Crysis 3 Tested, Benchmarked

Really lol , I guess you have not seen crysis1 and 2, this one blows compared to the 2 and that blows compared to 1... whats the point even of good grafix if 90% plays in the dark... worst crysis yet

I've got a 920 at 4ghz and a gtx 480 o/c'd and it bends this game over and spanks it silly. It seems that if you have a high enough bandwidth graphics card a really good cpu clock speed is more important.

what settings?

I bet so.

"Assuming you clear that hurdle, you'll likely want dual GTX 680s or HD 7970 GHz Editions to play on very high at 1920x1200 or more."

But...but...but people told me multi-GPU setups @ 19x10 is stupid! You HAVE to have a resolution of 25x14 or higher!!! :|

+1
Their have been quite a few games @ 19x10 that have brought single GPU flagships to their knees over the years that could benefit from another card. If one card could always do the job at all single monitor resolutions, we wouldn't have had multi-gpu technology years before multi-monitor gaming setups came out.

^^ did you just ask a question and answer it yourself?

It would help if you listed what CPU you have.

And you need to understand these tests are just "averages" and is in controlled sections in which could perform higher or lower compared to what you will experience.

Um, sure. Is that at 1080p or 1920x1200 with all settings Very High and at TXAA 4X? You'd be lucky to get 25fps.

no I mean in fb2 games even at 4xmsaa, jaggies disappear as whole and looks pristine...but in cry3,even with 8xmsaa annoying jaggies still remains while cutting fps more than half...the game graphics is bit buggy and the 1st level is the most bugged one.

Is TXAA any good? Or is it garbage like FXAA which makes things blurry in my opinion

AMD cards do perform slightly better. As shown in this more detailed benchmark here
http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/crysis-3-test-gpu/graficheskaya-chast.html

Why are the results so different?

http://gamegpu.ru/action-/-fps-/-tps/crysis-3-test-gpu/all-pages.html

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Crysis-3-PC-235317/Tests/Crysis-3-Benchmark-Test-Grafikkarten-1056218/

I actually enjoyed it. Perhaps it's because I like the Predator Bow and doing nothing but stealth kills. Although I would still say Far Cry 3 was still more fun. Imagine if Crysis 3 was an actual open world game like Far Cry 3 but with the Nano Suit and Predator Bow.

Well TXAA isn't a post-processing effect like FXAA is. It's actual Anti-Aliasing. Although the performance hit is similar to 4xMSAA I think.

As for FXAA, the only games I've noticed that it blurs everything is Skyrim and BF3. Otherwise the Nvidia Control Panel version is pretty subtle.

I just guess my expectations was so hard after the hype of the game returning to the freedom like the first game. x)

I agree the game would benefits more if it was more open world like Far Cry 3

"To deliver hyper-realistic experiences, no other PC game demands more from the graphics processor than 'Crysis 3,'" said Cevat Yerli,
CEO and president, Crytek. "By choosing AMD Radeon graphics, gamers
experience 'Crysis 3' in stunning visual clarity, even when settings are
cranked to the max .The launch of 'Crysis 3' is just the beginning of
an exciting relationship with AMD and its Gaming Evolved program, which
will help fuel development of future CryEngine™ titles. Together, AMD
and Crytek will help redefine the PC gaming industry."

when settings are cranked to max amd cards are faster than nvi for giving best image quality with less perf hit as nvi card cant cope with high msaa due to lower bus bit and memory than amd cards....here's benchmark as amd cards are faster even when setting are cranked to max with 4xmsaa/8xmsaa-

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Crysi...e/2046899/#?a_id=1056491&g_id=-1&i_id=2046902

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Crysi...e/2046899/#?a_id=1056491&g_id=-1&i_id=2046900

Just from the limited cpu testing done here it appears apparent that this game is also very hard on the cpu and would also like to see the results of your suggestions.

I'm currently running 2x sli'ed gtx460's 2gb models @920Mhz which together give performance somewhere between a stock 670 and 680......but I'm hoping my 2700k @5.5Ghz will help to push performance a little higher than has been demonstrated in this review as cpu limitation does appear to be a considerable factor.

I have 6850 Direct Cu edition and I'm playing on 40+ fps without aa all setting except post precessing and shadows on max those two are at medium...was expecting much better use of dx11 with this game original crysis blew me away this was a bit meh honestly...

Playing at 1920x1080

That issue is caused by VSync. Crysis 3 w/ VSync drops frames to the lowest 0 number. Meaning if you're running at 46FPS it'll drop you to 40FPS, if you're at 39FPS it'll drop you to 30FPS. This is why it seems like a CPU limitation because your GPU isn't pumping out as many frames as it can. Disable VSync and your GPU shoots to 100% the whole way through.

This is true, people need to target their settings to have a solid 60fps, or target to have 30fps. The in between stuff is too jittery.

Also some people should note that MP isn't as graphically taxing as SP. With everything maxed on Very High and FXAA, I get 55-60fps pretty easy. But on the same settings in SP, it's more like 40-55.

Oh and I have an i7-2600k 4.4Ghz and GTX 680 running 1211/3420