I kind of wonder why games can't be like UT99 lol. You slap some S3TC textures on that game and a newer render, and the graphics for the most part easily look like 2008+ game lol and you get real decent FPS...
On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 10:27 PM, AngelicTears <[email protected]> wrote: > crysis does have it's drawbacks...it's code actually kinda buggy on the CPU > side and a little on the GPU side but 2010 gen graphics can handle it, heck > ATI 46xx should be able to handle it max..but the CPU codes prevents it, > plus it's nvidia driven engine..lol, crytek would never do the same mistake > again which apparently crysis 2 will be on console, so it will not be GPU > heavy and must be multithreaded (Xbox 360 and PS3 have multicore CPU and old > rusty GPU except PS3 which combines CPU and GPU)... > @tribaljet > have u turn software vertex on for NFS:MW?? i can run it ok...with playable > framerates...heck i finished the game and cant play carbon ..lol > > On Sun, Jun 13, 2010 at 6:24 AM, tribaljet <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> You're right, gta was a bad port, crysis do have bad coding but I'm >> not talking down or anything because I love crysis, both single and >> multiplayer are incredible, but when a 16-core cpu with 2 ultra high >> end nvidia gpus have less than 40 fps, the fact that there's something >> wrong just is far too apparent. And I'm not talking about some riff >> raff gaming site benchmark. You can just compare crysis to crysis >> warhead and see the difference that a cleaner code has on the same >> engine. >> >> On Jun 12, 10:10 pm, "THEfog ." <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Crysis wasn't a port or bad coding, the graphics were just so advanced >> > for >> > its time that everyone with a super awesome computer (at the time) would >> > bitch and winge if they couldn't run it full graphics. >> > >> > THEfog >> > >> > On 12/06/2010 7:52 PM, "tribaljet" <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > Ok, now that my gma is almost all powerful and raining fire on puny >> > little pieces of gaming software, like crysis or gta iv, can anyone >> > explain me how need for speed most wanted runs smoothly? I've read >> > somewhere that gma 950 wasn't supposed to have any hard time at all, >> > and much before reading that I've tried it and was staring at my pc >> > crawling. While nfs underground 2 did ran acceptably, most wanted did >> > not at all, and even carbon ran better than most wanted. I think >> > undercover probably won't run and pro street suffers from the same >> > core issues as crysis, gta iv, metro 2033 and the likes, either awful >> > ports or messy code. >> > >> > -- >> > 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS >> >> -- >> 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS > > -- > 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS > -- Espionage724 Has A Signature... -- 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS
