Crysis 3 1080p 980ti

[techgeeknyc]

Hey guys i have a 980ti, i7 6700k, and 16gb ram and im running the game at 1080p (1900x1200 resolution). I have the system spec set to "very high", vsync turned on, but whenever i turn on AA of any kind, with exception of FXAA, I no longer have a stable 60FPS. This includes SMAA 2x or 4x, and forget about MSAA of any kind. I get dips into the low to mid 50's.

Owners of this card, is this normal for a 980 ti ? You would think a card like this can easily handle the game in 1080p. Any suggestions greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Also i noticed my cpu temps get really high when playing this game. Im seeing some of the cores touch 67c, whereas the GPU basically is stable at 75c.

 

[Mondozei]

Yes its normal. Same with Witcher 3 on ultra @ 1080p. Some games are just beastly to run at max/very high settings with AA.

 

[moonbogg]

I can do a test for you with one card running. I'll do it tomorrow though. Its late. It sounds normal to me for it to drop under 60 at times but I'll check.

 

[Red Hawk]

One way to check if your system is performing properly is to download the 3DMark benchmark, they give you a score which you can then compare to the average of systems with the same graphics card/CPU as you.

 

[aaksheytalwar]

Normal. A 980 Ti isn't powerful enough to run AA in Crysis 3 while maintaining 60 FPS.

 

[ultima_trev]

Even having the highest end hardware doesn't guarantee constant 60+ frames per second. It just means you'll dip less.

I get the same experience with Crysis 3 and Witcher 3 at 1680*1050 on my R9 390. In my opinion as long as I don't go below the occasional dip to 40-something I find the gameplay experience quite playable.

 

[Grooveriding]

Normal. I get dips at 1440p with two of them. AA is really demanding in the game.

 

[RussianSensation]

Hey guys i have a 980ti, i7 6700k, and 16gb ram and im running the game at 1080p (1900x1200 resolution). I have the system spec set to "very high", vsync turned on, but whenever i turn on AA of any kind, with exception of FXAA, I no longer have a stable 60FPS.

That's normal. 980Ti, even overclocked, gets ~ 60 fps averages, which means of course it's going to dip sub-60 fps in some of the most demanding scenes.

If sub-60 fps bothers you that much in gaming, start looking into a G-Sync monitor or you'll have to lower AA/settings. You can also try to turn off FPS counter in the game and see if sub-60 fps really bothers you vs. your mind's perception. In some games 48-55 fps doesn't feel that bad but YMMV depending on how sensitive you are to this.

 

[guskline]

Temps on CPU are not bad running full out. Is your 6700k Overclocked?
Concerning 60fps, I run fraps and view my min, max and average and then look at frame rates.

As RS pointed out in his graph, a standard clocked GTX980TI (947 vcore?) yields 59fps Average so obviously some frames are below 60 fps. Even the OC GTX 980TI Waterforce averages 61.5 fps, so it stands to reason that some are below 60 fps.

Crysis 3 is a tough game. I'm sure a poster could tell you a GPU combo that would keep the minimum fps 60 or more but I bet it will be expensive. Calling AdamK47 with his 4 GTX980TIs!:thumbsup:

 

[Actaeon]

If your display can handle it, you may want to try bumping up the resolution to 1440p and turning off AA, it might be less of a penalty while still reducing the aliasing from 1080p. Maybe not, but worth a try. Crysis 3 is still a very demanding game.

For me, I'd be pretty happy with a minimum of low 50s. I probably less sensitive to it than other people here, but I can hardly tell the difference between 50 and 60fps. It depends on the game, but in general my tolerance for minimums is around 30fps, so I tend to play at higher settings/resolutions

 

[psolord]

How about adaptive vsync? Or maybe msi afterbutner's frame limiter of rtss?

My 970 + 2500k, both overclocked, seemed to run the game nicely, above 60fps, in this outdoors section I chose to benchmark. Very High + smaa2x.

I have to be frank however. I did not play the game from start to finish on the 970, since I had 7950 crossfire when I played through it.

Still I am not using vsync in the benchmark obviously and I didn't see annoying tearing, but that's maybe due to the fact that the game was running close to 60fps. In any case I'd try adaptive vsync or the frame limiter or a combination of both. And some oc on the gpu.

 

[moonbogg]

If OP doesn't say anything else I'm not wasting time testing. OP are you gone?

