Crysis 3 20-30 FPS with my GTX 680 :s

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by jack00 (3556 posts) -

So I got crysis 3 couple of days ago, I thought with my rig I could play this on best settings with decent framerates but when I check with msi afterburner, I am always between 25 and 30 fps, sometimes it goes to 34 but not often. I got everything on max settings except MSAA 8x instead of 16 and shadows on medium instead of very high.

Is this normal with my comp to not be able to have better frame rates ?

#2 Posted by redskins26rocs (2674 posts) -

So I got crysis 3 couple of days ago, I thought with my rig I could play this on best settings with decent framerates but when I check with msi afterburner, I am always between 25 and 30 fps, sometimes it goes to 34 but not often. I got everything on max settings except MSAA 8x instead of 16 and shadows on medium instead of very high.

Is this normal with my comp to not be able to have better frame rates ?

jack00
My 7950 can barely handle x4 msaa at 60 fps i had to use 2x ssaa or 2x msaa on max settings. It is very demanding even at 1360x768. It would not surprise me if a 680 could not max it out at 60 fps with highest aa.
#3 Posted by Brean24 (1659 posts) -
Yeah because you have it on MSAA 8x which is ridiculous. AA doesn't even work in the game, turn it off and you'll have a massive jump in frame rate.
#4 Posted by redskins26rocs (2674 posts) -
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crysis-3-performance-benchmark-gaming,3451-6.html I found this so you are having the right amount of performance
#5 Posted by redskins26rocs (2674 posts) -
Yeah because you have it on MSAA 8x which is ridiculous. AA doesn't even work in the game, turn it off and you'll have a massive jump in frame rate.Brean24
Do not turn off aa it looks awful when compared to at least 2x ssaa
#6 Posted by Brean24 (1659 posts) -
[QUOTE="Brean24"]Yeah because you have it on MSAA 8x which is ridiculous. AA doesn't even work in the game, turn it off and you'll have a massive jump in frame rate.redskins26rocs
Do not turn off aa it looks awful when compared to at least 2x ssaa

Okay, but even at 2x ssaa he would see a huge increase in frame rate even though I don't agree with your opinion. Of course I have a 1440p monitor so I don't really need AA.
#7 Posted by jack00 (3556 posts) -

Isn't smaa the worst setting between the 3 fxaa, smaa and msaa ? Still I'll try it out and see if ig et better framerate. I'll give you an update.

#8 Posted by redskins26rocs (2674 posts) -

Isn't smaa the worst setting between the 3 fxaa, smaa and msaa ? Still I'll try it out and see if ig et better framerate. I'll give you an update.

jack00
i had the same if not very close performance with 2x ssaa and 2xmsaa. I also think it looks better than msaa but maybe it is just me.
#9 Posted by mastershake575 (8359 posts) -

Turn motion blur and shading down the medium (you will hardly notice it) and your frames should skyrocket

#10 Posted by jack00 (3556 posts) -
I turned off motion blur before even starting the game for the first time. So right now my settings are as follow: Everything on very high except shadows at high anisotropic at 2x smaa at medium (4x) I have better fps but not by much. In small areas I get 50-60 fps but outside it drops to 30-35, sometimes it goes to 40 but for like 1 second :s Kinda disappointed at the gtx680 performance if this is all it can do for a 500$ GPU.
#11 Posted by Truth_Hurts_U (9385 posts) -

I like TXAA. makes the jags go away better and is like msaa 4x in performance cost.

#12 Posted by mitu123 (154589 posts) -
[QUOTE="redskins26rocs"]http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crysis-3-performance-benchmark-gaming,3451-6.html I found this so you are having the right amount of performance

Time to SLI then.
#13 Posted by mastershake575 (8359 posts) -

IKinda disappointed at the gtx680 performance if this is all it can do for a 500$ GPU.jack00
So theres one game in exsistence in which your GTX 680 can't fully max at 50+ FPS and you think its the video cards fault ? (be disappointed at the game, not your highend videocard). Also what speed is your processor at ? (if yo udon't have a very good overclock on it then thats most likely the problem since its runs only at 2.8ghz stock)

