Crysis 2 - DX9 vs DX11 - 6990 vs GTX590
Introduction and What's New
Published: 17th July 2011 | Source: Zotac | Price: |
Introduction
When Crysis 2 first appeared we were all a bit disappointed in the graphical splendour on offer. Crytek had, with the original Crysis, given us a taste of the future and brought plentiful eye-candy.
Crysis 2 though was held back significantly on PCs by its console roots. As the current raft of gaming consoles are now ageing somewhat the original engine only took advantage of the DirectX 9 featureset. Now though we have the v1.9 patch for Crysis 2 which enables DirectX 11 features and so it finally looks like a cutting edge PC Game.
So what's new?
- Tessellation + Displacement Mapping
- High Quality HDR Motion Blur
- Realistic Shadows with Variable Penumbra
- Sprite Based Bokeh Depth of Field
- Parallax Occlusion Mapping
- Particles Motion Blur, Shadows and Art Updates
- Water Rendering improvements and using Tessellation + Displacement Mapping
As you can see there is a raft of improvements all designed to make the whole thing far more realistic with Tessellation enabling far greater detail and the adjustments to shadows and depth of field helping to put you in the game.
Obviously a High-Res texture pack and DirectX 11 features really up the ante as far as recommended specs go. Crytek now recommend a 1.5GB DX11 GPU, Quad Core CPU, 8GB of RAM and SSD. Quite a step up from the standard specifications but this is a huge step up in quality.
Let's grab a look at some screens. Starting with DirectX 9...
Most Recent Comments
Ok quick question. Would an Alienware M18x with the 2630QM and 2 GTX580m's be able to handle DX11 Max Settings?Quote
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DiggyDiggyHole
Ok quick question. Would an Alienware M18x with the 2630QM and 2 GTX580m's be able to handle DX11 Max Settings? |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DiggyDiggyHole
Ok quick question. Would an Alienware M18x with the 2630QM and 2 GTX580m's be able to handle DX11 Max Settings? |
But that is with AA off, but everything else maxed out. 25 FPS minimum is what I would consider playable, although personally I would prefer it never to drop below 30.
Also Tom, the high textures haven't fixed everything yet. Metal work still needs some work for example.Quote
well worth the wait... a few nvidia fanboys will be bragging about the FPSs for a long time 
Quote
QuoteAll that fuss,and it does not look significantly better!What a waste.Quote
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zeals
Well a 580m is around the performance of a GTX460, so using SLI GTX460 you'll get a minimum of 25 and average of 40.3 according to Tom's Hardware But that is with AA off, but everything else maxed out. 25 FPS minimum is what I would consider playable, although personally I would prefer it never to drop below 30. Also Tom, the high textures haven't fixed everything yet. Metal work still needs some work for example. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by nepas
All that fuss,and it does not look significantly better!What a waste. |
The environment interactions (water especially) looks a lot better, I think its worth it tbhQuote
Actually I went from 2 gtx 460 in sli (2gb versions overclocked at 800mhz) to pair of gtx 580 asus directcu II but tested 1 of my gtx 580 vs pair 460 and found after the direct x 11 ultra and high textures the gtx 580 comes out on top due to shaders being used from what can work out. Oh the gtx 580 is clocked at 900 mhz @ 1.5v.Quote
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by nepas
All that fuss,and it does not look significantly better!What a waste. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dugdiamond
well worth the wait... a few nvidia fanboys will be bragging about the FPSs for a long time |
Great Vid Tom loved it but I do have a question thats been naggin at me the whole build. Why on earth did ya put the 6990 in instead of the 590 and Ghetto in the 6990????
