My observation between Crysis and Crysis Warhead on my PC - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Gaming > PC Gaming
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 12-02-2008, 03:56 AM   #1 (permalink)
Hellfire!
 
Wildside's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Riverside, CA
Posts: 3,038
Send a message via MSN to Wildside
Default My observation between Crysis and Crysis Warhead on my PC

ok so i got Crysis: Special Edition for $20 on black friday at Gamestop. I installed the game, updated to patches 1.2 n 1.21.

in Crysis, the settings i set is everything on Very High except Shadows on Low and i actually had Motion Blur set to Very High, so i changed it to Low just in case for increase in performance. Kept the bar in the middle that u adjust for this setting if turned on. Anyhow, i ran Crysis at 30-40 fps average. I did start to go to combat n my fps dropped to 20-30 fps average.

now check this out, closed out of Crysis n started up Crysis Warhead. Settings are Enthusiast except for Shadows on Performance and, this time, turned on Motion Blur to Performance, turned up the bar to the middle like in Crysis. I run the game at 20-25 fps average. In combat, fps drops around 15-20 fps. Trees flicker a lot from far distances.

Crysis game has been patched 3 times, Crysis Warhead hasnt been yet, only Crysis Wars has, twice. Now i havent tweaked Crysis yet but i want to. I have done triple buffering in Crysis Warhead though. Understanding that there is "Ultra_High" settings, i would like to set Crysis to those settings and see what average fps i get.

oh n i just want to ask a question about the graphics in Crysis Warhead. If it looks better and is better optimized, then did Crytek use the "Ultra_High" settings for Enthusiast. In other words Ultra_High = Enthusiast in Crysis Warhead?
__________________

__________________
--Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit
--AMD Ryzen 1700x @ 3.4GHz w/ MX-4 and Corsair Hydro 100i Liquid Cooler
--Corsair LPX Vengeance Black 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4 3200 DRAM
--EVGA GeForce GTX 960 SuperSC ACX 2.0+ 2GB GDDR5
--ASUS Crosshair IV Hero AM4 X370 Motherboard
--WD BLACK SERIES WD2003FZEX 2TB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" HDD
--SAMSUNG 840 EVO MZ-7TE250BW 2.5" 250GB SATA 6Gb/s SSD
--Corsair Obsidian 750D Black Aluminum / Steel ATX Full Tower Computer Case
--Corsair Professional Series 860-Watt AX860
Wildside is offline  
Old 12-02-2008, 06:27 AM   #2 (permalink)
Benevolent Cake Despot
 
Merkwürdigeliebe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Montreal, CANADA
Posts: 1,733
Default Re: My observation between Crysis and Crysis Warhead on my PC

well, ultra high is simply "Crysis Very High" but with the variables maxed out (there's only maybe 10 or so variables from the hundreds in the config that are not maxed out in Very High settings), it performs worse, of course, than "Very High". There's optimized custom graphics configs that really play around with the variables a lot and just makes the game look and feel almost entirely different while adding some of the Very High features while still having equal performance to "High" by sacrificing some things and increasing others, some people refer to this as Ultra High, but there are some sacrifices made here and there to accommodate the "Very High" stuff like light rays, shader quality, ground debris relief, etc..

In Warhead, they've done other things.. I have noticed that they use a lesser quality of texture compression that probably works faster, but textures look slightly worse, and they've tweaked the LOD system too, I'm sure they've gone beyond just editing the config variables, they've probably trimmed out the core code for the game to be more efficient too.
__________________

__________________
|Intel Q6600 | 2GB Crucial Ballistix Tracers | XFX 8800GTS 512 | Gigabyte P35-DS3L | Antec 900 | Antec Neo 500 HE |
Merkwürdigeliebe is offline  
Old 12-02-2008, 02:24 PM   #3 (permalink)
gone
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,051
Send a message via AIM to Gabb
Default Re: My observation between Crysis and Crysis Warhead on my PC

I suggest getting the CCC pack which is a custom config which makes the gfx look just as pretty and have better performance ( in other words the custom config lowers settings of stuff your less likely to notice ). The official CCC pack is somewhere in the official Crysis Warhead forums
__________________
i7 3770k @ stock 3.5, Gigabyte GA-Z77X UD3H
Samsung 830 SSD 256gb and WD Black HD 1Tb, CoolerMaster HAF-X Case
Corsair HX 750 watt PSU, EVGA GTX 670 with 1.25 gig video memory @ stock settings, 16 gigs of Corsair Vengeance DDR3 Ram
X-Fi Xtreme Gamer card, Logitech G5 series 2
Corsair K90 keyboard, Dell 24" U2412M monitor
Gabb is offline  
Old 12-02-2008, 10:14 PM   #4 (permalink)
Hellfire!
 
