Crysis 3 VGA Graphics Benchmark performance test

Posted on: 02/23/2013 12:09 AM

---

You can always find out vids on our YT channel btw:

http://www.youtube.com/user/hhagedoorn

Not to self, make a link on the frontpage for that !

Nice vids!!!

I've seen a few already but it's cool to have them all in one place.

Posted on: 02/23/2013 12:15 AM

---

Man, next time I buy a gpu, I need to get something good because mine seem to fall off of the review charts real quick. The 460 sucked anyway...

Cool to see the game runs pretty nicely on the modern cards though. Can't wait to upgrade in the summer.

Posted on: 02/23/2013 12:18 AM

---

You can always find out vids on our YT channel btw:

http://www.youtube.com/user/hhagedoorn

Note to self, make a link on the frontpage for that !

Guru3d has a youtube channel , Osum!!

Cheers Hilbert.

Posted on: 02/23/2013 12:26 AM

---

Ok chaps, after years of trusty service and quite a bit of abuse from our side the GeForce GTX 570 seems to have died a horrible death, hence the totally low performance results.

I have removed the GTX 570 results and replaced them with GTX 580.

Posted on: 02/23/2013 12:46 AM

---

Ordered this gamer earlier today, hoping it arrives 2morrow. Looks like I should be OK with two 6950s at 1080p!? One probably would have sucked a little bit.

Posted on: 02/23/2013 12:51 AM

---

Top notch, cheers Hilbert.

580sli should do me good then until Metro LL maybe.

Posted on: 02/23/2013 12:52 AM

---

Thanks for the review!You are aweasome.

Posted on: 02/23/2013 01:03 AM

---

Great job! But the game is unoptimized like hell. Random drops everywhere. I bet it's rendering unnecessary bloat in the background just for the sake of "it'll melt pc's". It is Crysis 2 with bigger environments and somewhat better lighting engine after all.

Posted on: 02/23/2013 02:13 AM

---

Good informations in this review, i just tried Crisis 3, 3 hours ago on my 580 Lightning XE,hum if i want to play in very high settings,i really need to upgrade,i even tried in stereoscopic 3D ,it's really impressive..
maybe i have to wait for the GTX 7XX serie,i'm really confuse about,the GPU that i should buy,in 2 weeks i'll be at 900 euros saved,i need a good advice

Posted on: 02/23/2013 02:34 AM

---

thnx for the review great job like always ,but this is little bit weird i have a hd 7950 oc to 1230/1600 and my setting in crysis 3 are TEX Veryhigh+HIGH Preset+4SMAA 1080p , and the amount of the memory are all the time at 2300 2700 mb so how can u have on the titan only 2200 mb at the 1080p max out ???????????? and other question how can the hd 7970 ghz be so slower than a gtx 680 in amd game title ??? i mean even in nvidia games hd 7970ghz are the best , but amd title !! with huge difference !! this is little bit weird do u have a good explanation ?

Posted on: 02/23/2013 02:43 AM

---

Nice review Hilbert. Thanks. I'm wondering if we'll see another test with SLI and Xfire? It's going to be a while till I can afford the game so in the meantime I'm very interested to see how 2 660ti's can hold up.

Posted on: 02/23/2013 03:06 AM

---

Simple AMD drivers give them a few weeks. I remember Deus Ex:HR not having a functioning CF profile for the 6xxx cards an that was a Gaming Evolved title as well.

Posted on: 02/23/2013 03:08 AM

---

The game might be "the way it's meant to be bundled"

in terms of how you get hold of it, but if you want REALLY to PLAY it...you've got to equip yourself with the real card (NVidia), substitute just won't do the magic...

Posted on: 02/23/2013 03:09 AM

---

holy video ram usage at 1920x1200 8x aa.

Posted on: 02/23/2013 04:59 AM

---

i fix!


@wenimin. Hold out and wait for 7xx series, or pick up a gtx680 4gb.

