I know it says these forums are for Crysis 2, but I might as well ask my question here, if you all dont mind :>

So I have crysis wars here, playing Mesa on some server, with the game set to max settings. Moving around while looking up into the sky or into a wall gives me the 60fps my monitor can support. Looking at the CPU, GPU and RAM readings on the G15 LCD display shows around 40% for everything.

However, when I look into the valley, and start running around, looking at buildings and vehicles and trees, fps drops to around 26-28, with the lowest point at 20 fps. G15 LCD at that point says all the three readings (CPU, GPU, RAM) go up to 60%

So I wanna know this: Why on earth would the game run at 20fps and only use so little resources? Why wouldn't it use the 100% of CPU that is made available to it to try and achieve more fps? How would I go about getting more fps out of it? No background programs are running at the time, temperature is stable on all components.

My system specs:
CPU: Intel COre 2 Quad Q6600 @ 2.4GHz (quad core)
GPU: AMD HD 6950 2GB
4gb RAM

Is it a bottleneck issue with the processor? Thanks in advance for advice.

Crysis and Crysis 2 are graphics card intensive applications. In my opinion, I think your processor power is more than sufficient, so it shouldn't be the bottleneck. Have you updated your graphics card drivers? (Though I would think it's strange since crysis wars is really old and your new graphics card is definitely powerful enough to handle the game).

Also, Crysis isn't coded efficiently.

Also, Crysis isn't coded efficiently.

^ That's why.

CPU @ Standard clock?

WTH?

Read in I-Net how to Overclock ur nice Q6600.
But do it carefully and use ur Brain or u can kill ur Hardware with to much Voltage.

With more Mhz u will see much improve of FPS....also if u OC on that AMD Crap. (sry) (more mhz or NEWer CPU of course).

And theres no need to stop at 60 FPS (except tearing Screen)....disable V-Sync in Game Options, or disable it generally in Driver...thk its similar like NVIDIA.

Anyway for constant frames...all our systems are too weak.

Before they locked out the possibility to remove motion blur and a few other effects in the older patches, I almost able to get to that fps amount.

My rig is lower than yours, but close. Dunno if you can get it to 60 though.

I kinda stopped playing until some graphical effects are frigging allowed to be removed in multiplay. There's no joy in playing around 15 fps right now, or at least that's how I feel.

Crysis and Crysis 2 are graphics card intensive applications. In my opinion, I think your processor power is more than sufficient, so it shouldn't be the bottleneck. Have you updated your graphics card drivers? (Though I would think it's strange since crysis wars is really old and your new graphics card is definitely powerful enough to handle the game).

Also, Crysis isn't coded efficiently.


With more Ghz on CPU and a new modern CPU u will get more FPS. And if the GPU Card is bottlenecked with the old CPU u get an improvement on Top.

I got an Q9650 @3.8 Ghz to an OCed GTX 580.....so think now what is throttle down my System?

hmmm i have Q8400 and i overclocked it from 2.6ghz to 3.5ghz with same voltage ... that wont make any problems right? it was working for 5 months great

Crysis and Crysis 2 are graphics card intensive applications. In my opinion, I think your processor power is more than sufficient, so it shouldn't be the bottleneck. Have you updated your graphics card drivers? (Though I would think it's strange since crysis wars is really old and your new graphics card is definitely powerful enough to handle the game).

Also, Crysis isn't coded efficiently.


With more Ghz on CPU and a new modern CPU u will get more FPS. And if the GPU Card is bottlenecked with the old CPU u get an improvement on Top.

I got an Q9650 @3.8 Ghz to an OCed GTX 580.....so think now what is throttle down my System?

Yup I agree with you that with a more powerfully clocked CPU, you can get better framerates. I'm an overclocker too. However, if you benchmark a variety of CPU clocks using the same graphics card, you'll realise that the increase/decrease in frames per second isn't significant.

One or two overclocking forums did benchmarks for graphics cards and CPUs on crysis and crysis 2 (sorry, can't remember the website address) and yea, above a 3.0Ghz core (dual core and above), not much improvement in framerate. The graphics card matters a lot more in this case.

hmmm i have Q8400 and i overclocked it from 2.6ghz to 3.5ghz with same voltage ... that wont make any problems right? it was working for 5 months great

As long as your dual/quad core processor is above 3.0Ghz, which in this case it is, then you've pretty much done what you could for this game's framerates (contributed by processor). All that matters now is what graphics card are you using...you'll see a huge difference in performance depending on card.

The original Crysis is built for CPUs and GPUs that don`t exist. It would probably be most happy on a 20Ghz single core CPU and a GPU that does not care what it is being asked to do. As it stands it has a bottleneck on both the GPU and CPU side as it will never max out even the best gear out there.

Not much more FPS with OC you say? I can only remember my old E 8600 CPU from 3.3 Ghz to 4.5 Ghz...there was a significant raise on both max and min Frames but most see in Battle.

Perhaps there is more raise on minimum FPS.....so thats much better.


C1 depends more on GPU is right but with weaker CPU than GPU u svck too.

It differs much sometimes at Games...

Look at Bad Company 2.....totally depends on CPU! Even with GTX 580 i not gain much Max FPS over an GTX 285...except the MIN Frames.