New GPU's/Crysis and DX10 v DX10.1

[yogibbear]

With the Crysis demo now in our hot little hands, and the release of the 8800gt nvidia card like only a few hours ago, and all the rave reviews it's getting basically it's a 250 USD card (350 AUD) with the performance at about 95% of an 8800gtx. Now the problem is... DX10.1

The 8800gt is only dx10 compliant (not dx10.1) hence, although it's cheap, powerful and available right now, it might mean that in a couple of months with new cards coming out, i'll feel stupid for the purchase.

There's the supposed "9800gtx" that should be dx10.1 coming sometime... (anyone got an eta?)

And there's the ATI/AMD R670 "3800" coming out on nov 15th which will be dx10.1 compliant.

So... i want to upgrade for Crysis/the Witcher/COD4 etc etc etc... as i'm still on my pentium 4 so i'm going for the whole new 2-3k AUD rig upgrade like many people probably will be doing for the dx10 games being released. But the big question is whether to opt for the 8800gt now, wait to see how the 3800 ati performs in a couple of weeks, or stick it out for the yet-to-be-officially-announced dates on the 9800gtx and the ati card that'll be going up against that.

Now Discuss...

[Bioshock_FTW!]

well I need an upgrade, for sure. Crysis struggles at 1680x1050 on High settings, which is the least quality I'll let myself get away with. Anything below that is shoddy and virtually DX9.

I want to sell my mobo and CPU to upgrade to Intel, so if anyone's interested in some cheap gaming hardware (AMD), PM me.

[yogibbear]

well I need an upgrade, for sure. Crysis struggles at 1680x1050 on High settings, which is the least quality I'll let myself get away with. Anything below that is shoddy and virtually DX9.

I want to sell my mobo and CPU to upgrade to Intel, so if anyone's interested in some cheap gaming hardware (AMD), PM me.

yeah well at the moment i am running the demo in all medium on my 7950gt, 1280*1024 lcd, 2gb ram, p4 3.6gHz.

So the idea for me is to upgrade to something like:
q6600 g0
p35 mobo
4gb ram
vista 64 bit
22" 1680&1050
+GPU

GPU = 1 of: 8800gt, RV670 "3800", RV700, 9800gtx.

[Freddo]

There's no reason to care about DX10.1. Crysis won't use it, and it will take a long while before there are games that require it.

[yogibbear]

There's no reason to care about DX10.1. Crysis won't use it, and it will take a long while before there are games that require it.

Yeah i get that. If you go over to the crysis forums you can see that most of the "DX 10 ONLY" features can be unlocked on the demo in xp anyways...

I was more implying that i don't want to spend 350 dollars on a gpu only to then be able to have spent maybe 200 more (AUD) and got the dx10.1 which would give my computer a bit more life in the long run.

Plus dx10 is more about taking things aaway from the processor to do, and making the gpu do them instead. So it's not exactly things that can't be done without dx10. The main reason is that dx10.1 will support better AA, so no more UE3 "deferred rendering" so no AA for you! tactics from devs. We can get AA + HDR. (not that we couldn't before, but now it's better use of AA/type of AA)

[shocked]

Yeah i get that. If you go over to the crysis forums you can see that most of the "DX 10 ONLY" features can be unlocked on the demo in xp anyways...

I was more implying that i don't want to spend 350 dollars on a gpu only to then be able to have spent maybe 200 more (AUD) and got the dx10.1 which would give my computer a bit more life in the long run.

Plus dx10 is more about taking things aaway from the processor to do, and making the gpu do them instead. So it's not exactly things that can't be done without dx10. The main reason is that dx10.1 will support better AA, so no more UE3 "deferred rendering" so no AA for you! tactics from devs. We can get AA + HDR. (not that we couldn't before, but now it's better use of AA/type of AA)

Yeah I posted the direct link to it. I upgraded my PC with the sole purpose of Crysis....well and that and Avid for the Mrs.

The tweak makes the demo even better and that will help when the full game comes out!

[yogibbear]

Shocked, got any suggestions on my rig?

[shocked]

Shocked, got any suggestions on my rig?

I am not too good at this as I had one of my soldier buddies who is a computer phenom help me with mine.

I have a AMD Athlon 64 X2 5200+ Processor
Got 4 gigs of PNY 5300 DDR2 RAM
XFX 8800GTS 320 Video card
Oh and a Gigabyte m61p-33 motherboard

I went with those. I wanted the 640 video card, but the Mrs. vetoed that and said if there is not that much difference between the two than we do not need it and most people said there is not that much difference between the two cards.

Here is my rig.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...y/DSC_0057.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...y/DSC_0066.jpg

I am going to redo some of the wire management in there, but for now it works beautifully. LOL

[yogibbear]

Nice, very nice. When did you buy all that... particularly the 8800gts 320mb, as well the 8800gt is basically going to sell for just under the price of one of those, with a lot more performance. So... i'd be hoping you got your use out of it already?