Oh wait I know
so the red team cant call foul on it. Muhahahahahahahahahahahaha by saying well the 6990 was ghetto'd in and thats where it lost performance
hahahaha Totally loved each vid and cant wait for more
QuoteQuote:
|
Originally Posted by nepas
All that fuss,and it does not look significantly better!What a waste. |
Like Tom says I must be getting old,my eyes must be going 
Quote
QuoteQuote:
|
Originally Posted by S_I_N
AYE we will but if'n ya noticed I've been waving the Green Flag for sometime even when the enemy (err I mean red team) was ever so slightly out performing at launch of the 590. I knew it was crapola drivers Now we have it sorted out and beatin the pants off again Great Vid Tom loved it but I do have a question thats been naggin at me the whole build. Why on earth did ya put the 6990 in instead of the 590 and Ghetto in the 6990???? |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by nepas
Like Tom says I must be getting old,my eyes must be going |
im not say'in i dont trust yours numbers,,,but somthin doesnt seem right with those 6990 #'s...and before you jump the gun and assume my amd fanboyship i own both a 6970cf setup and a 460sli setup(and actually prefer the 460s)....seems like those numbers may go waaaaayyyyy up with 11.7 drivers.....will we get an update if and when that happens???Quote
Those numbers are fine, I think the developers use nVidia cards more than AMD cards when they develop it, the patch and the game itself probably favours nVidia cards.
Also Tom how did you benchmark it?Quote
Also Tom how did you benchmark it?Quote
I just ran a Benchmark, Adrenaline Crysis 2 Benchmark Tool,
Quality (Ultra), Res (1920x1080), AA (4x), Map (Times Square), Runs (3), API (DX11), Edge AA (Edge Blur), High Res (On).
Min Fps: 11.8 (this was between Run 1 and 2 though)
Average Fps: 54.6
Central Park: Min 6.0, Avg 47.9
Downtown: Min 15.1, Avg 50.8
Times Square: Min 3.2, Avg 54.8Quote
Quality (Ultra), Res (1920x1080), AA (4x), Map (Times Square), Runs (3), API (DX11), Edge AA (Edge Blur), High Res (On).
Min Fps: 11.8 (this was between Run 1 and 2 though)
Average Fps: 54.6
Central Park: Min 6.0, Avg 47.9
Downtown: Min 15.1, Avg 50.8
Times Square: Min 3.2, Avg 54.8Quote
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tinytomlogan
Because the 6990 was what the rig was built for dude |
hehehehe But I know ya have ur reviews to do keep em coming and I'll keep watching them p.s. if'n ya have a min check my 990fx post and chime in dont know if you've looked at these boardsQuote
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by badtaylorx
im not say'in i dont trust yours numbers,,,but somthin doesnt seem right with those 6990 #'s...and before you jump the gun and assume my amd fanboyship i own both a 6970cf setup and a 460sli setup(and actually prefer the 460s)....seems like those numbers may go waaaaayyyyy up with 11.7 drivers.....will we get an update if and when that happens??? |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DiggyDiggyHole
Dude, plain and simply. The red team is going down, After what I saw with initial Bulldozer specs I had hope but, the latest news have made me say enough. I am going to Intel and gonna stay on the green team. The other thing to think about is, the 6990 was not really designed for games. It was more or less designed to Benchmarking from what I hear. |
Thank You Very Much for your consideration in this matter
QuoteQuote:
|
Originally Posted by S_I_N
whilst tis true that AMD does the card and cpu to call INTEL the green team is IMHO wrong lol as intel has nothing to do with the Green Team please leave all green team and enemies err I mean red team analogies to GPU specific topics Thank You Very Much for your consideration in this matter |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tinytomlogan
There it is. Was there really a delay to get DX11 fixed, or was it purely a very clever marketing strategy? Maybe we’ll never know but if it is the latter then they all deserve a medal for seeing it through. |
Like every other developer they decided to put the consoles first. It's where the money is, and greed reigns supreme.
I mean, let's face it, it's a cack game. The gameplay is weak, the suit is weaker than in the first game and it's completely linear.
It was an average game at best that looked good, so it may have fooled a few people for a while (about 30% through for me, then I had seen enough).
I think had I endured the agony of actually playing it through to the end then I certainly wouldn't want to go back for some prettier textures, as most of it would be impossible to spot during game play. It wasn't a solid enough game to warrant another playthrough with better graphics, but Crytek want to try and soak up all the sales they missed at the beginning.
