I still cant run Crysis 1

[Mauricio G. B.]

Hey recently i got Crysis 1 for PC i really liked the Crysis series for a long now and i could never play the first installment on decent fps when it came out or few years later as for now i decided to try since i now got a FX 8350 oc @ 4.5Ghz and a GTX 970 G1 gaming edition card i though i could really max out the game, Turns out with everything maxed out i do get dips into the 30s .... any solution Fix or anything you guys now?, i already fixed the issue with the 64bit launcher

[DominicNikon]

i guess all you can do is lower graphic settings

[Mauricio G. B.]

1 minute ago, DominicNikon said:

i guess all you can do is lower graphic settings

... i waited 10 years to play crysis 1 on ultra im not lowering my settings >:c

[GreezyJeezy]

3 minutes ago, Mauricio G. B. said:

... i waited 10 years to play crysis 1 on ultra im not lowering my settings >:c

then deal with the dips,

[Jack Longman]

3 minutes ago, Mauricio G. B. said:

... i waited 10 years to play crysis 1 on ultra im not lowering my settings >:c

then you won't get the fps you want

[Mauricio G. B.]

1 minute ago, Jack Longman said:

then you won't get the fps you want

so basically, i still cant run a 10 year old game with a 970

[skyress3000]

Not sure about this but since it's an older game it might not be optimized for multi-core, making your CPU the bottleneck as something like a 6700k would be much better for single-thread performance

 

Also there's a saying "can it run crysis" for a reason.... in the screenshot you posted, it looks like the amount of grass being rendered is a little overboard..... that's probably a major contributor to the issue

[Mauricio G. B.]

2 minutes ago, skyress3000 said:

Not sure about this but since it's an older game it might not be optimized for multi-core, making your CPU the bottleneck as something like a 6700k would be much better for single-thread performance

Thanks for the non stupid answer, ill give it a show on my laptop that has a core i7 @ 3.1ghz and on a friends 6700k to see if its the problem

[QFA350]

Where do you reckon the question "but can it run Crysis" came from?

[Mauricio G. B.]

2 minutes ago, Warning said:

Where do you reckon the question "but can it run Crysis" came from?

in 2007-2010 was legit, but knowing a 970 has like way way way way more power than a GTX 9800  i thought i could /:

[QFA350]

5 minutes ago, Mauricio G. B. said:

in 2007-2010 was legit, but knowing a 970 has like way way way way more power than a GTX 9800  i thought i could /:

I believe LTT did a video benchmarking crysis on newer hardware and the same thing occured

[Mauricio G. B.]

1 minute ago, Warning said:

I believe LTT did a video benchmarking crysis on newer hardware and the same thing occured

last time i saw linus using Crysis was when he compared a 560ti vs a gtx 8800 or something like that, can you link the video?

[QFA350]

3 minutes ago, Mauricio G. B. said:

last time i saw linus using Crysis was when he compared a 560ti vs a gtx 8800 or something like that, can you link the video?

 

[QFA350]

3 minutes ago, Mauricio G. B. said:

last time i saw linus using Crysis was when he compared a 560ti vs a gtx 8800 or something like that, can you link the video?

 

[LabRat]

this a dx9 game?

there has to be something wrong somewhere. I can remember running that maxed out on a quad775 and a msi gtx260 lightning.

[Humbug]

Crysis is badly optimized as you can tell by Luke's video above.

 

Having said that you should be able to play it maxed out at 1080p on your GTX 970 without a problem. Ok so there are dips into the 30s but what is the general framerate and smoothness? And are you play in windowed or fullscreen mode?

[Mauricio G. B.]

10 hours ago, Humbug said:

Crysis is badly optimized as you can tell by Luke's video above.

 

Having said that you should be able to play it maxed out at 1080p on your GTX 970 without a problem. Ok so there are dips into the 30s but what is the general framerate and smoothness? And are you play in windowed or fullscreen mode?

i paly in fullscreen, i say the average is arround 47 fps, since it hardly locks onto 60fps during action or actualy gameplay besides walking on deserted areas, lowest it has been tis 27, oddly enough its not during explosions, is just seems like the hardware cant keep up

[Mauricio G. B.]

it appears that the issue is mostly on the first half of the game, just reached a Snowy level section and is rock solid  @ 60fps

[SteveGrabowski0]

Crysis 1 is horribly optimized. On my Xeon E3-1231v3 it pins one core to 100%, one to 50%, and the other 6 threads do jack shit. I get lots of dips into the high 40s in the second mission of the game. The GPU isn't the bottleneck, it's all the cpu.