(Oh and the diff between the 320mb and 640mb is basically nothing, unless you play at resolutions above the 1440*... widescreen res. where the ram will start to matter)

[shocked]

Nice, very nice. When did you buy all that... particularly the 8800gts 320mb, as well the 8800gt is basically going to sell for just under the price of one of those, with a lot more performance. So... i'd be hoping you got your use out of it already?

(Oh and the diff between the 320mb and 640mb is basically nothing, unless you play at resolutions above the 1440*... widescreen res. where the ram will start to matter)

I got most of those parts from Newegg (probably the greatest thing for computer buyers EVER!)

I got all of that a few weeks ago. The Antec 900 Case rocks and I threw in the thermocooler just for looks. At first it was sitting on the ram so I had to rearrange it, now it is right up next too it. A bit close for my taste but otherwise ok.

The wire management is a pain in the rear end, but once I got the round IDE cables for the CD and dVD rom's it made it a little easier.

[yogibbear]

http://www.techreport.com/articles.x/13479/4

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/...gt/page12.html

Have a look at the Crysis demo benchs. Hm...

[shocked]

Hm. Interesting. I have all of my settings maxed and playing it at 1280 x 1024 and I have no problems running it at all.

So I am not sure what else they are running, but I have no intentions of spending $600 on a video card for one game when the card I have plays it just fine.

That is wild...

[yogibbear]

Ah k, if you're running at 1280*1024 then you're set to play max everything with the rig you've got.

[shocked]

Ah k, if you're running at 1280*1024 then you're set to play max everything with the rig you've got.

Exactly. FRAPS does not work with the demo and causes the game to crash, but after playing it through twice now and with the DX10 workaround and playing it again, it runs like silk.

I wonder if these video card companies are slipping these guys money to over hype their products.

Kind of like what gates did with halo 3.

[yogibbear]

Crysis and Halo 3 in my opinion are generations apart.

Though it's cool i guess if all someone's got is a 360 and they want a fps multiplayer experience.

But Crysis's strong point will be the single player. So they're totally different market demographics or whatever.

I don't think crysis is getting that hyped anymore. It used to be waaaaay back when the first dx10 cards came out. But now... it's just a solid new engine fps that is competing head-on with the UE3 engine games.

The only reason people will want the new gpu's this Q4 '07/Q1 '08 is to max out everything on ridiculous setups with 1900*1200++ resolutions. Which nobody but the people who can afford those cards can afford to buy those screens anyway.

Plus top of the line tech. e.g. the QX9650 intel cpu brings down the price of their more budget-constricted enthusiast gamer orientated cpus. So i don't see it as a bad thing overall.

[ddave]

(Oh and the diff between the 320mb and 640mb is basically nothing, unless you play at resolutions above the 1440*... widescreen res. where the ram will start to matter)

I'm playing at 1440*900 and it uses over 400mb, so I'd adjust that res down. This is with most settings on high (though no AA) so I don't know if that makes a difference, but I think Crysis is one of those games where the 320 will hit its limits pretty easily.

[Yabbering Yeti]

well I need an upgrade, for sure. Crysis struggles at 1680x1050 on High settings, which is the least quality I'll let myself get away with. Anything below that is shoddy and virtually DX9.

I want to sell my mobo and CPU to upgrade to Intel, so if anyone's interested in some cheap gaming hardware (AMD), PM me.

hey matie, hang on to that equipment: Vista is the issue. XP performance over Vista in crysis is just insanely better (I tested it out for about 2 hours), plus you can enable all the dx10 beauty in dx9 PLUS is runs better still. So re-install XP (dual boot?) if its a possibility - cause anything you buy to run crysis on Vista isnt going to help you much at all. As I recall you have a nice rig, which you have played top $$ for - You will get so much more out of it on XP.

[shocked]

hey matie, hang on to that equipment: Vista is the issue. XP performance over Vista in crysis is just insanely better (I tested it out for about 2 hours), plus you can enable all the dx10 beauty in dx9 PLUS is runs better still. So re-install XP (dual boot?) if its a possibility - cause anything you buy to run crysis on Vista isnt going to help you much at all. As I recall you have a nice rig, which you have played top $$ for - You will get so much more out of it on XP.

Yeti is dead on with this.

[greylantern]

my rig

8800GTX
e6850 @ 3.6ghz
2gb 800mhz ram (getting another 2gb soon for dev/daw reasons mainly)
ANTEC 900 CASE! (yes, same as posted)

Anyway, Crysis demo @ 1440x900 in DX9 without the 'DX 10 features trick' is pretty decent, could do with AA but I take too much of a hit for me to be comfy (25-30fps), I prefer in the 50s and before anyone says "the human eye can't see blah de blah...", this is not about seeing it's about feeling, i'd rather play crysis close to 60fps with less eye candy than have it lagging and treacle like (which it is if you put everything on high + DX10 hacks + AA).

