Welcome, Unregistered.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Closed Thread
Old 04-May-2009, 18:42   #51
almighty
Naughty Boy!
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,469
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by suryad View Post
I am gonna do that tonight lets see if I notice a difference.


280GTX :

http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=775

Here is the 295GTX version of the article :

http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=807&p=0
almighty is offline  
Old 01-Jun-2009, 12:44   #52
RenegadeRocks
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,342
Default

http://www.gamezine.co.uk/news/game-...r-$1300130.htm

Crysis 2 announced for PC and consoles ! I was thinking of how bigger Crysis world will become, it seems it will become smaller as it has to run on consoles too now !
__________________
We are the Renegades, we are the people with our own philosophy,
We change the course of history, everyday, people like you and me !
My first game :Christmas Magic + on App Store now :) !
The awesome trailer on youtube !
Renegade's Muse !
RenegadeRocks is offline  
Old 01-Jun-2009, 12:48   #53
suryad
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,454
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by almighty View Post
Went on a 2 week vacation so did not have time to play too much with the machine. One thing I did notice though that if I tried to bump the cpu multiplier from the current 8.5 to 9.5, the motherboard did not complain, but didnt seem like it applied that setting either...I am thinking maybe I should bump the FSB up? Right now mine is at 400 mhz fsb up from 333...I think on that nforce motherboard I am going to be severely limited and I wont see myself going up for than 420 mhz....will find out sooner or later....


On another note I am quite excited about the prospect of the new Crysis game
suryad is offline  
Old 01-Jun-2009, 13:04   #54
Silent_Buddha
Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 10,469
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RenegadeRocks View Post
http://www.gamezine.co.uk/news/game-...r-$1300130.htm

Crysis 2 announced for PC and consoles ! I was thinking of how bigger Crysis world will become, it seems it will become smaller as it has to run on consoles too now !
I'm not sure why a console version would necessarily be smaller? If they use intelligent streaming it should still be able to maintain massive levels. Especially if the console version is limited to medium settings for things such as textures, vegetation and geometry while PC will still able to go up to very high settings.

After all Crysis was still able to run mostly fine at 720p on the HD 2900 XT even though it wasn't exactly the speediest card out there.

Regards,
SB
Silent_Buddha is offline  
Old 01-Jun-2009, 13:19   #55
pjbliverpool
B3D Scallywag
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Guess...
Posts: 5,895
Send a message via MSN to pjbliverpool
Default

You can always crank up the detail on the PC version but there are likely some more fundamental sacrafices that they will have to make to the game which will hobble the PC release. Crytek may still offer a much higher fidelity PC version of the game but until I hear otherwise i'm expecting this to be just another console ported fps now.
__________________
PowerVR PCX1 -> Voodoo Banshee -> GeForce2 MX200 -> GeForce2 Ti -> GeForce4 Ti 4200 -> 9800Pro -> 8800GTS -> Radeon HD 4890 -> GeForce GTX 670 DCUII TOP

8086 8Mhz -> Pentium 90 -> K6-2 233Mhz -> Athlon 'Thunderbird' 1Ghz -> AthlonXP 2400+ 2Ghz -> Core2 Duo E6600 2.4 Ghz -> Core i5 2500K 3.3Ghz
pjbliverpool is offline  
Old 01-Jun-2009, 13:26   #56
Silent_Buddha
Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 10,469
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pjbliverpool View Post
You can always crank up the detail on the PC version but there are likely some more fundamental sacrafices that they will have to make to the game which will hobble the PC release. Crytek may still offer a much higher fidelity PC version of the game but until I hear otherwise i'm expecting this to be just another console ported fps now.
Yes, but I'm still not sure why? Why would it be limited? Is GTA IV zones limited in size? Sacred 2 for example intelligently streams in the world as you move from place to place. And it contains most of an entire world. Oblivion? Fallout 3?

I don't see anything about current generation consoles that would limit the scope of a game. The graphics available? Yeah. Geometry complexity? Sure. The size and scope of levels if the game is designed with that in mind? Absolutely not.

Add to that the Crysis levels look bigger than they actually are IMO. Meh, guess we'll just have to wait and see.

Regards,
SB
Silent_Buddha is offline  
Old 01-Jun-2009, 13:27   #57
Neb
Iron "BEAST" Man
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NGC2264
Posts: 8,391
Default

While the CE3 showed the PS3 and 360 could have large scens/maps as Crysis first level BUT at the massive cost of being barebone land. Thus they of course have less to render and store in memory. Allowing them to have large level but keep the framerate decent and memory limits.

On PC of course they would not have this limiation and it would be a win-win situation for all. Even if they lower LODs etc for PC tweakers just can make a config in some hours and release it to make it pack some more punch.

