Cyrsis on consoles? *pic comparsion on pc* - Blu-ray Forum

xtop · 03-21-2008, 03:26 PM

here's what 1200 dollars worth of video cards get you...42 fps

actionhank · 03-21-2008, 03:36 PM

Cool. I think it's worth it, maybe in a year when the prices drop a bit. But thats just me

jkwest · 03-21-2008, 03:40 PM

Geez...i would love to have the balls to spend that much on a PC...too bad my wife owns mine...

dk3dknight · 03-21-2008, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jkwest

Geez...i would love to have the balls to spend that much on a PC...too bad my wife owns mine...

Much Sims playing?

I read in the march playstation official magazine that Tiberium uses the Cyrsis engine, so that will interesting to see.

Phatjedi · 03-21-2008, 04:05 PM

Pardon my ignorance, but does this mean they are making Cyrsis for the PS3?

xtop · 03-21-2008, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phatjedi

Pardon my ignorance, but does this mean they are making Cyrsis for the PS3?

noooo. just showing how awesome of a computer you need to begin to even scratch the surface of the game. i'm in the camp of people who think it can't be done without big sacrifices

Brian Cash · 03-21-2008, 04:20 PM

well did you guys read this months GI that nasa has had a team tryin to play the game at full capacity on there computers and the longest they have been able to play is 10min before the whole system crashed freakin nasa we can send a man to the moon but we cant play a computer game the way it was ment to be played

Phatjedi · 03-21-2008, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xtop

noooo. just showing how awesome of a computer you need to begin to even scratch the surface of the game. i'm in the camp of people who think it can't be done without big sacrifices

I see, I am trying to run it in crossfire with 2 3870, Q6600, 4 gigs DDR3 on a 24inch Dell. No such luck, but I have not given up either. Let me know if you find the sweet spot.

owa · 03-21-2008, 05:32 PM

What were the AA and AF settings for the benchmarks? The results actually look higher than most I've seen.

Anyway, yeah, Crysis is a system killer. Reading reviews for the 9800GX2 recently, even with top-of-line systems, Crysis was still a bear to handle especially at high resolutions and with any amount of AA or AF (some benchmarks would use minimal amounts of AA and no AF or no AA and a mid-range of AF-- 8xAF for example). Checking out several threads on the 9800GX2, the sentiment was usually the same. It's not too difficult to put together a high-end system that can run every game out there pretty well but then there's Crysis. It's still difficult to run even on ultra-end systems, especially at some of the higher resolutions and if any AA/AF are being used. There are usually some compromises needed in the game settings to keep things playable also (especially later in the game where the graphics go up a few notches and the performance drops even more). Looks like the sweet-spot resolution-wise is still between 1024x768 and 1280x800. Although, as a sidenote, with their use of motion-blur, framerates in the mid 20s feels much more playable in Crysis than in other games so IMO, the lower framerates aren't quite as bad as it seems.

So, maybe a 720p game, a mix of settings (high type settings but dialing down shadows or some other taxing setting a notch or two, for example) and a more limited draw-distance would still look great and run pretty well. I'm looking forward to seeing what they can accomplish and seeing what tradeoffs they have to make, if any.

On a somewhat related note, Oblivion on the PC and consoles looked very similar out-of-the-box but on the PC side the graphics were compromised to a certain extent. One of the first thing PC users did was modify the config and texture packs so that the textures in the distance were a much higher quality. They also changed the settings to reduce the pop-up graphics considerably and increase the detail in the distance (higher density of grass, for example). Even before the mods though, Obvlion was a measuring stick for graphics/performance on the PC and in its default state, looked very similar on the PC and consoles. Crysis on the other hand, doesn't seem to be designed around any such compromises on the PC but of course, it's killing even high-end systems so users are basically having to dial-back the settings on their own. So maybe they'll be able to deliver Crysis (or whatever they call it) on the PS3 in the state that most people are dialing-down their settigs on the PC to, is basically my point.