So, I have all on high but water,shaders and post pro on medium, you only loose god halos (dx10 features config trick remember), water on visor, rays through water, better waves etc... and I can get between 50 - 90fps and it plays beautifully at that speed and still looks ok. It's using the 'cheap' depth of field and no motion blur at these settings but i'm ok with that, as I said i'd rather have the speed than the 'pretty lag'.

My point is, don't think that a 8800 GT is gonna let you run at max quality at a very nice frame rate, expect ~20fps even at that res you run at (mine is lower res and my GTX struggles!) for reference I get ~170fps in UT3 demo on high!

Crysis is definitely going to look it's best in future, for now we all need to lower our expectations about the graphics (and our settings) and make it playable first and foremost because that's where the true fun is to be had with slick frame rates and the lovely non linear-ish gameplay.

And on a decent card (8gtx/gt/gts) with those compromised settings it can still look good, just not as jaw dropping as everything on 'very high' in DX10.

I've also tried it in vista under DX10 on very high and frankly it's a slideshow! again you can tweak certain things down while leaving others (Textures quality for example has little impact on a 768mb GTX so it can stay high/very high) but SHADOWS, SHADERS, WATER and POST PROCESSING should all be knocked down a notch to make it fully playable/enjoyable. That's what i've found in my initial tests (new nvidia driver).

I expect a little more optimisation in the full game or at least a patch, and newer drivers from Nvidia should help.

tip: Bring up the console in game (press the key above 'tab' on the left hand side next to '1') and type in 'r_displayinfo 1' to see your frame rate and mem usage no need for fraps.

On 'high' settings in sandbox, loading the multiplayer map and running it I get 60fps average or above and that's while running it in sandbox so it is very much playable on these cards you just need to knock down the settings that are less important to you to up the frame rate and in my tests I am happy with those above on 'medium' as they actually impact little on the visuals while playing it as a game (rather than staring at it like art) yet I get double the frame rate!

[greylantern]

btw - for clarity I meant using the DX10 features config trick gives ~ 25fps all on high @ my res, if I use the default configs (the true DX9 ones) I get ~40 fps with all on high. So you can see that those extra features that are turned on with the 'workaround' are still a drain on the system and though they look very nice I don't think it's worth the hit.

And this was all on XP btw, I've also tried running in DX9 mode on Vista (with the 'config trick' and in pure very high settings) and in general it's slower.

[yogibbear]

I've heard that the demo isn't optimised for more than a single core and also not for 64 bit...

So i'm pretty sure we'd be seeing some improvements in our performance in the final build.

[Xerxes III]

I am not too good at this as I had one of my soldier buddies who is a computer phenom help me with mine.

I have a AMD Athlon 64 X2 5200+ Processor
Got 4 gigs of PNY 5300 DDR2 RAM
XFX 8800GTS 320 Video card
Oh and a Gigabyte m61p-33 motherboard

I went with those. I wanted the 640 video card, but the Mrs. vetoed that and said if there is not that much difference between the two than we do not need it and most people said there is not that much difference between the two cards.

Here is my rig.



http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...y/DSC_0057.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v2...y/DSC_0066.jpg

I am going to redo some of the wire management in there, but for now it works beautifully. LOL

Gosh, I don't know... I'd say you might need another dozen fans or so to keep that baby running cool! = )

[Ric]

Dang that Antec 900 is popular with us gamers. I noticed Shocked has been re-arranging the drive bays as mine are at the top in my case. (Shocked) Do you have the side fan fitted and the centre drive bay one too, as I noticed you've place another 90mm fan on the PSU (how is that mounted for vibrations and noise?)? Now that's what I call cooling! If only the people who developed the 360 had put as much thought into cooling as we PC gamers do.

On the GT card front I have mixed feelings. First let's get the DX10.1 myths out of the way, read this:

http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?op...=6824&Itemid=2

Now for the performance and that nagging question "Did I make a boob buying that GTS 640mb?". Nope I didn't and here's why: first ask yourself how come the major tech review sites have hit the ground running on the day of release with benchies against a whole raft of next-gen (man I hate that expression) games? If they had this card for some time why have they been continuing to plus the GTS 640 as a good price/performance option? Easy to answer: they get paid to write those reviews. Most sites are only showing benchies for the 320 version which has less RAM and none of them are including the fact that you can easily overclock the GTS to GTX-like performance. I'll not deny that it looks like a good performing card and an option for any buyer, but remember that the 512 version will only be 10-20 bucks cheaper than a 640 GTS and although it has more stream processors it has less memory bandwidth (9.6 v 10.0) and fewer vertex processors (16 v 20). I think (INMHO) that with a mild overclock the GTS 640 will perform slightly better than the GT and with more memory for those higher resolutions. In short: don't panic it's hype, marketing, number juggling and some less than objective reviewing.

Just a thought though. If this turns out to be true the green team will have shafted me and leave me with no option but to go the down the AMD road completely as I'm already an AMD cpu fanboy!