Also CE3 PC version screenshots at max would be something to behold as the previous CE3 "console" screenshots where mostly from tweaked/modded PC CE2.
__________________
"If you told me that if I ate a kilo of shit I would put on a pound of muscles, I would do it." -Arnold Schwarzenegger
Neb is offline  
Old 01-Jun-2009, 13:33   #58
pjbliverpool
B3D Scallywag
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Guess...
Posts: 5,895
Send a message via MSN to pjbliverpool
Default

Yeah its all about how densly the data is packed in and how fast you travel through it rather than the overall size of the game. Geometry limitations would seem to the biggest danger to PC ports. Developers won't create seperate assets for PC and consoles so PC versions are limited by the consoles geometry capabilities.

I wouldn't be at all suprised to see the PC version of Crysis 2 sporting simpler geometry than Crysis.
__________________
PowerVR PCX1 -> Voodoo Banshee -> GeForce2 MX200 -> GeForce2 Ti -> GeForce4 Ti 4200 -> 9800Pro -> 8800GTS -> Radeon HD 4890 -> GeForce GTX 670 DCUII TOP

8086 8Mhz -> Pentium 90 -> K6-2 233Mhz -> Athlon 'Thunderbird' 1Ghz -> AthlonXP 2400+ 2Ghz -> Core2 Duo E6600 2.4 Ghz -> Core i5 2500K 3.3Ghz
pjbliverpool is offline  
Old 01-Jun-2009, 13:39   #59
Neb
Iron "BEAST" Man
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NGC2264
Posts: 8,391
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pjbliverpool View Post
Yeah its all about how densly the data is packed in and how fast you travel through it rather than the overall size of the game. Geometry limitations would seem to the biggest danger to PC ports. Developers won't create seperate assets for PC and consoles so PC versions are limited by the consoles geometry capabilities.

I wouldn't be at all suprised to see the PC version of Crysis 2 sporting simpler geometry than Crysis.
That would be a serious problem but hopefully it wont go that way. I rahter they lower the console object amount and landscape geometry before gimping the assets.
__________________
"If you told me that if I ate a kilo of shit I would put on a pound of muscles, I would do it." -Arnold Schwarzenegger
Neb is offline  
Old 01-Jun-2009, 23:47   #60
almighty
Naughty Boy!
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,469
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by suryad View Post
Went on a 2 week vacation so did not have time to play too much with the machine. One thing I did notice though that if I tried to bump the cpu multiplier from the current 8.5 to 9.5, the motherboard did not complain, but didnt seem like it applied that setting either...I am thinking maybe I should bump the FSB up? Right now mine is at 400 mhz fsb up from 333...I think on that nforce motherboard I am going to be severely limited and I wont see myself going up for than 420 mhz....will find out sooner or later....


On another note I am quite excited about the prospect of the new Crysis game
Remember that you need to raise the cpu Vcore when you raise the mulitplier, also overclocking by raising the multiplier is a better option then FSB overclocking as it places less strain on the MCP and SPP
almighty is offline  
Old 02-Jun-2009, 01:11   #61
Neb
Iron "BEAST" Man
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NGC2264
Posts: 8,391
Default

My mobo supports upto 400MHz being inside specs (x48 chipset). So I started by going default multiplier and upp bus from 333MHz to 400MHz with a Vcore to 1.25v and the nwork my way down toasting it witn Intel Burn Test. Rock solid at 1.23750v. 3.6GHz and I'll bet it will do more but I dont really want to push my mobo and it runs solid at default voltages even with 1000MHz DDR2.
__________________
"If you told me that if I ate a kilo of shit I would put on a pound of muscles, I would do it." -Arnold Schwarzenegger
Neb is offline  
Old 02-Jun-2009, 10:18   #62
Neb
Iron "BEAST" Man
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NGC2264
Posts: 8,391
Default

Interview with Cevat. Seems all good, PC still being pushed forward and the Warhead success talk was very interesting. Also only PC games in the future aint ruled out.

