Minimal Card to Run Crysis on Very High

[Intelman07]

So, with these new cards out now, and some old ones (Like the GX2) what card could I get that would minimally run Crysis smoothly?

My monitors Native Resolution is 1680x1050.

Anandtech did benches at 1600x1200, with no AA. I like to use AA, but I run at a lower res, I can't really gauge what would be good or not. The GX2 is probably the most expensive I'd go. GT280 is out of my range, and not that impressive. I haven't bought a computer part in a while (4 years or so) so I've saved quite well. (I won my current PC)

I've had both ATI and Nvidia, like them both quite well. The Video encoding acceleration sounds interesting, I do like to convert videos quite a bit for my Zune.

 

[Mustanggt]

I know a 8800GT wont run Crysis at full settings so you need to look higher end.

 

[Intelman07]

Yeah that is what I have now, it definitely doesn't come close... I just wonder if the 4870 would, or would I need to jump higher. I'll probably end up selling my card now for like 100 bucks or so.

 

[AzN]

4870 would do it 1280x1024 resolution. I'm not sure about 1680x1050.

 

[Intelman07]

Damn, well oh well. GT260 or the 9800 GX2

 

[Powered by AMD]

I would go for a 4850 Crossfire.

 

[Intelman07]

I suppose crossfile solutions are open to me, though a 4870 crossfire is more expensive than a GX2.

I've never actually used multi GPUs....

 

[Sylvanas]

Originally posted by: Powered by AMD
I would go for a 4850 Crossfire.

 

[Intelman07]

Do most games "support crossfire" or scale well. Multi GPU has never really interest me until now. I never want to be stranded.

 

[Nathelion]

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3338&p=14
4850 CF should do it

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: Nathelion
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3338&p=14
4850 CF should do it

FYI, that's only High + VH for the shaders.

 

[unr3al]

I wouldn't suggest anything less than an HD4870X2. But the difference between Crysis High and Very High is so minuscule that its really not worth it to me.

Besides, I would rather use the DX9 hack to improve image quality at a fraction of the frame cost rather than load Vista and suffer from dropping framerates left, right and center.

At the moment I am using WinXP Pro x64 and I haven't even had graphics to run DX9 properly yet though lol looking at the HD4850 myself, simply because it would run Crysis at the best settings I could run, at the max res I would want to run it; 1280x1024.

But if you really want to use Very High, nothing short of an HD4870X2 will suffice. Not even the GTX280 will do what you ask imho, 1680x1050 Very High. But thats just my opinion. Don't know what nVidia will do with improved drivers, but the future looks bad for the GT200, given the high prices and low relative performance.

Crysis has a terrible engine, okay it looks the best in the business but does it really have to be THAT demanding? Look at Half-Life 2. I run it on High Quality on my IGP and get around 40fps average @ 1024x768. Crysis I run at 800x600 minimum quality and get 10fps... And at said settings, HL2 looks better than Crysis lol

In short, here is what I'm saying:

Get the GTX280 if you want to waste cash and likely be mad at yourself for buying it lateron, or wait for the HD4870X2 and see what performance it actually has and if the GTX280's drivers improved by then (laughs). Or you could just get an HD4870 and run DX9 maxed Crysis, which would look nearly as good and would give you great framerates.

 

[schneiderguy]

GTX380 or HD5870x2

You better go check FS/FT for a time machine

 

[imported_Scoop]

There's no single card that would run it with everything maxed out on any resolution. GTX 280 Tri-SLI will however

 

[error8]

GTX 280 SLI would run the game just fine on very high settings at 1680 X 1050.

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Ah the Crysis excuse. It'd be different if the game was actually worthy of its hype beyond its graphics...what really gives it away is the fact that no one in their right mind would pay hundreds for a game they're probably going to only play 10-20 hours or so. Use a good excuse like, "I wanna play WoW, or Orange Box, or COD4 with as much extra eye candy as possible, I don't care if its complete overkill, I have X amount to spend and I want to spend it"

 

[sparks]

Since you already have an Intel based motherboard in the Asus P5E, I'd be more partial to the AMD 4800 series cards. Get a 4870 now and if you think you need more performance later, get a second one later and CF them.

 

[imported_Scoop]

Originally posted by: bunnyfubbles
Ah the Crysis excuse. It'd be different if the game was actually worthy of its hype beyond its graphics...what really gives it away is the fact that no one in their right mind would pay hundreds for a game they're probably going to only play 10-20 hours or so. Use a good excuse like, "I wanna play WoW, or Orange Box, or COD4 with as much extra eye candy as possible, I don't care if its complete overkill, I have X amount to spend and I want to spend it"

Crysis is actually one of the very best FPS games I've played. I would even rank it top 3 after FEAR and Doom 3. COD4 on the other hand is not worth it. But this kind of discussion should take place somewhere else

 

[Intelman07]

I love crysis online, and I play it on "High" graphics and sometimes it just chops up way too much....that is why I was looking at a new card in the first place. The new expansion is supposed to fix the performance issues...so whatever I get today will run even better there.

 

[alcoholbob]

What about DX10 Very High mode? How much would you need to run say 20+ fps on combat at 1920x1200? My assumption at this point is GTX 280 SLI...minimum.

 

[Intelman07]

DX10 Very high is what i was refering to, except at WSXGA+ 1680x1050, not quite 1920x1200

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: Scoop
There's no single card that would run it with everything maxed out on any resolution. GTX 280 Tri-SLI will however

try running crysis on 25x16 very high with gtx 280 tri-sli.

@op, you probably could get playable framerates on very high at 16x10 with tri-sli gtx 280 at least.

 

[Intelman07]

What about the GX2. No one seems to care about that. It seems to do well in benchmarks on 1600x1200 on high...

 

[AzN]

Originally posted by: Intelman07
Damn, well oh well. GT260 or the 9800 GX2

GT260 is no better than 4870 for Crysis.

You probably need gx2 or GT280 but I don't know if they'll do very high dx10. Perhaps dx9 hack mode.

 

[terentenet]

I don't know about 1680x1050 and ATI cards. All my experience is with Nvidia cards. I can play Crysis 32bit under Vista 64, using DX10 and all on Very High with my computer, at 1920x1080. Signature is outdated, my current specs are:
Intel QX9650 @ 4050 (450x9)
Zotac NF790i Supreme
4Gb Mushkin DDR3 @ 1800 8-8-8-24
2 x BFG 9800GX2 in Quad-SLI
Dell 3007WFP-HC & Samsung 42" LCD Full HD.
Even with this config, the game struggles at the given resolution, when loading textures. So, the framerate is consistently over 35fps, but from time to time it drops to 15fps for a matter of seconds then reverts back to over 35fps.
IMO, Crysis is not worth it. I played it once, on Med & Hi on 8800GTX SLI. I now just test the 9800GX2's with it, but wouldn't play it again.
It's the kind of game that you play, you finish then all you want to do is delete it so you can free up space.