Wildside's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Riverside, CA
Posts: 3,038
Send a message via MSN to Wildside
Default Re: My observation between Crysis and Crysis Warhead on my PC

Quote:
Originally Posted by Merkwürdigeliebe View Post
well, ultra high is simply "Crysis Very High" but with the variables maxed out (there's only maybe 10 or so variables from the hundreds in the config that are not maxed out in Very High settings), it performs worse, of course, than "Very High". There's optimized custom graphics configs that really play around with the variables a lot and just makes the game look and feel almost entirely different while adding some of the Very High features while still having equal performance to "High" by sacrificing some things and increasing others, some people refer to this as Ultra High, but there are some sacrifices made here and there to accommodate the "Very High" stuff like light rays, shader quality, ground debris relief, etc..

In Warhead, they've done other things.. I have noticed that they use a lesser quality of texture compression that probably works faster, but textures look slightly worse, and they've tweaked the LOD system too, I'm sure they've gone beyond just editing the config variables, they've probably trimmed out the core code for the game to be more efficient too.
oh ok, so Ultra High isnt worth it then? I would like to try it just to see how my system would handle it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabb View Post
I suggest getting the CCC pack which is a custom config which makes the gfx look just as pretty and have better performance ( in other words the custom config lowers settings of stuff your less likely to notice ). The official CCC pack is somewhere in the official Crysis Warhead forums
that would be nice.

still though, i expected to run Crysis with worse performance overall then Crysis Warhead, it's just wierd.
__________________
--Windows 10 Pro 64-Bit
--AMD Ryzen 1700x @ 3.4GHz w/ MX-4 and Corsair Hydro 100i Liquid Cooler
--Corsair LPX Vengeance Black 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4 3200 DRAM
--EVGA GeForce GTX 960 SuperSC ACX 2.0+ 2GB GDDR5
--ASUS Crosshair IV Hero AM4 X370 Motherboard
--WD BLACK SERIES WD2003FZEX 2TB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" HDD
--SAMSUNG 840 EVO MZ-7TE250BW 2.5" 250GB SATA 6Gb/s SSD
--Corsair Obsidian 750D Black Aluminum / Steel ATX Full Tower Computer Case
--Corsair Professional Series 860-Watt AX860
Wildside is offline  
Old 12-03-2008, 08:56 AM   #5 (permalink)
gone
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,051
Send a message via AIM to Gabb
Default Re: My observation between Crysis and Crysis Warhead on my PC

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wildside View Post

still though, i expected to run Crysis with worse performance overall then Crysis Warhead, it's just wierd.
in my opinion I didn't really feel Crysis Warhead ran too much better then regular Crysis ( small boost ) and it definately didn't look any better to me even at the higher graphical settings I was running at. The CCC pack helps though, try it out.
__________________
i7 3770k @ stock 3.5, Gigabyte GA-Z77X UD3H
Samsung 830 SSD 256gb and WD Black HD 1Tb, CoolerMaster HAF-X Case
Corsair HX 750 watt PSU, EVGA GTX 670 with 1.25 gig video memory @ stock settings, 16 gigs of Corsair Vengeance DDR3 Ram
X-Fi Xtreme Gamer card, Logitech G5 series 2
Corsair K90 keyboard, Dell 24" U2412M monitor
Gabb is offline  
Old 12-03-2008, 09:02 AM   #6 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
ricanflow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Euless, Tx
Posts: 6,317
Default Re: My observation between Crysis and Crysis Warhead on my PC

warhead runs better, but its also a more intense game.

I ran it most of the time @ 1680x1050 on gamer with some AA, but dropped it down to 1440x900 to get some more frames and it still looked very good.

Another trick it to make sure if you have an Nvdia card, that you go into the advanced options in the control panel and tweak the settings for high quality.
__________________
3DMARK06 = 20,341 (3.8GHZ)



Laptop
P7350 | GTX 260M | 4GB DDR2 800 | 320GB HD | X-Fi | Vista 64

Folding Rig/File Server

M775 | E1200 | Foxconn P9657AB
| Dual 8800GT | Antec NeoHE 500 | Barracuda 80GB | Wintec Ampx



ricanflow is offline  
Old 12-03-2008, 09:06 AM   #7 (permalink)
Master Techie
 
synergy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: 15 Hive
Posts: 2,284
Send a message via MSN to synergy Send a message via Yahoo to synergy
Default Re: My observation between Crysis and Crysis Warhead on my PC

I think the performance gain in Warhead was pretty substantial, but I noticed the big gain when I had 4gb in. Before that the performance was worse than Crysis. That was with all settings on Enthusiast and a 1440x900 res, motion blur turned to Gamer. I was averaging about 30 fps with highs in the 50's. I never hit 50's in Crysis and was lucky to even get high 30's.

