Crysis 2 setup

[zhadlp]

---

@TS unsa size imong monitor gamit, ug unsay resolution?

if you play at 1080p you can use max (hardcore settings) with no AA, maybe even with AA, check this tomshardware review:
Crysis 2 Performance Previewed And Analyzed : On The Cusp Of Crysis 2

take note lang jud nga your cpu is holding your system back, so I'm not saying you can't play it, it won't run as smooth as it would with a better cpu...

you can also try to overclock your cpu a bit for added performance....

[Ronjeremy]

@zhadlp 23 inch monitor ako gamit.

[EarlZ]

pareha raba ka graphic intensive ang crysis warhead sa crysis 2? I mean, if imong rig is maka "gamer set up sa warhead maka gamer paba kaha sa crysis 2? naa moy idea?curios lang..

Crysis2 runs better than Warhead, significantly better IMHO.

@TS unsa size imong monitor gamit, ug unsay resolution?

if you play at 1080p you can use max (hardcore settings) with no AA, maybe even with AA, check this tomshardware review:
Crysis 2 Performance Previewed And Analyzed : On The Cusp Of Crysis 2

take note lang jud nga your cpu is holding your system back, so I'm not saying you can't play it, it won't run as smooth as it would with a better cpu...

you can also try to overclock your cpu a bit for added performance....

Doesnt really matter what resolution he plays in since he is CPU limited, if he gets 60fps in 1024x768 then he will get 60fps in 1920x1080. Lowering the resolution only helps IF the issue is GPU limitation.

[Ronjeremy]

sirs ask unta ko, ma max naba nako settings using intel i3-540 (3.06G). I guess mao nalang na ako paliton. or mas better q8400?

[zhadlp]

@Earlz

it actually matters what resolution he plays at on most occassions, I've tested it personally.
there's less chance of running into a a cpu bottleneck if you use high resolutions
you can test it yourself, grab a cheap c2d setup, test it with a 5770 / gtx260 card. grab 3dmark scores at 1024, 1600, and 1900 resolutions. then swap with a higher card, like a gtx480 or 5870, then get the scores again at those resolutions, you'll notice that at 1024 resolution, the gain will be very small, but at higher resolutions, there will be a huge performance gap...

[WHINGZ_WORLD]

in my case i have quadcore boxtype when i play crysis 1 kong nagstart na ang game ex, sa savanna dugay sadko maka choose og team unya medyo kamang pud gamay kong mokuha na gani kog rifle ambut ngano nga pagkuha nako maunhan paman jud kog kuha knowing to think nga hapit taga adlaw na gani ko magduwa og crysis ako nalang gi huna2 nga basig i7 ila processor....)

[EarlZ]

@Earlz

it actually matters what resolution he plays at on most occassions, I've tested it personally.

It matters if you are GPU limited, since we are at the topic of CPU limitation then increasing or decreasing resolution will have minimal impact on the performance IF the game is CPU limited.

there's less chance of running into a a cpu bottleneck if you use high resolutions

Not really, if you are cpu limited at 800x600 you get 100fps, at 1920x1080 you get 95fps. Thats a clear sign of CPU limitation since increasing the resolution puts more work on the GPU and not the CPU and you only see a 5% performance drop.

you can test it yourself, grab a cheap c2d setup, test it with a 5770 / gtx260 card. grab 3dmark scores at 1024, 1600, and 1900 resolutions. then swap with a higher card, like a gtx480 or 5870, then get the scores again at those resolutions, you'll notice that at 1024 resolution, the gain will be very small, but at higher resolutions, there will be a huge performance gap...

At low resolutions the gap from the GTX260 vs the GTX480 will be very small IF the 3dmark version is CPU limited, say 3dmar06 the reason being he is CPU limited, clock that c2d 2Ghz higher than stock speed and the difference will favor the 480 because of the faster CPU.

Your example shows a GPU limitation not a CPU since at higher resolution the gap widens, take note CPU limitation will have minimal impact on ANYTHING that is increased for the GPU to work with.

[zhadlp]

It matters if you are GPU limited, since we are at the topic of CPU limitation then increasing or decreasing resolution will have minimal impact on the performance IF the game is CPU limited.

like I said, my point is on CPU bottleneck, he won't really feel any bottleneck because its the GPU doing most of the work... but since there is MINIMAL IMPACT in performance, then it doesn't hurt to use higher resolutions...

basically, he won't really feel the bottleneck in higher resolutions because he is maxing out his graphics card's performance...

Doesnt really matter what resolution he plays in since he is CPU limited, if he gets 60fps in 1024x768 then he will get 60fps in 1920x1080. Lowering the resolution only helps IF the issue is GPU limitation.

you quoted why I ask him the monitor/resolution he's using thinking that I would ask him to play at a lower resolution to improve performance? FYI, the reason I asked is because I was curious on why he had a gtx560 ti paired with a c2d...

and if he had answered that he had a smaller LCD, I would have recommended a bigger monitor to negate the CPU bottleneck...

[alwaysdrunk]

ahem...ahem.. murag battle of the brains na ni dah.. padaplin sa ta longneck raman ako nabaw-an wa may bottleneck hikhik jowk

[EarlZ]

and if he had answered that he had a smaller LCD, I would have recommended a bigger monitor to negate the CPU bottleneck...

You dont negate CPU bottleneck by simply bumping up the visual settings or resolution, you can only negate it by upgrading the CPU or disabling CPU intensive stuff like CPU driven PhysX if its applicable to the game.

At 800x600 you get 100fps, so you want to negate that CPU bottleneck by going 1920x1080 and you get 95fps, thats not negating the effects, thats just putting more work load into the GPU.

If you intend to negate the CPU bottleneck that means you will be getting more than 95fps at 1080p, meaning you need a faster CPU.

Negating GPU bottleneck is easier because you just need to run at a lower resolution or visual level.

Your understanding of how CPU and GPU bottleneck is correct but you have it the other way around.

EDIT:

Just to make it easier for everyone to understand;

When the CPU is the bottleneck, bumping up the visual quality of the game will have minimal impact on performance ~5% loss in FPS should still be acceptable, while lowering the resolution to really low values like 1280x720 ( from 1080 ) would yield roughly the same performance level.

If you say that bumping up the resolution will negate the CPU bottleneck then I expect to get more fps at 1080p vs 600p which is not the case, hence nothing is negated.

For GPU bottleneck, lowering the resolution or visual quality will yield a significant performance boost, increasing the visual quality would in turn impact the performance a lot, say from 100fps down to 30fps.

To "negate" CPU bottlenecks, the CPU has to be changed no increasing or decreasing ( aside from software level PhysX ) in game settings can change this or it can be achieved by overclocking to something like 55-66% more of the base clock speed.
To "negate" GPU bottlenecks, one has to simply lower the resolution/visual settings or get a better GPU.

EDIT2:

In my case, im getting only 80% GPU usage but I cannot maintain 60fps because my Q6600 @ 3.4Ghz is a severe bottleneck to my card.

lowering my resolution gives me roughly the same relative performance on demanding scenes.

CPU usage stays at a consistent 85-90% though.