http://au.pc.ign.com/articles/989/989158p1.html

Quote:
Yerli explained that the CryEngine 3 was a significant breakthrough for the company. He said that it's capable of scaling performance considerably, so he maintains that the PC version of Crysis 2 will look far better than the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 versions.
Quote:
"We don't need to dumb down the game; the technology provides all the horsepower we need to make a kick-ass 360 game, a kick-ass PS3 game, and push the PC gaming forward still,"
Quote:
"Warhead was a financial success, Warhead was a critical success, Warhead won numerous awards," Yerli said. DeMartini said that it got great reviews and "we were very happy with it." Yerli wouldn't rule out future PC-only games, but Crysis "is our flagship franchise" and they want it to get it to as many gamers as possible.
__________________
"If you told me that if I ate a kilo of shit I would put on a pound of muscles, I would do it." -Arnold Schwarzenegger
Neb is offline  
Old 02-Jun-2009, 12:05   #63
almighty
Naughty Boy!
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,469
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebula View Post
My mobo supports upto 400MHz being inside specs (x48 chipset). So I started by going default multiplier and upp bus from 333MHz to 400MHz with a Vcore to 1.25v and the nwork my way down toasting it witn Intel Burn Test. Rock solid at 1.23750v. 3.6GHz and I'll bet it will do more but I dont really want to push my mobo and it runs solid at default voltages even with 1000MHz DDR2.
I took my Core 2 Duo E6420 from its stock 2.1Ghz upto 4Ghz ( 500FSB ftw ) and its the older 65nm 'conroe' core aswel

Dont meen to brag but i happen to think im a awesome overclocker

Also got a 90nm AMD 5600+ X2 all the way to 3.5Ghz

My max temps with Intel Burn Test on my E6420 @ 4ghz are 47c, i love water cooling

And all that on a susposedly 'crappy' Nvidia 780i chipset LOL!!!
almighty is offline  
Old 02-Jun-2009, 12:24   #64
green.pixel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,230
Default

Wow, your sample must be one of the best in the world.

Vcore 1.6V ?
green.pixel is offline  
Old 02-Jun-2009, 12:47   #65
almighty
Naughty Boy!
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,469
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by m.fox View Post
Wow, your sample must be one of the best in the world.

Vcore 1.6V ?
Close, My E6420 is running at 1.58Vcore and drops to 1.51v under load and my 5600+ X2 took 1.44Vore and that droped to 1.41v underload.

And yes, there is not many E6420s like mine as most struggle tun run at 3.6Ghz stable, let alone 4ghz

E6420 @ 4ghz :

5600+ X2 @ 3.5Ghz :

A quick comparison, my E6420 at stock 2.1Ghz managed to do SuperPI in the same time as the 5600+ did when running Aat 3.5Ghz

Last edited by almighty; 02-Jun-2009 at 12:55.
almighty is offline  
Old 02-Jun-2009, 13:21   #66
Neb
Iron "BEAST" Man
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NGC2264
Posts: 8,391
Default

Most impressive, most impressive!

ANd you still got some more perfomance to get by using 500MHz DDR2.
__________________
"If you told me that if I ate a kilo of shit I would put on a pound of muscles, I would do it." -Arnold Schwarzenegger
Neb is offline  
Old 02-Jun-2009, 13:28   #67
almighty
Naughty Boy!
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,469
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebula View Post
Most impressive, most impressive!

ANd you still got some more perfomance to get by using 500MHz DDR2.
The memory for my E6420 is low latency, i left it at its stock speed but relaxed the timings during overclocking.

Because its a Nvidia chpset i can unlink my RAM and overclock my FSB without it overclocking my memory at all and without the memory holding back my FSB

My memory is 800Mhz @ 4-4-4-12-2T with 1.8v

I eventually got it to 950Mhz with the same timings but with 2.2v ( memory is rated for 2.4v )

Nebby what motherboard and CPU you got?

Last edited by almighty; 02-Jun-2009 at 19:26.
almighty is offline  
Old 02-Jun-2009, 14:08   #68
Neb
Iron "BEAST" Man
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NGC2264
Posts: 8,391
Default

Yeah missed that, nice timmings!

I got the following,

Gigabyte X48 DQ6 mobo 400MHz FSB
E8400 CPU @3.6GHz
4x2GB Mushkin 1000MHz RAM 5-5-5-15 2T 1000MHz
__________________
"If you told me that if I ate a kilo of shit I would put on a pound of muscles, I would do it." -Arnold Schwarzenegger
Neb is offline  
Old 02-Jun-2009, 14:24   #69
almighty
Naughty Boy!
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,469
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebula View Post
Yeah missed that, nice timmings!

I got the following,

Gigabyte X48 DQ6 mobo 400MHz FSB
E8400 CPU @3.6GHz
4x2GB Mushkin 1000MHz RAM 5-5-5-15 2T 1000MHz
That E8400 and that chipset should easily hit 4Ghz, get overlcocking
almighty is offline  
Old 02-Jun-2009, 18:10   #70
suryad
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,454
Default

Wow that is an awesome oclock indeed! I have not changed any voltage settings at all. My idea of oclock so far has been to take the 333 up to 400 and drop the multiplier to 8.5 from the stock 9 and then to have the memory run 1:1 with the fsb. That resulted in a 400 x 8.5 = 3.4 ghz cpu speed.