That being said...the game was so intense that there really wasn't enough time to admire the visuals...
__________________
i7 2600K | TRUE 120 w/ Xigmatek XLF-F1253 | Asus Sabertooth P67 | 16 GB G.Skill RipjawX DDR3 1600
EVGA GTX 560Ti | 256 GB Plextor M3 SSD |80 GB Intel X25-M SSD | Corsair Graphite 600T
Coolermaster Purepower 850W | Samsung 25.5" 1920x1200 | Windows 7 Pro 64-bit


HTPC: AMD FX-4100 3.6 GHz | Gigabyte GA-880GM mATX w/ ATI Radeon HD 4250 | 8 GB G.Skill RipjawX DDR3 1600
LG Blu-Ray/HD-DVD ROM + DVD RW | 60 GB OCZ Vertex SSD | WD Caviar 1 TB | Antec Veris Fusion Black HTPC Case
Logitech diNovo Edge KB | Win7 Pro 64-bit
3dMark06 23,159 | 3dMark Vantage 23,579 | TF2 Stats Page | BC2 Stats | BF3 Stats
MCSE (SharePoint 2013), MCITP & MCTS (SharePoint 2010), CIW
synergy is offline  
Old 12-03-2008, 09:19 AM   #8 (permalink)
gone
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,051
Send a message via AIM to Gabb
Default Re: My observation between Crysis and Crysis Warhead on my PC

Quote:
Originally Posted by synergy View Post
I think the performance gain in Warhead was pretty substantial, but I noticed the big gain when I had 4gb in. Before that the performance was worse than Crysis. That was with all settings on Enthusiast and a 1440x900 res, motion blur turned to Gamer. I was averaging about 30 fps with highs in the 50's. I never hit 50's in Crysis and was lucky to even get high 30's.

That being said...the game was so intense that there really wasn't enough time to admire the visuals...
heh that reminds me I never tried Crysis Warhead with my 4 gigs of ram upgrade ( well technically 3.25 since I'm on 32 bit xp ), although I'm skeptical of seeing any performance boost :P
__________________
i7 3770k @ stock 3.5, Gigabyte GA-Z77X UD3H
Samsung 830 SSD 256gb and WD Black HD 1Tb, CoolerMaster HAF-X Case
Corsair HX 750 watt PSU, EVGA GTX 670 with 1.25 gig video memory @ stock settings, 16 gigs of Corsair Vengeance DDR3 Ram
X-Fi Xtreme Gamer card, Logitech G5 series 2
Corsair K90 keyboard, Dell 24" U2412M monitor
Gabb is offline  
Old 12-03-2008, 11:03 AM   #9 (permalink)
Master Techie
 
synergy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: 15 Hive
Posts: 2,284
Send a message via MSN to synergy Send a message via Yahoo to synergy
Default Re: My observation between Crysis and Crysis Warhead on my PC

I was playing it on Vista x64 so all 4 were registered. It was surprisingly quite a big boost in performance.
__________________
i7 2600K | TRUE 120 w/ Xigmatek XLF-F1253 | Asus Sabertooth P67 | 16 GB G.Skill RipjawX DDR3 1600
EVGA GTX 560Ti | 256 GB Plextor M3 SSD |80 GB Intel X25-M SSD | Corsair Graphite 600T
Coolermaster Purepower 850W | Samsung 25.5" 1920x1200 | Windows 7 Pro 64-bit


HTPC: AMD FX-4100 3.6 GHz | Gigabyte GA-880GM mATX w/ ATI Radeon HD 4250 | 8 GB G.Skill RipjawX DDR3 1600
LG Blu-Ray/HD-DVD ROM + DVD RW | 60 GB OCZ Vertex SSD | WD Caviar 1 TB | Antec Veris Fusion Black HTPC Case
Logitech diNovo Edge KB | Win7 Pro 64-bit
3dMark06 23,159 | 3dMark Vantage 23,579 | TF2 Stats Page | BC2 Stats | BF3 Stats
MCSE (SharePoint 2013), MCITP & MCTS (SharePoint 2010), CIW
synergy is offline  
Old 12-03-2008, 02:21 PM   #10 (permalink)
Master Techie
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NB, Canada
Posts: 2,215
Send a message via MSN to Akubane
Default Re: My observation between Crysis and Crysis Warhead on my PC

Warhead gave me a 10-15fps boost over crysis on average. 1920x1200 all settings topped out dx10. That's substantial enough for me. Kinda weird how it worked out for you.
__________________

__________________


C2D E8400 | Diamond 4870 X2 | Biostar Tpower I45 | 4GB G.Skill PK
Corsair 750TX | Xigmatek HDT-S1283 | CM Haf 932
2x Seagate 1TB 7200.11 | Asus Xonar D2X | LT Z-5500's
Razer Lycosa | Razer Lachesis | LG L245WP-BN 24" MVA LCD
Akubane is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Crysis Warhead and Stalker CS - Multi-GPU Gameplay Osiris PC Gaming 1 10-20-2008 02:25 PM
Warning: Crysis Warhead and Spore DRM concern VampD PC Gaming 31 10-04-2008 10:58 PM
Crysis Warhead Sandbox editor and ModSDK in the works! HOORAY! Wildside PC Gaming 3 09-28-2008 03:02 AM
Crysis Warhead Sweapstakes!! Osiris PC Gaming 12 08-24-2008 09:56 PM
Crysis warhead release date Luke PC Gaming 38 08-04-2008 09:16 PM



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.