Crysis Finally Gets Playable at 2560x1600...with 2 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280 in SLI

When NVIDIA's new GeForce GTX 280 hits e-tailers next week, gamers who are running 30 inch displays with a 2560x1600 resolution, will finally be able to play Crysis with a solid framerate. In order to do so it will require 2 GeForce GTX 280 video cards running in SLI.

[TiKiMaN1]

Honestly...I think it is ridiculous that this game should require such crazy hardware to play with a solid FPS. Is this game really ahead of it's time or is it just bad programming? That is the question.

[bumnut]

its still looks awesome at 1280 x 1024 on a mid range pc.

you do not need to have a top spec pc to enjoy the game.

[fermcr]

@bumnut

Yep... you said it all.

A mid PC runs Crysis very well... at HD :) (contrary to consoles, were most games don't run in HD)

[Bolts]

Are you insane or just daft? They're talking about playing Crysis on high quality settings with 4X AA and all the options on 2560x1600 NATIVE resolution. I don't think anyone here realise how incredibly high def that is, lets consider the fact that 1080p is "only" 1920x1200 and Halo 3 is barely running at 640p.

Basically one 280 GTX equal twice the power of the 360, if not more...and it comes with the price to match. If you want to know what's nextgen really looks like then this is it.

[fermcr]

Actually ...

720p = 1280×720 (it's HD)
1080p = 1920×1080 (it's FULL HD)

You don't even need a medium PC to run most games at 720p.

In image quality you have something like this:
480i < 720i < 480p < 1080i < 720p < 1080p

[Crazyglues]

yeah I don't know where you got 1080p is 1920 x 1200... because...

1080p = 1920 x 1080 -Hence that's where the 1080p comes from...

yeah but basically these are Ridiculously high-res settings to be running Crysis at.

[lsujester]

But they are insanely pretty settings to run any game at. For someone who PC games quite regularly, I have to admit consoles can't touch what modern PC's can.

Remember folks, RSX in the PS3 is a slightly modified GeForce 7800GTX. The Xenos in the 360 is a similarly powered card from ATI. That means that the PS3 and 360 are already two GPU generations behind, and horribly underpowered in comparison. That's why you see games running in 580, or 640.. and having to be upconverted. The hardware is already obsolete.

So while mainstream may consider 1080p "Full HD", it's already old news as far as PC gamers are concerned.

So yeah, Crysis may make my computer lay down and cry like a girl, but it also brings the most graphically rich game the world has yet to see.

[LinuxGuru]

computer monitors use a different aspect ratio than TVs, hence a 1920 x 1200 resolution instead of "proper" 1920 x 1080

[Bolts]

Yeah 1080p is 1920×1080. I screwed up but it was 4 AM at the time...guess I shouldn't post at those hours LOL. But yeah, 2560x1600 native resolution is higher and more demanding than most console can possibly imagine. That is a lot of polys people. I think what we are seeing now on the PC is the ground work for the next generation of console GPU.

[TiKiMaN1]

That is very true. However, I know quite a few people that are disappointed with the performance they have received so far. Mostly because their hardware allows them to play all of there other games at high res. I suppose they suspect that because they only own 24" or 30" monitors that they should be able to play all games with setting maxed.

[Genki]

I'll wait about 2 or 3 years, and cop a $1500 PC that will run this game like butter. Some may be puzzled at this, but any good game will withstand the test of time. I guess I'll find out if Crysis is just that.

[MicroDeath SoftStar]

crysis is pure garbage ,it wont stand the test of time it cant even hold up to COD4 OR BIOSHOCK , yes it looks real good but this game is extremely lame most people wont ever finish it and then there are games made by valve which make the devs of crysis look like a bunch of tech nerds with no idea as to what goes into a good game

[Bolts]

Crysis is a lot like Farcry. Being a game good game isn't the point. It is basically and eye candy game designed to sell their engine and benchmark hardware.

[levy]

If you think it's bad, then you can tell yourself that. First of all, Crysis beat EA:s expectations in sales. And second, I can't see how
>90% in average review scores is bad....
It's an awesome game, but everyone might not think so. Everyone have different taste you know.

And furthermore, it IS eye candy, but having this obsession of maxing it out like that is just stupid. Even on lower res and settings it still has top notch graphics. And as a lot of people say, the graphics do not make the game, so you don't HAVE to have good graphics to play it. It's just a bonus.

[Genki]

Look the word up in the dictionary and then get back to me about opinionated subjects being facts...

[akaFullMetal]

crazy how you need two graphics cards to run this at its max, we shouldnt be going that far with this, soon you will need to buy two graphic cards to just play regular games. We should be able to just buy one graphic card and then enjoy, considering people pay 500 dollars for a graphics card. To much man, to much.

[Crazyglues]

This is insane... didn't hardware catch up to software, well what the hell happened...

Because when you start to need two top level GPU's to run a game in decent frame rates, something is seriously wrong.