Cordre69 · 03-21-2008, 06:03 PM

It is still such a beautiful game. I'd love a PS3 version but I already play it comfortably on my TV from my PC so it'd be a redundant buy.

Bluoholic · 03-21-2008, 06:07 PM

please tell me you're not trying to say that it will run 60 fps with very high settings full AA and full AF on PS3, are you? Because other than that I can't figure out why is this here

Simplayer · 03-21-2008, 06:16 PM

I think he's saying that it probably won't run that well on the PS3. Definately not at the high end.

player2006911 · 03-21-2008, 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brian Cash

well did you guys read this months GI that nasa has had a team tryin to play the game at full capacity on there computers and the longest they have been able to play is 10min before the whole system crashed freakin nasa we can send a man to the moon but we cant play a computer game the way it was ment to be played

your kidding right that was in the april fools jokes section just like the nintendo microsoft and sony jokes!

xtop · 03-21-2008, 07:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bluoholic

please tell me you're not trying to say that it will run 60 fps with very high settings full AA and full AF on PS3, are you? Because other than that I can't figure out why is this here

considering 1200 dollars worth of video cards can't even do 60fps...

dk3dknight · 03-21-2008, 07:08 PM

Yay, see I have this weird idea in my head would it be possible to push one of the spe cores into a video processor, I mean if you think about it physics are usualy pushed on the graphics card..

I guess it would come down to memory crush would the faster xdr make up for the difference in volume.

david2189 · 03-21-2008, 07:28 PM

its an amazing game, graphics is breathtaking!

partridge · 03-21-2008, 09:43 PM

This is the big problem with PC games; you pay one price but depending on our set up, you get a different experience.

Personally I don't see the point of developing a game that only a tiny percentage of gamers will ever enjoy as it was meant to be seen. It's nothing but posturing by pc devs; just an exercise in "ooh, look what we can do"

PC gaming is in trouble, consoles have taken the mass market and the poor pc is left with Sims and WoW.

Gimme my PS3 any day.

Ascended_Saiyan · 03-21-2008, 10:08 PM

First of all, Crysis is not a truly multithreaded program. In other words, it doesn't scale properly as more cores are introduced (highly inefficient). Therefore, you won't get anywhere near the performance you would get out of a quad-core processor (PS3 has 7 useable cores [6 SPEs and 1 PPE] for gaming).

Secondly, x86 based processors can NEVER reach anywhere near their theoretical maximum (google it...I can't cut and paste on the PS3). The Cell has the potential to reach 99% of it's theoretical max.

The graphics cards are way more powerful than the RSX (as we should all know). That helps PCs out tremendously. Also, the memory dumps are huge! Of course, I believe the code could be rewritten to optimize for less memory.

Personally, I think Crysis could be adapted to provide the same graphical experience on the PS3, but in 720p.

Also, I like the medium setting better than very high from those pics.

Nerdkiller likes BD · 03-21-2008, 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ascended_Saiyan

Personally, I think Crysis could be adapted to provide the same graphical experience on the PS3, but in 720p.

Also, I like the medium setting better than very high from those pics.

I second that. I just want PS3 Crysis already. I don't want to blow hundreds on something that still can't take it to the full.

reiella · 03-21-2008, 11:05 PM

Crysis is fun

.

That said, source would have been nice. Especially since Quad SLI 9800GX2 (4 cores) is apparantly contradicting.

I imagine it means 2 9800GX2 as opposed to a D5400XS with quad-sli (since that should be 8 cores then), but not too surprising since it was called quad-sli by the media in the past as well (before NVidia showed the new pretty chipsets).

The Crytek engines does have some growing to do yet [on two sides, improving the multi-card playback is something big that needs to improve].

I think the idea behind the 'ports' has been to recreate the engine on the new platform to make use of it's advantages, that said, time will tell

.

