Crytek proves you can get Crysis running on high settings for $900 US

The folks at Crytek set themselves a challenge to create a PC within a budget of $900 USD that would be able to play Crysis on the highest settings. And according to them, they managed to succeed. Their system consisted of a Core2Duo, 8800GT 512MB, NVIDIA nForce 650i Socket 775 MB, 2GB ram 240 pin DDR 2 800 and other necessary components such as a 250GB 7200 RPM. They conclude that their experiment shows Crysis provides unparalleled performance on high settings on an easily affordable machine.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Capt CHAOS3987d ago (Edited 3987d ago )

The article fails to mention the most important aspect.

What RESOLUTION did they run at????

Edit: Sorry if I did miss the resolution, It must have been number blindness.. :-)

Well, this is hope yet for me to get back into PC gaming, I'm getting fed up how servers are managed under xbox live..

JsonHenry3987d ago (Edited 3987d ago )

I can play everything on high running @ 1680*1050. Or Very high running at 1400*900.

And my PC is almost identical to theirs except I am running an AM2 dual core AMD.

Account deleted3987d ago

i wonder why they chose windows xp... interesting.

Mecha1053987d ago

It says right here, "As you’ll see from the 8 minutes of video we recorded, Crysis looks absolute fabulous on High settings with this configuration and runs very smoothly on a 1280x720 resolution."

solidt123987d ago

Also they said they used DirectX 10 and I thought DX10 was only available with Vista.

mikeslemonade3987d ago

Still not worth it. There's going to be another game that comes out that will force to upgrade soon after this anyway. And Crysis will get ported to the consoles. And after 2007 and 2008 we're going to be full of FPSs that we don't care if the graphics are like 2x times better on PC. I mean Killzone 2 and Resistance 2 I would choose these games over Crysis.

FunnyBone3987d ago (Edited 3987d ago )

So speak for yourself instead of everyone else...I like the idea that it can run on an inexpensive PC...Plus the article is a nice change from all the rampant fanboy articles that have been non stop since 2008...
Or would you rather have the 10,000 articles of hd-dvd vs blu ....

I think I know the answer to that already...

Yes I would rather play cyrsis than KZ2 or RFOM2 as both those games have yet to arrive and I dont buy into the hype around them..When they come out and I can see them in action for myself.Then i will decide...

I am still planning on building my own PC around $2000 after all said and done.Still nice to know that it is possible...

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3987d ago
titntin3987d ago

Hmmm - so pay 3X the cost of a next gen cosole to run the game at 720P?

@Captn Chaos - you must have missed it - they clearly state they ran it at 1280 x 720.

Account deleted3987d ago (Edited 3987d ago )

i don't see why pc gamers aren't satisfied with this game running at 720p,,, well maybe it's when you lash out a 1200$(the absolute minimum) on a gaming pc you are forced be dissapointed, i'll stay by my console(a 400 eu purchase) and I'll keep a good mid-range pc to run rts games on....

ar3987d ago

Could bee the fact that it looks like crap if you don't use the panels native resolution on an LCD screen.
I stick to my CRT as long as it works.

socsca3987d ago

Hook it up to a HDTV and it should look quite nice. I don't actually know but it seems to make sense since most console "HD" games run at 720p and look lovely on any hdtv below the disgusting 46+ sizes. Some games run at even lower res but still manage to look good, like Cod4 or Halo 3.

I dunno man, just typing cus I'm bored.

theox2g73987d ago (Edited 3987d ago )

"Hmmm - so pay 3X the cost of a next gen cosole to run the game at 720P?"

yea pay 3X the cost and be able to do a billion other things on it, u typed that comment on a pc, sooner or later, that pc will need upgrading/replacing whether u like it or not, u know ppl dont just upgrade to play games, right? nuff said

u make an argument and leave it one sided, pcs are different from consoles whether u like it or not, u can't compare them on the same front and be indifferent about other factors, i have noticed a chunk of the fanboys on this site are suffering from double standard syndrome,
first off ps3 fanboys can argue that bluray is an added bonus on ps3 and hence makes it a good deal/value for money even if u r just buying the console to play games, however to these fanboys feel it's a waste of money to get a $900 computer that can play the best looking game on the market decently and do a million other things? get my drift, pcs don't just play games and watch movies, they do a trillion other things consoles can't do, as a matter of fact, over the yrs game consoles have been trying to be more than just gaming boxes, they are trying harder and harder to be like pcs bcos they have seen the advantage pcs have with multitasking, some of these innovations are impressive but a price is paid, just to look at patches, framerate issues these days,

Bottomline, IT'S A FACT PC GAMING IS MORE EXPENSIVE THAN CONSOLE GAMING BUT IT IS THE TRUE BANG FOR YOUR BUCK!! PERIOD! NO ARGUMENT THERE!! It's simple if PCs don't serve ur purpose, they won't be as valuable and may seem expensive but when u utilize the resources/abilities of the pc, it's a whole lot more valuable, plus pc games are cheaper on the software side, save $10- $20 per game, this is awesome for multiplats when u have a gaming pc,
Consoles are awesome deals for ppl just looking solely to get games and they have awesome exclusives but most of these are also coming for pc, the gap is gradually narrowing on exclusives for consoles, as i am writing this, i have dmc4 and assassin's pre-ordered for pc, waiting to pick up in 2 weeks and i'm going to be enjoying it at full detail in true pixel by pixel 1080p on my 52" Bravia with liquid smooth framerates, oh and i forgot, both games were $10 cheaper than their console counterparts

ar3987d ago

Thats why PC games are cheaper than there console counterparts. To balance it out a bit. At least they are in Sweden.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3987d ago
VirusE3987d ago

Are they running it on high or very high? I can only manage 720p at very high and my pc is no slouch. x6800 at 3.5ghz, 2gigs 1066 dominator, wd raptor, 680i, x-fi, 640 meg 8800gts overclocked.

JCDenton3987d ago

I can get ~35-45 fps in 1280x1024 on very high (in XP, with little tweak to enable "very high" in XP). My specs: Core 2 Quad @ 3Ghz, 8800GTS SLI, 3GB RAM.

eyeballpauluk3987d ago

i ran the game (with an e6600, 8800 gtx OC, 2gb ram) at 1680*1050 getting about 35fps....I had everything at high, except for 2 settings. They were something like shadows and post processing I think.

But in all seriousness, I would rather turn the settings down than go to a lower resolution, as I tried the game at 1280*1024 and it didnt look right at all considering I had just played the game at my other res....

NiraTum3987d ago

with that price i can have a ps3 (399$) and a 360 (350 elite) and i still have some money to spend on games

socsca3987d ago

Do that, I recommend it, except for the elite part, just the premium.

Show all comments (44)
The story is too old to be commented.