At this point your going to need a small power plant to run enough power for your setup to get 60 fps out of Crysis, and forget about the electric bill because it's going to be through the roof..

especially if you play more then once a week... So the real cost of the game is more like $860 dollars a year.. $500 for the card $300 for electric bill for the year and 60 dollars for the game..

don't even bother to add tax because you might just pass out... LoL

[Kakkoii]

This is only one game....

It's not like hardware is going to stop advancing, and games are going to keep increasing exponentially.

These people are cranking a game that was made to be the most realistic game ever, To the max possible settings.. They are playing at way higher than HD resolution. With insane details and filterings.

The Nvidia drivers for the GTX 280 are still in their infancy also.. I'm sure you'd need only one GTX 280 to play these settings at a decent FPS. That card is quite a power house.

You don't have to play games in these extreme settings, game developers only make these settings available for the people who have the money to afford the equipment to play at these extreme settings.

You know.. Like if 95% of people have a 9800GTX machine.. And the other 5% have 3 9800GTX in SLI... Well the game developers will make some higher settings to enable for those rich people lol.

You don't need to play on the highest possible resolution.. It's just their for the people who can afford that luxury..

It's like buying a Lamborghini... You don't have to buy it, but if you have a lot of money to spare.. Then go for it :P.

[zslash]

Solution: don't play the game at 2560x1600, which is a resolution higher than "full HD" aka 1080p.

My $500 PC runs Crysis perfect at 1280x720

[CNIVEK]

...or ANY game, for that matter.

Here's what I DO know: I bought a mid-range Velocity Micro PC last April, for $1300 awith the following basic specs

- Vista 32-bit
- Intel Core 2 6600 @ 2.4Ghz
- Nvidia 8600GT, 256mb DRAM
- 2G RAM

...and it BARELY runs Crysis. It looks like an original XBOX title, and runs at about 15 FPS...at best.

[Kakkoii]

That's because you got ripped the f*ck off lol.

You need to study up on parts and prices better.

http://n4g.com/gaming/News-...

For $1300 last year.. I could have built a high-range PC.

[CNIVEK]

...I'm not into building PCs, son. I bought it based on the fact that it met or exceeded the (then) reported minimum specs for current and future PC titles, and it came with 2 years warranty (included in the $1300).

But, what I PAID for the rig, has NOTHING to do with my point. The fact still remains, that the most highly touted, overhyped game of the past 5 years, looked and played like CRAP, on a well-equipped PC. I'm certainly not the only one with such an experience with Crysis.

But, I did learn a lesson: I'm sticking with what I know...console gaming. My $400 launch 360 plays EVERY game I put in it, doesn't require an install, will NEVER require an upgrade to play future 360 titles, and the hardware specs/performance are locked in...no need to tweak anything game-to-game. Therefore, even if I HAD built my own, and saved a lot of $$...my PC experience would have been the same.

Besides...I don't care what ANYONE says, that keyboard/mouse sh1t sucks ass. :o

[Kakkoii]

Well of course.. To do good with PC Gaming.. It's good to gain some knowledge about hardware..

You bought an 8600GT that only has 256MB ram... That's suicide with a card like that.

If you had a 1GB of 512MB version.. Your computer would actually perform quite well on Crysis.. And look better than the current consoles could do.

Your PC will also play every game you put in it, if you keep the game on the settings your computer is capable of!!!!

Just like how your XBOX 360 is only capable of certain settings in each game.. It's not any different than a computer dude. It's only a bit more automated, so you have no choice of detail, only what the developers set it to, and what the machine is capable of. Which is usually crap and below 720p.

Where as most PC games are played in 1080p or higher on even midrange PC's. With not to mention more Anti-Aliasing and Anisotropic filtering levels, and better shading and textures.

If you actually set the settings in Crysis to the low ammount that would be required for the Xbox 360 to play it. You're current computer would burn through it like nothing.

There's a lot to PC gaming your missing.

[Bolts]

I other word, son. You got ripped off LOL. Those are horrible specs for a $1300 PC! Where the hell did all the money go? There is absolutely nothing "well equiped" about that PC at all. I can put that system together for $800 or less.

The lesson here: Console are for people who doesn't understand tech.

Ironically enough these same people would fight fanboy wars over which console have better tech.

[GIJeff]

shoulda got my laptop:

core 2 duo 1.8ghz
4gb ddr2
8800gts 512 gddr3
HDMI output
17inch 1440x900 screen

$1,250.00 at best buy.

[lsujester]

Well, if you wanted to spend a few more hundred, a good graphics card would really beef that system up. I know that'd suck being you already paid 1300, but if you wanted to PC game more, you'll only need one part replaced.

[Kakkoii]

Yeah, The rest of the parts are perfectly fine.

Dual Core is a smart choice. Although the system you bought probably put in one of the most expensive dual cores, which is a waste. You only need the cheapest dual-core from Intel really..

8600GT's are pretty powerful.. But since it's 256MB, it's performance is capped and thrown down the sh!tter. lol.

Sorry you had such a bad experience with PC gaming man. But in life, any serious long term purchase should first be studied more. It's common sense so that stores don't jip you.