hi, i just want to confirm IF im getting lower fps than i should.. cos ppl seem to get more fps than me with slower gpu etc (i.e. 140?fps average @ 1080p lowest with hd7970, or 100fps @ 1080p high with hd7970 etc) n according to my result, u def need sli/cf to get 100+fps @ 1080p med-high.. (?) not to mention nvidia card runs crysis 3 faster(correct me if im wrong cos that certainly was the case with c2 mp, i.e. hd7970 ran slower than gtx580 in c2 mp in dx9)

my setup
i5 3570k(4ghz), msi gtx680 tf3(stock o/ced), 8gb ddr3 2133, 120hz lcd, it was pretty much brand new system, n installed win7 64bit n crysis 3 at same time.

i get ~98fps average(79fps min, 105fps max) @ 1080p lowest settings(with v-sync on, get ~15-20fps less with v-sync off) according to fraps benchmark.
http://secure.gamesas.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=65&t=62242

n if i record the gameplay with afterburner(85% quality, 1/2 frame, 80fps, to 2nd hdd), fps drop to ~65fps average(56fps min, 75fps max).

Depends...

I can test if you want tonight my max fps with my 7970 cf which I only just got working last night.

I imagine i'll get pretty high fps if I set everything to low and enable FXAA. I haven't actually tested my highest fps yet.


Last night I was getting 60-63 fps average min 59 max 63 with everything on very high except shadows and post-processing on high. Though I did have the fps locked to 60.

As for the Nvidia vs AMD in crysis 2, crysis actually prefers AMDs directcompute architecture but Nvidia was a partner... so there were a few odd things going on in C2 like in C1.

I have a Asus DirC gtx 660ti and run the C3 at 100+ fps (Asus sabertooth i7 , 24gb ram , win 7 x64 ) . If i reccord the mach ( 99% of my game i reccord alweis) fps drop to 65-80 . I use hy grafical setings . Nice thing a friend of mine with a i5 , 4gb ram , win 7 x64 , gtx 640 have the same fps only on medium grafic settings :-/ . Its strange ... especialy after last patch his setup seems to work even better ....

After the fix for the FPS drop introduced in patch 1.3, I get around 100-120FPS with 2x EVGA GTX 580 Superclocked on an ASUS Rampage IV Extreme, with 64GB of DDR3-2400MHz with a Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition 3970X with everything set to "high", 16x anisotropic filtering, high res textures, 1xSMAA anti-aliasing, motion blur medium and lens flares on .

I can test if you want tonight my max fps with my 7970 cf which I only just got working last night.

I imagine i'll get pretty high fps if I set everything to low and enable FXAA. I haven't actually tested my highest fps yet.


Last night I was getting 60-63 fps average min 59 max 63 with everything on very high except shadows and post-processing on high. Though I did have the fps locked to 60.

As for the Nvidia vs AMD in crysis 2, crysis actually prefers AMDs directcompute architecture but Nvidia was a partner... so there were a few odd things going on in C2 like in C1.
oh i thought u were getting 100+fps on 1080p(?) medium/high with single hd7970.. not cf

After the fix for the FPS drop introduced in patch 1.3, I get around 100-120FPS with 2x EVGA GTX 580 Superclocked on an ASUS Rampage IV Extreme, with 64GB of DDR3-2400MHz with a Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition 3970X with everything set to "high", 16x anisotropic filtering, high res textures, 1xSMAA anti-aliasing, motion blur medium and lens flares on .
hey jdb2, im aw3s0m0 from c2 mp anyway, i can totally understand how u get over 100fps since u have i7 3970x + gtx580 sli..

but this is wat im talking about, how do u get 100+fps with gtx660ti or gtx640?
nvm ur friends gtx640 for now, do u run 1080p lowest setting with 660ti?
I have a Asus DirC gtx 660ti and run the C3 at 100+ fps (Asus sabertooth i7 , 24gb ram , win 7 x64 ) . If i reccord the mach ( 99% of my game i reccord alweis) fps drop to 65-80 . I use hy grafical setings . Nice thing a friend of mine with a i5 , 4gb ram , win 7 x64 , gtx 640 have the same fps only on medium grafic settings :-/ . Its strange ... especialy after last patch his setup seems to work even better ....

What on earth are you people doing with 24-64GB RAM lol? I can't even utilize ~5gb even with a whole bunch of stuff open at the same time.