When you compare it to something like BFBC2 and the upcoming BFBC3 it has very, very, crushingly hard competition.Quote
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by AlienALX
It was a delay I would lay my house on it. Like every other developer they decided to put the consoles first. It's where the money is, and greed reigns supreme. I mean, let's face it, it's a cack game. The gameplay is weak, the suit is weaker than in the first game and it's completely linear. It was an average game at best that looked good, so it may have fooled a few people for a while (about 30% through for me, then I had seen enough). I think had I endured the agony of actually playing it through to the end then I certainly wouldn't want to go back for some prettier textures, as most of it would be impossible to spot during game play. It wasn't a solid enough game to warrant another playthrough with better graphics, but Crytek want to try and soak up all the sales they missed at the beginning. When you compare it to something like BFBF2 and the upcoming BFBC3 it has very, very, crushingly hard competition. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DiggyDiggyHole
So comes from the mouth of the Alienware FanBoy, and another thing It should not be compared to those games, Compare it to something more like Halo and other Scifi shooters. Crysis is a brilliant game and fun at that, the game play is fun and amazing no matter what you say. |
All I have seen from this thread so far is people arguing and calling eachother fanboys.
As for a comparisson? it's a FPS. So I will compare it to any FPS I care to, thanks.
Crysis 2 is a poor game. The original was a poor game. But then, it's amazing what the shallow will look over because something looks nice.
Oh go on then. Why not. I'm a fanboy. Take a look over the forum, you'll just love the latest mod project I have going on. It's a Bitfenix, so your logic is flawed. Then take a look over my post count and the date I joined instead of being stupid.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DiggyDiggyHole
Dude, plain and simply. The red team is going down, After what I saw with initial Bulldozer specs I had hope but, the latest news have made me say enough. I am going to Intel and gonna stay on the green team. The other thing to think about is, the 6990 was not really designed for games. It was more or less designed to Benchmarking from what I hear. |
AMD are going nowhere. All I have heard since the early 90s are comments like yours saying how Intel have beaten them. Of course they have, they're an enormous company with the power to waste money making sure they have the fastest processors on the market.. With prices to suit.Quote
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by AlienALX
Come again? All I have seen from this thread so far is people arguing and calling eachother fanboys. As for a comparisson? it's a FPS. So I will compare it to any FPS I care to, thanks. Crysis 2 is a poor game. The original was a poor game. But then, it's amazing what the shallow will look over because something looks nice. Oh go on then. Why not. I'm a fanboy. Take a look over the forum, you'll just love the latest mod project I have going on. It's a Bitfenix, so your logic is flawed. Then take a look over my post count and the date I joined instead of being stupid. If the term 'fan boy' ever screamed out so loudly it's all there. What you seem to have failed to notice is that Llano has pretty much sewn up the cheap gaming PC market overnight, and deemed all other onboard graphics solutions null and void. AMD may not want to invest billions of dollars into the CPU market at the top end, but once again they have put out a product that performs within a price bracket and have socked it to Intel. The latest Radeons are incredibly fast cards. The 6990 is an animal and whilst not as good over all as the 590 will still hold a domineering point in the marketplace due to disgruntled Nvidia customers. AMD are going nowhere. All I have heard since the early 90s are comments like yours saying how Intel have beaten them. Of course they have, they're an enormous company with the power to waste money making sure they have the fastest processors on the market.. With prices to suit. |
You may not want anything to do with Llano. You may not want anything to do with Alienware, or Dell.
The fact is that the 'enthusiast' PC market is merely but a boil on the backside of the computing world. Llano will be a massive success.
As for Nvidia being on top of the podium right now? of course they are. But as we have seen a good few times over the past decade that can change overnight. See also - Radeon 9800 pro handing it to the 5950u, ATI's 5 series and so on.
Right now all of my GPUs are Nvidia. Last year they were all ATI.
You want to be very careful what you wish for. If AMD were 'going down' or whatever you called it you can bet your ass you would be paying double for the Nvidia cards you bought in the future, with newer cards coming out every ten years or something.Quote
The fact is that the 'enthusiast' PC market is merely but a boil on the backside of the computing world. Llano will be a massive success.