Posted on: 02/23/2013 05:51 AM

---

this is nvidia biased bench

pcgameshardware.de reviewed crysis 3 with latest drivers....
1080p,4xaa,VHQ maxed out-
7970ghz-43 fps
7970=39 fps
680=38 fps
7950=35 fps
670=34 fps

see it for yourself-
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Crysis-3-PC-235317/News/Crysis-3-Benchmarks-von-AMD-1056491/galerie/2046899/#?a_id=1056491&g_id=-1&i_id=2046902

Who cares? Crappy performance across the board. It is funny to hear people talking about wanting to upgrade for C3 though. Do you upgrade your card for 3dMark? Crytek releases a point and click interactive (I use the term loosely here) benchmark with brain-dead ai that lasts all of 7 hours (again, I'm being generous) and people with SLI and crossfire setups are crying on each others shoulders ready to dish out hundreds more in addition to the $60+ that they just spent. Crytek, AMD, and Nvidia must be laughing their collective arses off. It actually is quite brilliant entertainment. But don't worry, Maldo will probably come along and mod the game to look better and run great, even on DLD's "magical" 470.

Posted on: 02/23/2013 05:54 AM

---

this is nvidia biased bench

pcgameshardware.de reviewed crysis 3 with latest drivers....
1080p,4xaa,VHQ maxed out-
7970ghz-43 fps
7970=39 fps
680=38 fps
7950=35 fps
670=34 fps

see it for yourself-
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Crysis-3-PC-235317/News/Crysis-3-Benchmarks-von-AMD-1056491/galerie/2046899/#?a_id=1056491&g_id=-1&i_id=2046902

313.95 aren't the latest drivers. The newer ones give a performance increase in Crysis 3 specifically, granted it's only 5% but still. Plus it's two different tests, Hilbert is using FXAA vs 4xMSAA on that review, obviously it's going to be different numbers and that could potentially offset values between cards differently, but I mean wtf are you supposed to do, show every single possible combination of AA/AF/etc and dozens of cards? I can just as easily say that using 4xMSAA is advantageous for AMD and thus that site is bias.

But yeah go away.

Posted on: 02/23/2013 07:53 AM

---

Nice review, thanks Hilbert. But is the 7950 a ghz edition (1000mhz) or just the boost edition (925mhz)? Didnt know there was a 7950ghz ed.

Posted on: 02/23/2013 08:25 AM

---

Unfortunately it seems much of the extra processing power for the higher quality settings goes into non-perceptible visuals.

An oversimplified analogy:
You have two numbers multiplied together. At low settings, the numbers are to 1 decimal places. On medium settings, it is to 4 decimal places. On high, it is to 9 decimal places, and on very high is is to 15 decimal places.

'Very high values'
4.485763298539084
2.390483453945839

'High' values
4.485763299
2.390483454

'Medium' values
4.4858
2.3905

'Low' values
4.5
2.4

So, for the very high, high, medium, and low values you end up with:
Low = 10.8
Medium = 10.7233
High = 10.723142945
Very high = 10.723142943475189

So, although 'very high' has more precision, by the time you get to all the decimal places the difference become inperceivable. Of course, there are millions of these calculations going on, many of which may be interacting, but overall you cannot really see the difference. The other thing is that many of these high precision calculations may be done on thing that you would not see a difference with regardless of whether it were the precision of medium or very high, so it just ends up crippling the performance. Instead of improving visuals at the source there is much post-processing done to dress it up.

Now (excuse the sexist connotation here).
If you have two women, one is a '4', and the other is a '7'. I mean a proper '4' and a proper '7', some people go around calling 7's a 10 it kind of takes the meaning away from it!

Anyways, with a little bit of work an makeup, you can make the 7 look like a 9, but to make a 4 look as close to 9 as possible you really have to spend a lot more time and money to bump her score up, and she may only end up a 7 in the end. Post-processing is like the make-up, you are dressing the 4 up to make it look better, just with higher settings you end up with a higher end result, but at the end of the day, the fact remains is, she's still a 4, and you spend all that time and effort when you could have started with a 7 or higher in the first place.

The visuals in Crysis, and any other game, is analogous to this. As Maldo proved with Crysis 2, he bumped that girl's base score up, and the end result is worth it! There should be a greater difference between the low and very high settings, visually, in Crysis 3. It seems they spent a lot of time covering up blemishes and applying makeup to areas under the dress (where you won't see, unless maybe if you're drunk in which case covering them won't make a difference), instead of applying it her face and perking up her breasts.

