Electronic Arts reveals PC system requirements for Crysis 3

Crysis 3 was officially announced way back in April following a premature leak on EA's Origin the week before. We already know a great deal about the title and the storyline at this point and Crytek even offered up some...

Read more

Locked and loaded for high performance. Bring it on!

Much better than I was expecting.

I'll wait and see when it comes out. I was disappointed in crysis 2, it felt like a console port. I wish they would make it so like to run the game in absolute max settings you need a Graphics card that has not even come out yet. Kind of like they did in crysis 1.

Looking forward to this one! Don't think I will be able to completely and utterly max it but I should be damn close....well maybe, maybe not! My old junker scores a P9419 3DMark11 (i7 930 + 670) and runs Crysis 2 very well at my resolution (1600p) lets hope it doesn't melt playing this.

8 Gb memory for high performance.

Crazy high.. wonder what thats all about?

I am below the lowest settings and I ran the alpha at medium at 45 fps...

I'll have to take a wait and see attitude toward this one.

I've been itching for a proper PC game for a good long while now. I hope this one hits the mark.

So wait that's the "High performance system requirements" not recommended? Atleast we know its not cpu depended with the AMD Bulldozer FX4150 or a i72700K

No DirectX 10?!?!?! But it runs on a Athlon 64 X2 5200+.... That makes no sense.

What that tells me is the game will use hyper-threading but not 6 or 8 cores. I could be wrong but thats the way I interpret the High Performance values.

Good Thing the System Requirements in not that high

I think I'll be able to play this game with my 3 year old MSI GT 160M-Equipped GT628 Gaming Laptop
D

This is mostly rubbish.

You can run this with a 560 Ti or later easily at 40+ fps.

They are trying to convince hardcore Crysis 1 fans (basically the entire PC community) that they're going to back to their roots. They're not.

Truth is, the CryEngine has been optimized for consoles, this in turn has caused Crytek to make certain graphical compromises. They offset these drawbacks by adding unnecessary eye candy, such as the blinding (but beautiful) sun rays, extra blur, etc. Even textures look worse. I believe someone from TechSpot wrote a lengthy, technical forum post explaining how Crysis 2 in reality looks worse than its predecessor.

This game is no different.

Maybe they optimized it with intentions of porting it to next gen consoles? (Crosses fingers.)

For everyone saying tht CE3 is optimized for consoles, I want to say that it is true but it doesnt mean that CE3 is worse than CE2.
I think current consoles are capping CE3 true power.
I played C3 MP alpha and I have to say that it looks better than C2 and even the first one atleast detail wise.
now looking better doesnt mean 100% as being technically better. for ex in real life when you see a beach for first time and a desert for first time then most of the people will praise the beach but every effect is same because it is the DAMN REAL LIFE.
that makes crysis look better to our eyes but this doesnt mean that it is technically better.
after seeing the grass in fields C3 trailer I am just amazed with CE3 thats why I am posting in favour of CE3 and C3

"I believe someone from TechSpot wrote a lengthy, technical forum post explaining how Crysis 2 in reality looks worse than its predecessor."
Do you think you could find and link it?

Meh, Original Crysis is one of my top 10 games I've played, Crysis 2 is at near the top of one of the worst games I've played, I've played the Alpha version of Crysis 3, so far thoroughly disappointed but it could all change I guess, I'll wait for the reviews this time though.

Even though my system's in between recommended specs, I still need a little experiment to play it in smooth framerate (preferably 60fps). Can't wait to test it out.

Textures probably