Anyway as others have already said - everything low, AA off. If you want even more performance run the game at lower resolutions, but not recommended unless your card is REALLY weak because things start getting blurry.

I average around ~90 fps with GTX660 Ti with an i5 2500K @ 4.5ghz.

N4RU70, you may be encountering a soft CPU cap because there is only so much a GPU can pump through before the CPU starts becoming the limiter - as you keep lowering the settings/resolution this will become more and more noticeable.
Although an i5 3570K @ 4ghz should technically be MORE than enough, C3 is really a game that puts the CPU through it's paces more than any other game.
If you have the cooling see if a ~4.3-4.4ghz OC improves your framerate averages, hope you've got some sort of consistent benchmarking method

Really happy to see more people with 120hz monitors, aren't they great?

Anyway as others have already said - everything low, AA off. If you want even more performance run the game at lower resolutions, but not recommended unless your card is REALLY weak because things start getting blurry.

I average around ~90 fps with GTX660 Ti with an i5 2500K @ 4.5ghz.
umm im already running the lowest setting @ 1080p for max fps n i only get ~98fps average.
~90 fps average with gtx660ti is very high compared to my result..

Anyway as others have already said - everything low, AA off. If you want even more performance run the game at lower resolutions, but not recommended unless your card is REALLY weak because things start getting blurry.

I average around ~90 fps with GTX660 Ti with an i5 2500K @ 4.5ghz.
umm im already running the lowest setting @ 1080p for max fps n i only get ~98fps average.
~90 fps average with gtx660ti is very high compared to my result..
As I said there's only so much a GPU can push through in a given game, there is a soft framerate cap.
The best example I can think of is if you added another GTX680 - theoretically if you're averaging 98 fps with one 680, then two should give you nothing less than 170-180 fps. But it simply won't happen, you will be lucky to see framerates edging around ~120-140 fps. If you used an i7 3960X @ 5ghz then you could probably see 150fps+, but that would be the limit of that.

There is a soft CPU bottleneck beyond a certain framerate, combined with the fact that the game engine doesn't seem to be built around pumping crazy framerates like Quake 3 engine. That's why a 660 Ti seems to give nearly the same performance as a 680 at the lowest settings, the 680 only really pulls ahead at medium/high settings. The more you force higher framerates the more skewed the results will get.

Soz that's all I know, someone from Crytek will probably know better :S
Developers aren't building game engines with 120hz monitors in mind - yet. 60fps is still the industry standard.

N4RU70, you may be encountering a soft CPU cap because there is only so much a GPU can pump through before the CPU starts becoming the limiter - as you keep lowering the settings/resolution this will become more and more noticeable.
Although an i5 3570K @ 4ghz should technically be MORE than enough, C3 is really a game that puts the CPU through it's paces more than any other game.
If you have the cooling see if a ~4.3-4.4ghz OC improves your framerate averages, hope you've got some sort of consistent benchmarking method

Really happy to see more people with 120hz monitors, aren't they great?
i got noctua nh-d14 hsf but dont like running cpu/gpu@max limit cos heat/stability etc(since i dont have air con in my room) n i doubt there'll be much fps increase from extra ~10% in cpu speed.

i just run fraps benchmark(f11) on mp with 16 ppl, n yer 120hz is mad for first person shooter imo, been using it since c2 mp.

p.s. do u still play c3? havent seen u in ages

The best example I can think of is if you added another GTX680 - theoretically if you're averaging 98 fps with one 680, then two should give you nothing less than 170-180 fps. But it simply won't happen, you will be lucky to see framerates edging around ~120-140 fps. If you used an i7 3960X @ 5ghz then you could probably see 150fps+, but that would be the limit of that.

There is a soft CPU bottleneck beyond a certain framerate, combined with the fact that the game engine doesn't seem to be built around pumping crazy framerates like Quake 3 engine. That's why a 660 Ti seems to give nearly the same performance as a 680 at the lowest settings, the 680 only really pulls ahead at medium/high settings. The more you force higher framerates the more skewed the results will get.
not planning on getting another gtx680 cant afford it, not worth it since its just for c3.. not to mention ill also need new mobo/psu.

i still dont get how gtx660ti get similar performance in c3 mp even in lowest setting(compared to gtx680) cos that def wasn't the case for c2 mp(i got ~50-60fps average with gtx560ti then got ~80-90fps average with gtx580 at 1080p lowest setting in c2 mp)