open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Crysis runs faster than Eve
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Miilla
Minmatar
Hulkageddon Orphanage
Posted - 2011.06.22 12:36:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: Miilla on 22/06/2011 12:45:34

Really, it does.

No kidding.


I cannot believe that Crysis runs faster on my rigs than Incarna.

Something is wrong here.


Keltas Mortermain
Posted - 2011.06.22 12:37:00 - [2]
 

crysis 1 is kinda old

SirWOLFE
Caldari
Versatech Co.
Raiden.
Posted - 2011.06.22 12:38:00 - [3]
 

Not so much faster on my machine but in station enviroment pushes my graphics card harder than crysis 2 in full detail and it dont look as good as crysis does.

Miilla
Minmatar
Hulkageddon Orphanage
Posted - 2011.06.22 12:39:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: Miilla on 22/06/2011 13:00:29

Originally by: Keltas Mortermain
crysis 1 is kinda old


Yeah but its a serious machine hog.

Im on a GTX260 atm that should handle incarna fine, if its not the GPU code then CQ must be dependant on more bandiwdth, which CCP said it wasn't.

For gods sakes this is barely a 2 year old machine... It has all the requirements and more.

So that rules out the bandwidth suckage.

I hope they optimise the graphics further down the road, 260s can play far more demanding FPSs out there than Incarna should require.

Something is really wrong.




Dont take this as an i hate incarna thread, absolutely not; I think it is actually awesome (compared to teh bland station before), but something is really wrong in their graphics engine I think if a more demanding FPS can out perform this.


Hannibal Ord
Minmatar
Noir.
Noir. Mercenary Group
Posted - 2011.06.22 12:40:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: Miilla
Really, it does.

No kidding.


I cannot believe that Crysis runs faster on my rigs than Incarna.

Something is wrong here.




I think that's basically unfair. I mean, how can you compare the awesomeness of CQ to Crysis. Comparing Crysis to CQ is like Morrowind to Oblivion.

Keltas Mortermain
Posted - 2011.06.22 12:41:00 - [6]
 

cpu bottlenecking maybe i dunno

Tobiaz
Spacerats
Posted - 2011.06.22 12:44:00 - [7]
 

I was thinking the same thing just a few minutes ago. Perhaps CCP is trying to set a new bar on minimum machine specs. Maybe they got jealous of the attention Crysis was getting for it back then.

Miilla
Minmatar
Hulkageddon Orphanage
Posted - 2011.06.22 12:59:00 - [8]
 

CCP, PLEASE spend the next month focusing on nothing but optimsating the graphics CORE.



BLACK-STAR
Posted - 2011.06.22 13:06:00 - [9]
 

Confirming I run Crysis 2 on maxiumum settings with anti-analyzing at 60FPS, without AA it's 80+FPS.

Incarna Captains Closet runs at 40FPS.! WTF! And as I notice the FPS dropping as the patches kept rolling through Incursion I had 80FPS w/ AA on EVE in space.

This isn't a performance issue, I had just did full rig cleaning, fan runs smooth and maintenance/defrag. Now I can run EVE fine, but it's taxing peoples rigs.

Miilla
Minmatar
Hulkageddon Orphanage
Posted - 2011.06.22 13:08:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: BLACK-STAR
Confirming I run Crysis 2 on maxiumum settings with anti-analyzing at 60FPS, without AA it's 80+FPS.

Incarna Captains Closet runs at 40FPS.! WTF! And as I notice the FPS dropping as the patches kept rolling through Incursion I had 80FPS w/ AA on EVE in space.

This isn't a performance issue, I had just did full rig cleaning, fan runs smooth and maintenance/defrag. Now I can run EVE fine, but it's taxing peoples rigs.



Already defragged after i patched lol, I have the cache set to max too, plenty of memory.


Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.06.22 13:10:00 - [11]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 22/06/2011 13:12:30


Confirming that Crysis 2 gets better FPS compared to the EVE CQ environment at maxed-out graphics settings for both.

Welcome to some time ago - what to do so CQ isn't universally hated.
CQ is sort of nice, I guess. But lack of options, mandatory nature = INSTAHATE
You guys never listen early enough nor make noise strong enough when it matters.
Guess what, even the "(do not) load station environment" is supposed to be TEMPORARY only.
Twisted Evil

Quick recap, in case CCP insists on keeping CQ the default environment :
* MANDATORY - separate the CQ from the non-CQ graphics detail settings into two completely separate groups which you can set differently
* MANDATORY - keep the ESC menu option to not load any environment at all
* STRONGLY PREFERRED - add some even lower graphics detail levels for CQ
* OPTIONAL BUT HIGHLY DESIRABLE - do not delete the current hangar environments AND make them an alternative (default disabled) via the ESC menu

Axhind
Caldari
Ars ex Discordia
Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2011.06.22 13:12:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Edited by: Akita T on 22/06/2011 13:10:11

Confirming that indeed, Crysis 2 gets better FPS compared to the EVE CQ environment at maxed-out graphics settings.

Welcome to some time ago - what to do so CQ isn't universally hated.
CQ is sort of nice, I guess. But lack of options, mandatory nature = INSTAHATE
You guys never listen early enough nor make noise strong enough when it matters.
Guess what, even the "(do not) load station environment" is supposed to be TEMPORARY only.
Twisted Evil




I don't think you can have enough memory or fast enough gear for CCP to be unable to bring the FPS to single digit numbers with their epic programming skills. I just wonder what this means for dust. If this is the level of graphics and movement not even consolers are going to play it.

Sue Shee
Posted - 2011.06.22 13:13:00 - [13]
 

Edited by: Sue Shee on 22/06/2011 13:14:05
Originally by: Keltas Mortermain
crysis 1 is kinda old
& i hear crysis 2 is having major performance issues (BF2 beats crysis in performance)

enterprisePSI
Unimatrix 0.1
Posted - 2011.06.22 13:15:00 - [14]
 

Please stop comparing a console port like crysis 2, with the CQ which is pure pc stuff.


Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2011.06.22 14:16:00 - [15]
 

Originally by: enterprisePSI
Please stop comparing a console port like crysis 2, with the CQ which is pure pc stuff.

Yeah, you're right... how could we compare something that actually looks better and runs faster with something that doesn't do that YET ?
Twisted Evil
P.S. Crysis 2 as a game is junk. But it also only used DirectX 9.0c, just like EVE. So the comparison is quite valid.

San Severina
Minmatar
Posted - 2011.06.22 14:19:00 - [16]
 

I've been saying that all day, doesn't make much sense but it's true. I run Crysis 1 on this machine much cleaner than CQ, why all the resources for one cr4ppy room?

Grats CCP you now have the new industry benchmarking tool, people will be building super machines to get max framerate at high rez on your engine.


 

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only