last a LONG time as it is (I bought it this year).
 
D

dude404

Member
I don't know why you guys are complaining, one of the game best selling point was the graphics, the high system requirements should be expected.

Also for those who have 3 years old computer, you can't be expecting to be able to play Crysis, this game is going to be the game with the best graphics than anything the xbox 360 or ps3 can produce. You can however play plenty of other PC games that don't use much resource that are still being produced today.

Also I played the multi-player beta of Crysis on my P4 3.0ghz, 1gb ram, BFG 7800gs 256mb(agp), with an 800 x 600 resolution. I tested the settings with medium texture, medium shaders, and everything else on low. I was surprised that it was actually playable.

I'm planning on upgrading my PC early next year so I can play this beast of a game on high.
 
J

J-Rzez

Member
MickeyKnox said:
Try the single player demo in 2 weeks.
Click to expand...

Yeah, i'll def give it a shot... I wanted a game that'd push this PC graphically, this would probably be it... Gonna pick up UT3 as well I think for that... (and the fun! :p)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Alone in The Dark Pc Requirements Revealed
Platform
3
611
Elysium44 replied
Tekken 8 PC requirements: Requires 100 GB available storage space
News Platform
16
2K
Spukc replied
Starfield PC Performance Thread
18 19 20 21 22
1K
74K
mansoor1980 replied
Ghost of Tsushima Director’s Cut PC cross-play and system requirements revealed. PlayStation overlay, cross-play, and Trophy support!
4 5 6 7 8
357
18K
IDappa replied
The Day Before | OT | Today is The Day Before The Day Before
Community Event
10
1K
Kupfer replied
Top Bottom