Thanks. i have that one also. There is another instruction thread where a step is reversed, i think, and the correction is in a later post.
gee you should really oc those 3 gtx580 cards some more for 1920x1080.
Condescending much?
its a public forum not a lovefest. when I see something I think is odd or just plain silly I usually make a comment about it. $1500 in gpus, $1000 cpu and then the needed $300 1200 watt psu to run that stuff just seems downright silly with a relatively dinky 1920x1080 monitor. and then on top of that he feels the need to oc the cards which is useless at that res. its like buying an F-350 dually to pull a jet ski.Condescending much?
How did you get it to finally work?
i just now got a copy of Crysis 2 D/L'ing now
i am one of those people who can wait
:whiste:
I was getting around 25-30FPS and at times, it dips to around 18FPS. Of course, this is not ideal but at 8100x1600px and every setting maxed out, what the hell do you expect?
its a public forum not a lovefest. when I see something I think is odd or just plain silly I usually make a comment about it. $1500 in gpus, $1000 cpu and then the needed $300 1200 watt psu to run that stuff just seems downright silly with a relatively dinky 1920x1080 monitor. and then on top of that he feels the need to oc the cards which is useless at that res. its like buying an F-350 dually to pull a jet ski.
lol, not a 350 but I have owned a few 150s and driven a 250. with gas like it is though I will not be owning a truck again anytime soon.But have you ever driven an F-350? If you only knew the power of the dark side!
Yeah, not worried about max settings. The 280 wouldn't do all that either. But why did they make it for game consoles that were easily out-classed by a 7800GT at the time and NOT aim for PC hardware that easily out-classes it? Hmm. So it's not even possible to water it down to console-levels on PC? Strange. They put so much work into squeezing it onto a console and it limits their potential customers to not include that work on the PC version as well.
That said, it meets the requirements for the original Crysis, and Crysis 2 has been well-known to run better than the original on the same hardware due to being aimed at DX8-class consoles, so I wasn't expecting requirements to be higher for anything but the new enhancements.
That said, it's the 1GB model and not 2GB, so I'm guessing the texture pack isn't going to work out. Even so, the 540M supports DX11 and the GTX 280 doesn't. If I can get playable ~30FPS at 720p with similar setting + DX11, I'd gladly take the notebook out for a spin instead.
There is 0 chance a 540M will do 30 fps at 720P with everything maxed out in DX11 in Crysis 2. That chip only has 96 SPs and far less memory bandwidth than the desktop version. I'd MUCH rather take a GTX280 with its 240 SPs in DX9.
This video highlights the differences between DX9 Extreme and DX11 Ultra very well (and there isn't much to it):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8z8knMzIBw&feature=related
So it makes sense to take a faster GPU for this game in DX9 over a much slower GPU in DX11.
Thanks. I was never really considering playing it maxed. I basically just wanted to know if I could enable DX11 effects at the detail levels and resolutions that were already playable and have it still be playable, considering it is DX11 hardware. I just assumed that those levels would be pretty comparable between the GTX280 and the GT 540M due to the console port nature.
I just assumed that those levels would be pretty comparable between the GTX280 and the GT 540M due to the console port nature.
There is also a 30-35% performance hit on modern cards to go from DX9 Extreme to DX11 Ultra in Crysis 2. The 540M is about 2.5x-3x slower than the GTX280 to begin with. You are forgetting that DX11 brings little to the table unless you enable the Ultra mode (then you get Tessellation, soft shadows and all the other bells and whistles). But the 540M won't be able to run in that mode anyway. So you won't have any of those advanced features turned on but the game will run 2-3x slower than on the 280. The general rule of thumb is that DX11 isn't worth it unless you are using a modern card. If you are gaming on anything less than an HD5770, then forget about DX11 in modern games. You are better off using DX9/10 codepath and cranking up the texture/shader/particle quality instead.
DX 11 increases preformance. So it is worth it.
and even if there was a game that was slightly faster in DX11, a low end card could not actually run any DX11 features without slowing to a crawl anyway. and again he might be overlooking the fact that a 540m or lower end card does not even meet the minimum requirements to run Crysis 2 or some other demanding games with or without DX11.DX11 cost me about a 30% FPS hit from what I got under DX9 in Crysis 2. So not sure if you are referring to DX11 broadly or to DX11 in C2 ? In Crysis 2 it definitely incurs a framerate hit.
Just because the 540M in the new Alienware M11x r3 isn't high-end doesn't mean that it doesn't meet the minimum requirements. I'm not sure where you're getting that from. In what ways does a 1GB 540M not meet the minimum requirements?and even if there was a game that was slightly faster in DX11, a low end card could not actually run any DX11 features without slowing to a crawl anyway. and again he might be overlooking the fact that a 540m or lower end card does not even meet the minimum requirements to run Crysis 2 or some other demanding games with or without DX11.
Just because the 540M in the new Alienware M11x r3 isn't high-end doesn't mean that it doesn't meet the minimum requirements. In what ways does a 1GB 540M not meet the minimum requirements? Crysis 2 requires an 512MB 8800GT or better. The GT335 in the previous Alienware M11x (r1/r2) could top that and this is a step beyond even that (admittedly a small step that wasn't really enough to justify the 2GB option they now offer). The 8800GT was considered the most appropriate card for mainstream players to play Crysis back in 2007 when they both launched so it doesn't surprise me one bit that they targetted it as the baseline for Crysis 2.
My point is that playing at 720p (native resolution) with a 1GB GT 540M and a Sandy Bridge Core i5 should be perfectly doable with the right settings, the same as anyone running a 9800GTX+/GTX250.
sorry but you are flat out wrong claiming that a gt 540m and especially a gt 335 would be faster than an 8800gt. they are slower in every respect possible. an 8800gt has more sp, tmus, rops and memory bandwidth. and a 9800gtx+/gts250 would be much faster than your gt 540m. the gt 540m is pretty close to an 8800gt though which I mentioned earlier by saying it was barely below requirements.Just because the 540M in the new Alienware M11x r3 isn't high-end doesn't mean that it doesn't meet the minimum requirements. I'm not sure where you're getting that from. In what ways does a 1GB 540M not meet the minimum requirements?
Crysis 2 requires an 512MB 8800GT or better. The GT335 in the previous Alienware M11x (r1/r2) could top that and this is a step beyond even that (admittedly a small step that wasn't really enough to justify the 2GB option they now offer). The 8800GT was considered the most appropriate card for mainstream players to play Crysis back in 2007 when they both launched so it doesn't surprise me that they targetted it as the baseline for Crysis 2.
My point is that playing at 720p (native resolution) with a 1GB GT 540M and a Sandy Bridge Core i5 should be perfectly doable with the right settings, the same as anyone running a 9800GTX+/GTX250.
There's 5 different processors and 3 different mobo's listed in, what I assume is, the system specs part of the graph. Do they test all cards in multiple systems and avg. the results? Or, do they test the cards on different systems and then just combine the results on one graph?
Can we even compare the results on the graph with each other, never mind other sites?
The less-powerful graphics card to GeForce GTS 450 and Radeon HD 4870 tested processors Core 2 Quad Q9550, and Phenom II X 4 940 BE, depending on the resursoëmkosti games, and more productive on the basis of more powerful solutions. Video version by dispersed sponsors were assimilated to normal counterparts by lowering their clock frequencies.