Let's just hope that with future patches, they remove the unnecessary work underneath the dress which will save time (increase performance).

Posted on: 02/23/2013 08:34 AM

---

this is nvidia biased bench

pcgameshardware.de reviewed crysis 3 with latest drivers....
1080p,4xaa,VHQ maxed out-
7970ghz-43 fps
7970=39 fps
680=38 fps
7950=35 fps
670=34 fps

see it for yourself-
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Crysis-3-PC-235317/News/Crysis-3-Benchmarks-von-AMD-1056491/galerie/2046899/#?a_id=1056491&g_id=-1&i_id=2046902

So why is it that they used beta6 drivers from the 18th and not the latest nvidia drivers from the exact same day ? (released earlier even)

Fail!

Posted on: 02/23/2013 08:53 AM

---

Great mini review HH.
I've played under an hour so far and found a tweak posted by DarrenSimmons to be well worth trying.
http://forums.guru3d.com/showpost.php?p=4535260&postcount=1857

With my GTX580 clocked by about +20%, running max settings, no AA, vsync on, I havent seen max GPU use yet.
(313.95 driver)
It has hugged 60fps the whole time.
Its early in the game though so perhaps I'll eat my words

ps the game looks awesome!!


there are tons of nvidia paid shill sites...g3d one of them
hardwaresecrets got banned 2 years ago coz they refuse to kiss nvis butt

http://www.geforce.com/whats-new/articles/nvidia-geforce-314-07-whql-drivers-released

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Crysis-3-PC-235317/News/Crysis-3-Benchmarks-von-AMD-1056491/galerie/2046899/#?a_id=1056491&g_id=-1&i_id=2046902

You managed 2 whole posts since joining before you started to troll.
Then you did 2 consecutive trolls in the same thread.
One post not enough for you, feel bigger now?
Take a serious look at yourself before criticising others, you're not even a good forum member lol.

fyi, I havent seen anything that makes me believe they favour NVidia.
y u feel so inferior?

Posted on: 02/23/2013 08:56 AM

---

With my GTX580 clocked by about +20%, running max settings, no AA, vsync on, I havent seen max GPU use yet.
(313.95 driver)
It has hugged 60fps the whole time.
Its early in the game though so perhaps I'll eat my words


at what resolution are you playing ?

Posted on: 02/23/2013 09:06 AM

---

1080p.
I'll recheck my full settings in a minute.
I think I disabled motion blur.

Yep, everything on ultra, motion blur disabled, vsync on.

Posted on: 02/23/2013 09:20 AM

---

i'm not trolling ...i have given benches and even nv off bench result..
.....and this review is pathetic and fake coz there is no 7950GHZ edition card in the market unless you manually oc it....only msi(aftermarket design) recently released 7950 with boost clock to 960mhz but not ghz edition...similar hazard they did with fc3 bench when they say 7970boost model.....even an elite member(2003 join date,2500+posts,5 rep points) of anand told me not to give much heed on g3d ....they are one among many of nvi biased site and generally do time-line demo benches

So you're here because... ?

For someone so nitpicky, you failed to notice:
1) they have clocked some of AMDs gfx cards to 1GHz and shown how they will perform.
Hardly the action of an NVidia shill.

2) they havent stated that any of the cards are the GHz "edition", you're the only one that did that.
Look at all the performance charts, not one of the cards are labelled, they are reference clocks or running at the specified speed.

Again before criticising, look at what you are doing.
There are quite a few decent words to describe you, but I wont stoop to your level.
I will grin a bit though


If you dont like this forum or the review, start/write your own.
See how you get on

Posted on: 02/23/2013 09:50 AM

---

2) they havent stated that any of the cards are the GHz "edition", you're the only one that did that.
Look at all the performance charts, not one of the cards are labelled, they are reference clocks or running at the specified speed.


Not that I'm taking sides with that troll but:



clearly states "GHz"

Good stuff from Guru3D as always though, keep them trolls out.