As for Nvidia being on top of the podium right now? of course they are. But as we have seen a good few times over the past decade that can change overnight. See also - Radeon 9800 pro handing it to the 5950u, ATI's 5 series and so on.
Right now all of my GPUs are Nvidia. Last year they were all ATI.
You want to be very careful what you wish for. If AMD were 'going down' or whatever you called it you can bet your ass you would be paying double for the Nvidia cards you bought in the future, with newer cards coming out every ten years or something.Quote
Someone mentioned above, but not exactly, but I'm a bit sceptical as to why the 6990's minimum fps in this setup have come out so low.
.. and just to rant about the Dx11 update - why the fudge did they wait until I'd finished the game, had enough of it, and moved onto other games before releasing it ??
hmmpfh.
Still tickles me that one of the 'right now' cards is a stripped version of 'last year's cards that was damned by the reviewer-hammer before it got out of the blocks.
I still stand by my statement that if you're in the budget for low to mid powered cards, you can take your pick where your money fits best.
If you're at the top end with a decent budget, why would you buy a card from a manufacturer that doesn't do everything, even if it meant a matter of minimal fps.Quote
.. and just to rant about the Dx11 update - why the fudge did they wait until I'd finished the game, had enough of it, and moved onto other games before releasing it ??
hmmpfh.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by AlienALX
Right now all of my GPUs are Nvidia. Last year they were all ATI. |
I still stand by my statement that if you're in the budget for low to mid powered cards, you can take your pick where your money fits best.
If you're at the top end with a decent budget, why would you buy a card from a manufacturer that doesn't do everything, even if it meant a matter of minimal fps.Quote
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by AlienALX
You may not want anything to do with Llano. You may not want anything to do with Alienware, or Dell. The fact is that the 'enthusiast' PC market is merely but a boil on the backside of the computing world. Llano will be a massive success. As for Nvidia being on top of the podium right now? of course they are. But as we have seen a good few times over the past decade that can change overnight. See also - Radeon 9800 pro handing it to the 5950u, ATI's 5 series and so on. Right now all of my GPUs are Nvidia. Last year they were all ATI. You want to be very careful what you wish for. If AMD were 'going down' or whatever you called it you can bet your ass you would be paying double for the Nvidia cards you bought in the future, with newer cards coming out every ten years or something. |
2: You are very right, products just sway back and forth with the times, one minute it is ATI, the next it is Nvidia but, I personally prefer Nvidia.
3: I am probable jumping the gun on AMD's Bulldozer, I really like it and am hoping it will be outperform SB once AM4 comes out and they can actually be maximized to there fullest potential.Quote
Brand loyalty is a fickle thing when it comes to technology.Quote
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ya93sin
Brand loyalty is a fickle thing when it comes to technology. |
Brand loyalty, AKA, fanboyism is stupid. Having a preferred brand is ok but being loyal to one brand and only buying that brand because you are a fanboy when you can get better performance or value for money from another is dumb.Quote
It's amazing how you go away from a forum .... come back after 12 months ...and the same arguements are here ... can't you just all realise ... competition drives the market...in fact it drives all markets ... brand loyalty = low IQ ... preference is something else ... would any of you have an AMD or Intel logo branded into your skin ... no because its stupid....just like the fanbois ... anyway crysis is poor ... it's nice for benchmarking ... thats it ... and the point of pushing the technology is a good point...but I don't think really Crysis 2 is going to make any developers lose sleep ... I think the UT3 Samaritan Demo was what made them soil themselves ... it was less then 3 days after the demo showcased MS started advertising for VLSI engineers for the new xbox development ... was this coincidence ... I think not ...Quote
*Looks at thread, begins to read replies, gets bored, has an urge to right a short message about why it's pathetic, resists, goes and gets something to eat*Quote
I've been playing Crysis 2 recently, and I have to say I'm enjoying it. Maybe its the little click noise when you headshot somebody that makes it so satisfying...Quote
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DiggyDiggyHole
1: Never said I did not, Dell and Alienware just make horrible Desktops. I love there laptops, I am personally getting an M18x. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DiggyDiggyHole
2: You are very right, products just sway back and forth with the times, one minute it is ATI, the next it is Nvidia but, I personally prefer Nvidia.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DiggyDiggyHole
3: I am probable jumping the gun on AMD's Bulldozer, I really like it and am hoping it will be outperform SB once AM4 comes out and they can actually be maximized to there fullest potential.