#14 Posted by Cranler (8809 posts) -
Yeah because you have it on MSAA 8x which is ridiculous. AA doesn't even work in the game, turn it off and you'll have a massive jump in frame rate.Brean24
This. 2x smaa does a good job with the jaggies with very little performance cost and any setting above that makes no difference in iq for me. Maybe its been patched though.
#15 Posted by Brean24 (1659 posts) -

[QUOTE="jack00"]IKinda disappointed at the gtx680 performance if this is all it can do for a 500$ GPU.mastershake575

So theres one game in exsistence in which your GTX 680 can't fully max at 50+ FPS and you think its the video cards fault ? (be disappointed at the game, not your highend videocard). Also what speed is your processor at ? (if yo udon't have a very good overclock on it then thats most likely the problem since its runs only at 2.8ghz stock)

This I have the same video card as the OP but with a faster/better*cough* CPU and I get 40-60 frames per seconds with everything at max settings with AA at 2xMSAA
#16 Posted by the_bi99man (11054 posts) -

It's an incredibly demanding game. From what I hear, there's a lot of settings that can be turned down, without losing a lot of picture quality. But also, I don't think I've heard of  any  setup, including SLI rigs, that can actually handle it completely maxed, including large amounts of AA, at high resolutions, and maintain 60+ fps. 30-40+ is a more reasonable framerate target.

#17 Posted by jack00 (3556 posts) -
I wonder why they make those game that nobody can max out sometimes...
#18 Posted by lostrib (41261 posts) -

I turned off motion blur before even starting the game for the first time. So right now my settings are as follow: Everything on very high except shadows at high anisotropic at 2x smaa at medium (4x) I have better fps but not by much. In small areas I get 50-60 fps but outside it drops to 30-35, sometimes it goes to 40 but for like 1 second :s Kinda disappointed at the gtx680 performance if this is all it can do for a 500$ GPU.jack00

You can turn anisotropic 16x without losing any frames

#19 Posted by mitu123 (154589 posts) -

It's an incredibly demanding game. From what I hear, there's a lot of settings that can be turned down, without losing a lot of picture quality. But also, I don't think I've heard of  any  setup, including SLI rigs, that can actually handle it completely maxed, including large amounts of AA, at high resolutions, and maintain 60+ fps. 30-40+ is a more reasonable framerate target.

the_bi99man

That's how it is on my rig.

#20 Posted by jack00 (3556 posts) -
I'm still playing around in the msaa, smaa and txaa. In some areas I will get a steady 60 fps, sometimes it drops to 30 but doesn't seem to go below. Like I said, everything is on very high except shadows and shaders which I put on medium now.
#21 Posted by Elann2008 (33028 posts) -
[QUOTE="jack00"]

Isn't smaa the worst setting between the 3 fxaa, smaa and msaa ? Still I'll try it out and see if ig et better framerate. I'll give you an update.

redskins26rocs
i had the same if not very close performance with 2x ssaa and 2xmsaa. I also think it looks better than msaa but maybe it is just me.

Visually, it's on par with MSAA, but it barely hits the performance. 2xSMAA medium is the way to go. Low vs Medium, zero difference in performance. To the TC, GTX 680 will nearly max out the game, with 2-4xAA, but you're not going to get 50-60 frames per second. :P
#22 Posted by the_bi99man (11054 posts) -

I wonder why they make those game that nobody can max out sometimes...jack00

To push hardware further. To give hardware designers a reason to keep going. To make games that look great already, and will be able to look even better a year later, just by being turned up higher than most people had used previously, keeping up with modern games. Just like Crysis 1.

#23 Posted by Elann2008 (33028 posts) -

[QUOTE="jack00"]I wonder why they make those game that nobody can max out sometimes...the_bi99man

To push hardware further. To give hardware designers a reason to keep going. To make games that look great already, and will be able to look even better a year later, just by being turned up higher than most people had used previously, keeping up with modern games. Just like Crysis 1.

This. +1
#24 Posted by AmazonTreeBoa (16745 posts) -

[QUOTE="jack00"]I wonder why they make those game that nobody can max out sometimes...the_bi99man

To push hardware further. To give hardware designers a reason to keep going. To make games that look great already, and will be able to look even better a year later, just by being turned up higher than most people had used previously, keeping up with modern games. Just like Crysis 1.