[Helly]

Ok so to make things a bit clearer here, Crysis 1 is NOT horribly optimized! This game is 10, TEN YEARS old. It was amazingly optimized for single cores and later somewhat for dual cores. You can't expect them to keep updating the game when there's more cores available. That's just unrealistic but more importantly that's EA. I mean FFS the game even starts with a screen saying runs great on Intel Extreme edition... the old single core extreme edition. Hell this game actually runs better on an AMD FX single core CPU... THATS HOW OLD THIS GAME IS!

 

Now i have actual experience in running this both on an FX 8350 (@4.6Ghz) and my current I7 5960x. It did not run awesome on my 8350 but i can't remember if i got dips into 30s. But i ran it on 2 7970's in xfire. Maybe that helped a bit, i dunno. I do know that my 5960x almost doubled my fps. So i can confirm the 8350 is not the best cpu for crysis 1. But it was perfectly playable on my 8350 because i recorded the entire game with fraps on it. The video of it is perfectly watchable and doesn't show anything of the dips.

 

I also find it weird you say you play in fullscreen while the screenshot you posted is windowed. You don't know how to take a screenshot fullscreen or do you mean fullscreen as in the whole screen is filled with the game but the acual game is windowed? Cuz old games like crysis 1 actually run worse when you play them windowed, at least that's my experience.

 

Just thought i'd give some extra info here i hope its helpful

 

 

[typographie]

5 hours ago, Helly said:

I mean FFS the game even starts with a screen saying runs great on Intel Extreme edition... the old single core extreme edition.

Where are you getting the idea that Intel had a single-core Extreme Edition processor in 2007? That would've been the Core 2 Quad QX series. The game is old, sure, but not Pentium 4 old.

[Mauricio G. B.]

7 hours ago, Helly said:

Ok so to make things a bit clearer here, Crysis 1 is NOT horribly optimized! This game is 10, TEN YEARS old. It was amazingly optimized for single cores and later somewhat for dual cores. You can't expect them to keep updating the game when there's more cores available. That's just unrealistic but more importantly that's EA. I mean FFS the game even starts with a screen saying runs great on Intel Extreme edition... the old single core extreme edition. Hell this game actually runs better on an AMD FX single core CPU... THATS HOW OLD THIS GAME IS!

 

Now i have actual experience in running this both on an FX 8350 (@4.6Ghz) and my current I7 5960x. It did not run awesome on my 8350 but i can't remember if i got dips into 30s. But i ran it on 2 7970's in xfire. Maybe that helped a bit, i dunno. I do know that my 5960x almost doubled my fps. So i can confirm the 8350 is not the best cpu for crysis 1. But it was perfectly playable on my 8350 because i recorded the entire game with fraps on it. The video of it is perfectly watchable and doesn't show anything of the dips.

 

I also find it weird you say you play in fullscreen while the screenshot you posted is windowed. You don't know how to take a screenshot fullscreen or do you mean fullscreen as in the whole screen is filled with the game but the acual game is windowed? Cuz old games like crysis 1 actually run worse when you play them windowed, at least that's my experience.

 

Just thought i'd give some extra info here i hope its helpful

 

 

if i take the screenshit while on fullscreen its just a black screen, but its the same fps and it actually ran the same windowed or fullscreen

[Helly]

5 hours ago, typographie said:

Where are you getting the idea that Intel had a single-core Extreme Edition processor in 2007? That would've been the Core 2 Quad QX series. The game is old, sure, but not Pentium 4 old.

Ok sorry, we we're both wrong actually :P. It's indeed the Core 2 Extreme. But this is the dual core extreme not the quad core. The quad core came out months after this game (Q1 08). This game was never optimized for more then a dual core. So the FX i thought of must have been the 7x series or something... i dunno. I somehow remember reading this game ran far better on the AMD FX cpu's at the time.

[Mauricio G. B.]

45 minutes ago, Helly said:

Ok sorry, we we're both wrong actually :P. It's indeed the Core 2 Extreme. But this is the dual core extreme not the quad core. The quad core came out months after this game (Q1 08). This game was never optimized for more then a dual core. So the FX i thought of must have been the 7x series or something... i dunno. I somehow remember reading this game ran far better on the AMD FX cpu's at the time.

actualyl you're still wrong, there were core 2 Quad extreme editions since 2006 as for the Q6XXX series http://ark.intel.com/products/28028/Intel-Core2-Extreme-Processor-QX6700-8M-Cache-2_66-GHz-1066-MHz-FSB

[Humbug]

11 hours ago, Helly said:

Ok sorry, we we're both wrong actually :P. It's indeed the Core 2 Extreme. But this is the dual core extreme not the quad core. The quad core came out months after this game (Q1 08). This game was never optimized for more then a dual core.

i get what you're saying but even the per core performance of modern AMD and Intel CPUs is a lot better than those old core2 CPUs. So even if the workload is relatively singlethreaded it should perform. If not it's not well optimized enough.