About Cryostasis's Performances - Page 2

Oli-Wan · #11 03-29-2009, 09:29 PM

... So what?

I remember a loooot of games "Nvidia the way it's meant to be played" which worked better on ATi.

In the case of Cryostasis, neither ATi nor nVidia have good performance, the brand is not the problem, and as far as I know, the other PhysX games aren't slower on ATi than nVidia without PhysX, Mirror's Edge is a good exemple.

So stop trolling... ATi is not the problem, PhysX is deactivate. The only difference between nVidia and ATi in this game is that ATi hadn't all the useless physx effects... So, I repeat, yes, I believe that a game with PhysX support will run well on my card without PhysX effects, and that is the way it should be...

No need to discuss about the two 3D Card manufacturer, there will be a patch, so there are no problems anymore.

Nike-it · #12 03-30-2009, 12:33 PM

The upcoming patch should make the performance on ATI cards similar to Nvidia, right now, Cryo is better optimized for NVidia.

EvilInside · #13 03-30-2009, 01:53 PM

when the fox could not reach the grapes say it is sour...
when the ati users could not get the physx say it is useless...

Oli-Wan · #14 03-31-2009, 09:10 AM

PhysX is useless since it's release by Ageia a couple of years ago, with the PPU. Since this first release, nVidia buy the technology (like usual...), and it didn't change anything. OpenCL and Havok is a lot more intersting. But it is not the debate...

Breach · #15 04-02-2009, 12:09 AM

I have a nVidia GTX 295 with 182.08 and PhysX enabled. At 1900x1200 it's still choppy at times at max settings. The weird thing is -- if I actually disable hardware PhysX it runs better?

Andrei Mateescu · #16 04-06-2009, 12:01 PM

GTX 295? Wow, I'll probably sell my soul to

.

Anyway, back to the topic at hand:
By now everybody knows that Cryostasis may run horribly, on just about anything(that includes 295), so get over it. A patch is coming, which I think is the most the devs can do at the moment.
End of discussion... please.

The PhysX issue, likewise, is much to prominent. The fact of the matter is that all of the leading physics engines have their pros and cons. PhysX falls exactly in that category, it has some unique abillities and some incredible "inabillities", so ...get over it. And I wouldn't worry too much about the "corporatist actions" of nVidia either, bearing in mind the fact that it's not going quite how they planned. Again - get over it.

boredgunner · #17 04-11-2009, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oli-Wan

... So what?

I remember a loooot of games "Nvidia the way it's meant to be played" which worked better on ATi.

In the case of Cryostasis, neither ATi nor nVidia have good performance, the brand is not the problem, and as far as I know, the other PhysX games aren't slower on ATi than nVidia without PhysX, Mirror's Edge is a good exemple.

So stop trolling... ATi is not the problem, PhysX is deactivate. The only difference between nVidia and ATi in this game is that ATi hadn't all the useless physx effects... So, I repeat, yes, I believe that a game with PhysX support will run well on my card without PhysX effects, and that is the way it should be...

No need to discuss about the two 3D Card manufacturer, there will be a patch, so there are no problems anymore.

Perhaps you should look up the term trolling. I have a friend who has an AMD dual core CPU overclocked to 3.4 ghz as well as an ATI Radeon HD 4870 video card, he hardly surpasses 20 FPS in this game. On the other hand, before I installed my PPU I got much higher performance than him, I only dropped to around 20 FPS in a few areas, the rest of the time I was above 30. Not to mention I have a larger monitor and play on a large resolution. I know my GTX 260 CORE 216 is slightly faster than the 4870 but the difference is almost negligible, except for in PhysX games like Cryostasis. My CPU is faster but either way our cards aren't in much of a bottleneck. That was just one post from experience. I would like to see how the game runs after the patch is released.

Breach · #18 04-11-2009, 10:52 PM

I don't want to bash Cryostasis performance merely because this doesn't help it. As I said in an another forum this kind of performance is something I'm OK to let Crysis get away with, but not this game. Ultimately justice materializes in sales figures.

Regardless. As I said even with an nVidia GTX 295 I was hitting issues. From what I hear ATi performance is pretty horrid.

JuggernautOfWar · #19 04-17-2009, 01:09 AM

Yes, all we can do is wait for a patch which will hopefully introduce multi-threading. (April 20th) I believe that is a huge issue here, our CPUs are not being utilized by the game, so we get horrid frames.

serinity · #20 04-17-2009, 01:25 AM

I run a i7, 6 gigs of ram, and 1 nvidia 260 with no problems at all. it is smooth sailing the whole way. Play with max settings and everything turned on. I've even gone into the Nvidia control panel and enabled supersampling, 8x antialiasing and anisoptropic and set it to enhance current settings.

I dont understand how you say that a 295 will have problems lol. It shouldnt. Maybe when it gets choppy at times you have something running in the background?

My only issue is that fly mode is on and clipping is turned off so everytime i start up the game i have to open the console and turn that crap off.