 

[techgeeknyc]

Hey guys thanks for all the advice so far. For reference, here's a link to 3DMark benchmarks:

http://www.3dmark.com/fs/6842556

Getting graphics score of 18514, physics of 12925, combined 15324. All factory settings, with zero overclock, with I guess whatever EVGA version has put on by default. Are these benchmarks in the right range?

I guess I can try adaptive vsync as well, but basically playing "very high" with SMAA 4x seems to dip down to low 50's pretty frequently. I tried turning off the FRAPS counter and just playing, but I can clearly notice when it dips because the game almost pauses for a brief second.

Moonbogg, if you can quickly run a test yourself, that would be greatly appreciated. Many thanks!

 

[Deders]

SMAA 2xT is better quality than 4x imo because it has the temporal factor. I find that when I use 4x, if I quickly move the mouse and face another way, not all of the pixels move at the same rate.

As for CPU heat, the Welcome to the Jungle level with all the long grass can potentially make more use of your CPU than I've seen in any other game. Other levels won't need as much CPU power.

It's the level that websites and magazines should use for gaming powerdraw for PSU reviews. I've not seen a game draw more. Yet

 

[guskline]

techgeeknyc: Here are my results for 3D Mark Firestrike with the EXACT same video card but with an OC'd 5960x:

Obviously with a 8core/16thread OC'd cpu my Physics and overall score are higher but your Graphics score is slightly higher. Your score is fine.

 

[Termie]

This game engine is so smooth that dipping below 60fps really isn't an issue. No, you're not going to get a constant 60fps with your setup, but it honestly doesn't matter. So in fact your system IS easily handling the game. Just enjoy it, there's nothing wrong with your card!

And note, 1920x1200 is not 1080p. It's about 10% higher and thus more stressful.

 

[moonbogg]

This game engine is so smooth that dipping below 60fps really isn't an issue. No, you're not going to get a constant 60fps with your setup, but it honestly doesn't matter. So in fact your system IS easily handling the game. Just enjoy it, there's nothing wrong with your card!

And note, 1920x1200 is not 1080p. It's about 10% higher and thus more stressful.

I have to agree. This game engine is magical IMO. Never have I played a game where 60FPS and even a little below feels just fine (well, not since going to 120+hz screens anyway). Its incredible.
I was playing again last night and I thought I was almost done with the game, but nope, there is more. I find the game to be amazing really and am really enjoying it. People talk trash about its gameplay, but I think its great for the kind of game it is.
Regarding the OP and FPS, you are using 4XAA. Dips below 60 are expected, but since you are still here in this thread, I will do a fraps run for you tonight at your res and settings on a single card. I can say though I think nothing is wrong with your card or anything and your 3Dmark score is right in line.

 

[Magic Carpet]

Maxwell never really shined in Crysis 3 to be honest with ya.

 

[Deders]

That's at 4k which adds another hurdle. 1080p or 1440p results would be more relevant.

 

[moonbogg]

It shines pretty nice at 1440p, that's fersher.

 

[Magic Carpet]

That's at 4k which adds another hurdle. 1080p or 1440p results would be more relevant.

If you crank settings up, add AA, etc. You need extra b/w. The shot I linked above could equal to lower res with beefier AA. FXAA is piece of cake you know. Try Crysis with MSAA 8X instead.

 

[Deders]

It's a bit like comparing eating apples to cooking apples. You are better off going for the kind that you intend to use.

MSAA will affect games differently depending on how they are rendered. There is no single rule.

 

[Magic Carpet]

Even in your shot, 980 is barely faster 780 Ti. If you compare with other games, the performance delta will get quite a bit larger.

I think, 780 TI SLI if picked on the cheap, should provide very good performance in older titles such as this one.

And speaking of 4K. It's just awesome, played at a friends yesterday. Not surprised, 1080p is quickly becoming a thing of the past. A quality panel is a hard sell via benchmarks though...

 

[Deders]

From my experience games that came out before Maxwell tend to show similar results to this. After Maxwell came out, Nvidia would prioritise game optimisation for Maxwell, leaving Kepler users 2 months behind for optimisations.

Of course most of the online game benchmark results would have been made before Kepler optimised drivers were available which I think is a bit unfair to Kepler. Especially when you see 780 results being on par with an AMD 280X when it previously competed with a 290. The timing of the 'drop' in results is highly suspicious.

That's not to say that Maxwell isn't better than Kepler. I'm sure that it's optimisation has also improved like most cards do shortly after release.

 

[Termie]

Ok, here are some recent benchmarks.

Remember, the OP is at 1920x1200, noot 1080p.