Agreed. Up until three weeks ago, I had never maxed out Crysis 1, not I can with ease.
#25 Posted by kable9 (4 posts) -

OP needs to upgrade that CPU. Like running a Ferrari engine on regular grade gasoline at the moment.

#26 Posted by lostrib (41261 posts) -

OP needs to upgrade that CPU. Like running a Ferrari engine on regular grade gasoline at the moment.

kable9

maybe overclock it

#27 Posted by jack00 (3556 posts) -
I've never been much for overlocking, I would probably need to buy some cooling system if I did too and not sure where to start with that.
#28 Posted by mastershake575 (8359 posts) -
I've never been much for overlocking, I would probably need to buy some cooling system if I did too and not sure where to start with that.jack00
Oh jesus, thats processor isn't overclocked at all ? (theres your problem). An i5/i7 would easily give you 10-15 more FPS
#29 Posted by Ben-Buja (2747 posts) -

Yeah because you have it on MSAA 8x which is ridiculous. AA doesn't even work in the game, turn it off and you'll have a massive jump in frame rate.Brean24

What are you talking about? AA does work fine.

MSAA is always heavy in games using deffered rendering. TC just use some post processing AA instead. I recommend SMAAx2

#30 Posted by mixedplanet (1214 posts) -

I think your CPU is holding you back.

With my system I can around 55 average, everything maxed out except shadows on high and FXAA. 

#31 Posted by funkyzoom (1457 posts) -

I have heard people say that AMD processors paired with AMD graphics cards give the best performance in games. I don't know how far that's true, but I do think this theory is ridiculous. In my case, with a MUCH weaker system than TC's, I managed to maintain the fps in lower 30s, which occasionally dropped to higher 20s (very rare, it happened maybe thrice during the entire campaign). In any case, I don't think you should bother much because Crysis 3 is actually a benchmarking tool rather than a game. Aprat from the gorgeous graphics, it has nothing going for it. The game is too short, too easy, too dull and too boring. I certainly feel i wasted my money by buying it at full price. Its high time Crytek went back to making open world sandbox games like Far Cry and Crysis 1.

#32 Posted by GameGazersDen (9 posts) -
I'm sure we will get a performance boost before too long. wait for an update on your 680
#33 Posted by mitu123 (154589 posts) -

Yeah because you have it on MSAA 8x which is ridiculous. AA doesn't even work in the game, turn it off and you'll have a massive jump in frame rate.Brean24
Yes it does, my shot with 8xMSAA at 1200p:

ibtvd29s0SvOHo.png

 

#34 Posted by Brean24 (1659 posts) -

[QUOTE="Brean24"]Yeah because you have it on MSAA 8x which is ridiculous. AA doesn't even work in the game, turn it off and you'll have a massive jump in frame rate.mitu123

Yes it does, my shot with 8xMSAA at 1200p:

ibtvd29s0SvOHo.png

 

I don't notice any jaggles in any game including Crysis 3, so forgive me if I don't see a difference. As for my statement, it was based on my experience at launch, in which AA was actually broken, however I'm assuming they fixed it judging by the comments.
#35 Posted by andmcq (247 posts) -
[QUOTE="Brean24"]Yeah because you have it on MSAA 8x which is ridiculous. AA doesn't even work in the game, turn it off and you'll have a massive jump in frame rate.redskins26rocs
Do not turn off aa it looks awful when compared to at least 2x ssaa

Personally I can't stand AA and I always leave it off. I found a massive performance increase by running the game on high and not on very high. Graphically high and very high look very similar.
#36 Posted by Zaral_1 (186 posts) -
MSAA is super demanding because it renders the screen at a higher resolution and then down samples to a lower resolution. Once you get higher resolutions this technique only gets more taxing and will become more infeasible once screens become higher and higher resolution. It's not the graphics card's fault or the games fault this runs slow. It's just the way the algorithm is designed that makes its very demanding. This is why new techniques like FXAA and TXAA are being developed. Even though at 1600p the difference from 4XMSAA to 8XMSAA will almost be no difference but there will be some guy with 4X Titans that will want to do it to justify their 2K worth of video cards.