03-21-2008, 03:26 PM	#1
xtop Blu-ray Count Member since:Oct 2007 Blu-ray collection:- DVD collection:- Digital collection:- Trading Score:3	Cyrsis on consoles? pic comparsion on pc here's what 1200 dollars worth of video cards get you...42 fps

03-21-2008, 05:32 PM	#9
owa Blu-ray Knight Member since:Apr 2007 Blu-ray reviews: 96	What were the AA and AF settings for the benchmarks? The results actually look higher than most I've seen. Anyway, yeah, Crysis is a system killer. Reading reviews for the 9800GX2 recently, even with top-of-line systems, Crysis was still a bear to handle especially at high resolutions and with any amount of AA or AF (some benchmarks would use minimal amounts of AA and no AF or no AA and a mid-range of AF-- 8xAF for example). Checking out several threads on the 9800GX2, the sentiment was usually the same. It's not too difficult to put together a high-end system that can run every game out there pretty well but then there's Crysis. It's still difficult to run even on ultra-end systems, especially at some of the higher resolutions and if any AA/AF are being used. There are usually some compromises needed in the game settings to keep things playable also (especially later in the game where the graphics go up a few notches and the performance drops even more). Looks like the sweet-spot resolution-wise is still between 1024x768 and 1280x800. Although, as a sidenote, with their use of motion-blur, framerates in the mid 20s feels much more playable in Crysis than in other games so IMO, the lower framerates aren't quite as bad as it seems. So, maybe a 720p game, a mix of settings (high type settings but dialing down shadows or some other taxing setting a notch or two, for example) and a more limited draw-distance would still look great and run pretty well. I'm looking forward to seeing what they can accomplish and seeing what tradeoffs they have to make, if any. On a somewhat related note, Oblivion on the PC and consoles looked very similar out-of-the-box but on the PC side the graphics were compromised to a certain extent. One of the first thing PC users did was modify the config and texture packs so that the textures in the distance were a much higher quality. They also changed the settings to reduce the pop-up graphics considerably and increase the detail in the distance (higher density of grass, for example). Even before the mods though, Obvlion was a measuring stick for graphics/performance on the PC and in its default state, looked very similar on the PC and consoles. Crysis on the other hand, doesn't seem to be designed around any such compromises on the PC but of course, it's killing even high-end systems so users are basically having to dial-back the settings on their own. So maybe they'll be able to deliver Crysis (or whatever they call it) on the PS3 in the state that most people are dialing-down their settigs on the PC to, is basically my point. Last edited by owa; 03-21-2008 at 05:40 PM.

Similar Threads
thread	Forum	Thread Starter	Replies	Last Post
When do you think we will see the next gaming consoles?	General Chat	HomeTheaterVirgin	25	08-25-2009 05:26 PM
Consoles will be extinct by 2020	PS3	Nerdkiller likes BD	24	07-25-2008 01:34 PM
The future of consoles...	PS3	Proteus	9	06-11-2008 01:07 AM
Because it's not just about Consoles...	Blu-ray Technology and Future Technology	Elandyll	6	12-29-2007 12:42 AM

03-21-2008, 03:36 PM	#2
actionhank Senior Member Member since:Jun 2007 Location:Las Vegas, Nevada	Cool. I think it's worth it, maybe in a year when the prices drop a bit. But thats just me

03-21-2008, 03:40 PM	#3
jkwest Off-Topic King Member since:Jul 2007 Location:Northern California PSN Id: jkwest5 Blu-ray reviews:1 Trading Score:20	Geez...i would love to have the balls to spend that much on a PC...too bad my wife owns mine...

03-21-2008, 04:05 PM	#5
Phatjedi Active Member Member since:Nov 2007 Location:Schertz Blu-ray collection:123	Pardon my ignorance, but does this mean they are making Cyrsis for the PS3?