|
Bulldozers are pretty much the same technology as Magny Cours. Again, do your research. There's no way they could compete with a Sandybridge version of a Xeon and nor are they supposed to.Quote
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by AlienALX
Quite ironic then that Dell sell more desktops than any other manufacturer combined. I prefer whoever has the fastest card for the lowest ammount of cash. Simple as that, I couldn't care if Fanny Industries made it. I would highly doubt that Bulldozer would compete with Intel's top of the line. If you are expecting it to then be prepared to be horribly let down. Do your research and you will find that AMD no longer compete for the top spot. And, they haven't since 2006 (the FX Opteron rebadges for $500 or so). The reason is simple. All of that R&D would have left them broke. So they wound down production and went back to doing what they had always done, make cheap processors for Joe Public. Bulldozers are pretty much the same technology as Magny Cours. Again, do your research. There's no way they could compete with a Sandybridge version of a Xeon and nor are they supposed to. |
Bulldozer is designed to compete with Sandy Bridge, originally it was set to actually out perform Sandy Bridge(1155 not 2011) I know it is not designed to compete with SB-E from what I have heard that will be Scorpio's Job.Quote
A top end AMD won't compete with a top end Intel. I doubt that will change any time soon, especially with the lost fortunes RE - Radeon 6 series. I mean, I can see them selling a lot, but nowhere near the 5xxx Radeon sales.Quote
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by AlienALX
A top end AMD won't compete with a top end Intel. I doubt that will change any time soon, especially with the lost fortunes RE - Radeon 6 series. I mean, I can see them selling a lot, but nowhere near the 5xxx Radeon sales. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DiggyDiggyHole
Dell Plain and simply has terrible hardware and how there Desktops are put together are just horrible, that is a simple fact.
|
Nah, I doubt it. I mean, the 2600k shames the 990x so I can't see how AMD could possibly come up with something to beat it.
Again, Bulldozer is based around Magny Cours, which won't touch Sandybridge. I would imagine price will be the key to its success. (edit and the onboard GPU of course !)
I may be pleasantly surprised, but I doubt it. AMD are now after the sectors of the market where the most money is to be made. Laptop CPUs, good onboard GPUs and so on. The enthusiast market is but a boil on the bum compared to the mass consumer market.
They just don't have the cash to put into the research mate. Seriously, staying atop Intel for three years nearly saw them bankrupt. They were selling CPUs at £400 odd a go and making hardly anything. Intel, however, threw money down the drain for those three years and didn't even break a sweat (those utterly awful P4s, see, all of them). It was only Core 2 Duo that got them back to the top and they haven't looked back since.Quote
Again, Bulldozer is based around Magny Cours, which won't touch Sandybridge. I would imagine price will be the key to its success. (edit and the onboard GPU of course !)
I may be pleasantly surprised, but I doubt it. AMD are now after the sectors of the market where the most money is to be made. Laptop CPUs, good onboard GPUs and so on. The enthusiast market is but a boil on the bum compared to the mass consumer market.
They just don't have the cash to put into the research mate. Seriously, staying atop Intel for three years nearly saw them bankrupt. They were selling CPUs at £400 odd a go and making hardly anything. Intel, however, threw money down the drain for those three years and didn't even break a sweat (those utterly awful P4s, see, all of them). It was only Core 2 Duo that got them back to the top and they haven't looked back since.Quote
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ya93sin
Yes, but the services and products they provide for businesses are of far higher quality. |
CSS Valid
Continue ReadingQuote