I wonder if I will get any more of a boost if I changed the 1:1 ratio to something else...basically to boost the memory speed. My memory timings are 4-4-4-12 2T
suryad is offline  
Old 02-Jun-2009, 18:40   #71
almighty
Naughty Boy!
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,469
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by suryad View Post
Wow that is an awesome oclock indeed! I have not changed any voltage settings at all. My idea of oclock so far has been to take the 333 up to 400 and drop the multiplier to 8.5 from the stock 9 and then to have the memory run 1:1 with the fsb. That resulted in a 400 x 8.5 = 3.4 ghz cpu speed.

I wonder if I will get any more of a boost if I changed the 1:1 ratio to something else...basically to boost the memory speed. My memory timings are 4-4-4-12 2T

Just relax the memory timings and speed while you overclock and try to get more form your CPU.

4ghz should be quite easy as it only requires a 450FSB with a x9 multi but remember to watch your temps and your Vcore, 45nm Intel chips have a max 'safe' Vcore of around 1.36volts, you can run 1.4v if you have high end air cooler or a water cooling system.

At 4Ghz your 280 GTX's would show a massive improment, but it wont affect your max framerates, the biggest difference it wil give you is in the most important area...it will higher your MIN framerate

After your CPU has tested stable THEN start to tune the memory

What make and model is you motherboard?

Most people who run SLI fail to understand they need the CPU power to back up the graphics cards it will be driving.

EDIT : PC2 8500 1066Mhz memory is faster then the same memory running at 800Mhz with tighter timings.

Set your memory to 1066 'unlinked' with timings of 5-5-5-15-2T at 2.1-2.2v and you should see a fair amount of extra memory bandwidth
almighty is offline  
Old 02-Jun-2009, 18:43   #72
green.pixel
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,230
Default

The mods could move this HW discussion into another thread.
green.pixel is offline  
Old 02-Jun-2009, 18:55   #73
Skinner
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Zwijndrecht/Rotterdam, Netherlands and Phobos
Posts: 865
Default

Well, I stil have high hope for Crysis 2 being an improvement over the first one.
These guys are true tech enthusiasts, if they just have to make their engine very, very flexible....
__________________
Schieten op de beesten.
Skinner is offline  
Old 02-Jun-2009, 19:50   #74
suryad
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,454
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by almighty View Post
Just relax the memory timings and speed while you overclock and try to get more form your CPU.

4ghz should be quite easy as it only requires a 450FSB with a x9 multi but remember to watch your temps and your Vcore, 45nm Intel chips have a max 'safe' Vcore of around 1.36volts, you can run 1.4v if you have high end air cooler or a water cooling system.

At 4Ghz your 280 GTX's would show a massive improment, but it wont affect your max framerates, the biggest difference it wil give you is in the most important area...it will higher your MIN framerate

After your CPU has tested stable THEN start to tune the memory

What make and model is you motherboard?

Most people who run SLI fail to understand they need the CPU power to back up the graphics cards it will be driving.

EDIT : PC2 8500 1066Mhz memory is faster then the same memory running at 800Mhz with tighter timings.

Set your memory to 1066 'unlinked' with timings of 5-5-5-15-2T at 2.1-2.2v and you should see a fair amount of extra memory bandwidth

Thanks I am gonna try what you suggested out. As you can tell I am an oclocking noob. My motherboard is an evga nforce 780...none of the ftw or the other stuff. Its an ok oclocked from what I have read. I am sure I wont be getting 450 FSB out of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by m.fox View Post
The mods could move this HW discussion into another thread.
Yeah they could so I wont bring up this hardware related stuff in this thread anymore. Apologies in advance for derailing it.

@Skinner
Agreed though I still dont see how they could do it. I mean its not simply a matter of putting high res textures in the PC version and not so in the console versions after all. Still I am sure there will be one or two articles coming out explaining the console vs pc differences of the engine once the game is out. I am def interested in seeing how they can pull it off.

Last edited by suryad; 02-Jun-2009 at 21:44.
suryad is offline  
Old 06-Jun-2009, 04:27   #75
swaaye
Entirely Suboptimal
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: WI, USA
Posts: 7,316
Default

They were never going to ignore the console market again. Why would any company? It would be stupid to do so today.

It doesn't necessarily mean anything about the gameplay. It could affect the graphics though considering how far behind the consoles are at this point. It's not exactly a trivial difference anymore.

It's not really called Crysis 3 is it? Makes no sense IMO.
swaaye is offline  

Closed Thread

Tags
nebula's dream, pc rulez

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:00.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.