03-21-2008, 04:20 PM	#7
Brian Cash Special Member Member since:Dec 2007 Location:Chicago Blu-ray collection:13 Blu-ray reviews:2 Trading Score:3	well did you guys read this months GI that nasa has had a team tryin to play the game at full capacity on there computers and the longest they have been able to play is 10min before the whole system crashed freakin nasa we can send a man to the moon but we cant play a computer game the way it was ment to be played

03-21-2008, 06:03 PM	#10
Cordre69 Power Member Member since:Aug 2007 Location:Livermore, CA 4K collection:218 Blu-ray collection:1094 Trading Score:1	It is still such a beautiful game. I'd love a PS3 version but I already play it comfortably on my TV from my PC so it'd be a redundant buy.

03-21-2008, 06:07 PM	#11
Bluoholic Expert Member Member since:Dec 2007 4K collection:1 Blu-ray collection:482 Trading Score:1	please tell me you're not trying to say that it will run 60 fps with very high settings full AA and full AF on PS3, are you? Because other than that I can't figure out why is this here

03-21-2008, 06:16 PM	#12
Simplayer Special Member Member since:Jan 2008 Location:Windsor, Ontario	I think he's saying that it probably won't run that well on the PS3. Definately not at the high end.

03-21-2008, 07:08 PM	#15
dk3dknight Blu-ray Ninja Member since:May 2007 Location:Arlington, Texas PSNetwork: dk3dknight PostCount: 0001 Blu-ray collection:44 Blu-ray reviews: 2	Yay, see I have this weird idea in my head would it be possible to push one of the spe cores into a video processor, I mean if you think about it physics are usualy pushed on the graphics card.. I guess it would come down to memory crush would the faster xdr make up for the difference in volume.

03-21-2008, 07:28 PM	#16
david2189 Expert Member Member since:Sep 2007 Location:London, UK Blu-ray collection:183	its an amazing game, graphics is breathtaking!

03-21-2008, 09:43 PM	#17
partridge Blu-ray Ninja Member since:Oct 2005 Location:England	This is the big problem with PC games; you pay one price but depending on our set up, you get a different experience. Personally I don't see the point of developing a game that only a tiny percentage of gamers will ever enjoy as it was meant to be seen. It's nothing but posturing by pc devs; just an exercise in "ooh, look what we can do" PC gaming is in trouble, consoles have taken the mass market and the poor pc is left with Sims and WoW. Gimme my PS3 any day.

03-21-2008, 10:08 PM	#18
Ascended_Saiyan Blu-ray Samurai Member since:Sep 2006 Location:Atlanta, Georgia Blu-ray collection:608 Trading Score:1	First of all, Crysis is not a truly multithreaded program. In other words, it doesn't scale properly as more cores are introduced (highly inefficient). Therefore, you won't get anywhere near the performance you would get out of a quad-core processor (PS3 has 7 useable cores [6 SPEs and 1 PPE] for gaming). Secondly, x86 based processors can NEVER reach anywhere near their theoretical maximum (google it...I can't cut and paste on the PS3). The Cell has the potential to reach 99% of it's theoretical max. The graphics cards are way more powerful than the RSX (as we should all know). That helps PCs out tremendously. Also, the memory dumps are huge! Of course, I believe the code could be rewritten to optimize for less memory. Personally, I think Crysis could be adapted to provide the same graphical experience on the PS3, but in 720p. Also, I like the medium setting better than very high from those pics.

03-21-2008, 11:05 PM	#20
reiella Blu-ray Guru Member since:Dec 2006 Home Theater Gallery:1 Blu-ray collection:237 DVD collection:1	Crysis is fun . That said, source would have been nice. Especially since Quad SLI 9800GX2 (4 cores) is apparantly contradicting. I imagine it means 2 9800GX2 as opposed to a D5400XS with quad-sli (since that should be 8 cores then), but not too surprising since it was called quad-sli by the media in the past as well (before NVidia showed the new pretty chipsets). The Crytek engines does have some growing to do yet [on two sides, improving the multi-card playback is something big that needs to improve]. I think the idea behind the 'ports' has been to recreate the engine on the new platform to make use of it's advantages, that said, time will tell .

Best PS3 Game Deals