Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

New Mac Pro Octo-core / 8800GT / Crysis

Are you going for this setup? >> New Mac Pro Octo-core / 8800GT / Crysis

  • Hell yes I am, I have been dream'n about this!

    Votes: 39 38.6%

  • Uh Macs aren't for gaming. I'm a boring person.

    Votes: 11 10.9%

  • I wish, too rich for my blood. I steal Wi-Fi!

    Votes: 36 35.6%

  • No, what is Crysis? I don't have a crysis, do you?

    Votes: 15 14.9%
  • Total voters
    101
J

jrichman63

macrumors regular
Original poster
New Mac Pro Octo-core / 8800GT / Crysis

Has anyone tested it? post it here and post a vid to youtube.

This is the official - New Mac Pro / 8800GT / Crysis - Thread
 
Where is the option that say Crysis is the biggest pile of dog **** since the movie Anaconda? 😉

Seriously, the hype is ridicously. It is all looks and no bloody gameplay.

A game that requires the newest, top of the line hardware is an insult to 98% of computer users out there. Valve and Blizzard, for instance, are way more conservative in their requirements.
 
"A game that requires the newest, top of the line hardware is an insult to 98% of computer users out there. Valve and Blizzard, for instance, are way more conservative in their requirements."

If you listen to the developers, they developed the game to look great and run on "medium to high" settings on current hardware. I think it's pretty sweet that they made a game that will look even better when newer hardware comes out. They have since said that the way their biggest mistake was they way they didn't inform the market about this. Reference the recent interview at CES.

Even if it's over-hyped, I've played it on medium-high settings and it looks amazing and was pretty fun to play.

Bottom line for me is that the Mac Pro is a damn good and expensive computer...we should be able to put the best video card available in it too.
 
I can tell you how it's going to go with a Quad core at least. As part of my job we built a custom watercooled PC for a customer. It had the following:

3ghz Quad core
8gb of ram
single 8800gtx
Vista x64
dual raptor drives in raid configuration and a 1tb hdd

It got about 35-46fps on the Crysis demo at 1440x900 resolution with every setting maxed out. Keep in mind this was the demo so the final version of the game probably has some additional performance improvements.

If you set the resolution any higher than that the game would start to choke and you'd have to turn settings down to keep over 30fp. At 1900+ resolutions it got a whopping 10fps.

So, I'd expect similar performance on a new Mac Pro(especially given that the quad core we used was the same as the old Mac Pros, not the new Peyrn one), but you lose a bit too due to our card being a GT(although not much).

I think if the customer had gone SLI they would have been able to handle at least 1650x1080 at max settings.

Oh and as a bonus fact, this computer scored a rating of 5.9(max score) in all categories on Vista x64 except ram where is scored a 5.0. Which made me laugh that 8gb of DDR2 800 ram wasn't enough to max out vista.
 
Pressure said:
Seriously, the hype is ridicously. It is all looks and no bloody gameplay.

A game that requires the newest, top of the line hardware is an insult to 98% of computer users out there. Valve and Blizzard, for instance, are way more conservative in their requirements.
Click to expand...

Agreed...

Gameplay wise its rudimentary and as average as you can get. Yes it looks pretty, but so does a cheap whore, who would provide more 'bang for your buck' than one frickin game and a $4k computer 🙄

So yes more options please..

)) I have too much money, and think the sun shines out of crytech's ar*e


)) Crysis is a bland insipid game which forces people to pay ridiculous sums of money to look at a high resolution pretty textured rocks, when in actual fact I can just go outside and the resolution is much better and it doesnt cost me the bloody earth and the frame-rate is a damn site more stable (unless I'm drunk of course)....


😉😛🙂😎



Edit.. oh and this thread should be in the apple games section.
 
MacRumorUser said:
Agreed...

Gameplay wise its rudimentary and as average as you can get. Yes it looks pretty, but so does a cheap whore, who would provide more 'bang for your buck' than one frickin game and a $4k computer 🙄

So yes more options please..

)) I have too much money, and think the sun shines out of crytech's ar*e

)) Crysis is a bland insipid game which forces people to pay ridiculous sums of money to look at a high resolution pretty textured rocks, when in actual fact I can just go outside and the resolution is much better and it doesnt cost me the bloody earth and the frame-rate is a damn site more stable (unless I'm drunk of course)....

😉😛🙂😎

Edit.. oh and this thread should be in the apple games section.
Click to expand...


Lol. You are right, some of the newer games seem to be all technology, and short on play time.

Example even COD4 is much shorter than previous ones.

Haven't tried Crysis yet so can't compare to a cheap wh*re but will take your word for it. =p
 
I really enjoyed Crysis up until the aliens. Then it seemed.. uninspired. I feel like the story really dropped away after you beat the Korean Boss. There seemed to be giant gaps in the plot.

Even on medium settings, on my rig with and 8800GTS, it looks fantastic.
 
SolrFlare said:
It got about 35-46fps on the Crysis demo at 1440x900 resolution with every setting maxed out. Keep in mind this was the demo so the final version of the game probably has some additional performance improvements.
Click to expand...

I think I read that originally the demo did not take advantage of multiple cores, so it might run better with the retail version unless they've updated the demo.

Everything I've read (prior to the current patch) also says the game runs better in XP than Vista.
 
The best and funniest comment I read about the new patch ...

Does the patch make the game playable on computers not imported from the future?
Click to expand...

😀 made me giggle anyway
 
SolrFlare said:
Oh and as a bonus fact, this computer scored a rating of 5.9(max score) in all categories on Vista x64 except ram where is scored a 5.0. Which made me laugh that 8gb of DDR2 800 ram wasn't enough to max out vista.
Click to expand...

I'm sure the amount of ram factors into it, but I think the speed is what really matters there. I was playing around and single channel got me 5.0 and dual channel and a bit of overclocking got me up to 5.9.

The graphics card seems to be the bottleneck in most systems with crysis. A dual core is sufficient; quad-core would help a bit, but it's still largely limited by the graphics card.

Edit: I am using DDR2 800 also, on an nvidia 680i.
 
I'm currently playing Crysis...I'm about to enter the mountain.

All I could say is it's the best looking game I have ever played! And I just finished COD4 (I played both COD4 on my PC and work's 360 and my PC looked way better) and UT.

Note: I work in the game industry.
 
Basically, until the next generation of video cards come out, Crysis will not be maxed out at resolutions of 1920 x 1200 and up. Even Tri-SLI 8800 Ultra's choke on 2560 x 1600 resolution. It's just too demanding of a game.

Extra cores won't help all that much - if you game at any reasonable resolution, the game will be GPU-bound and not CPU-restricted.

SolrFlare said:
I
Oh and as a bonus fact, this computer scored a rating of 5.9(max score) in all categories on Vista x64 except ram where is scored a 5.0. Which made me laugh that 8gb of DDR2 800 ram wasn't enough to max out vista.
Click to expand...

RAM speed is what matters - my 4GB DDR2 800 got a 5.0 but went up to a 5.9 once I overclocked it to DDR2 1000
 
juice said:
I think it's pretty sweet that they made a game that will look even better when newer hardware comes out.
Click to expand...

That's a very stupid thing to do. "Hey you lot here's Vista, sure it won't run well not but just wait till you get a new computer!". Think back to Doom 3, everyone got hyped about the graphics (missing out on the lack of gameplay). It was released and only ran on a minority of computers, but then games that looked as good started to appear too but running on weaker systems. Some might say that time for Crysis is already here with CoD4.

It's lazy coding. Of course open-ended games take up more resources since they've got so much to render and keep track of than a linear game. But it's still no excuse for such a watered down FPS experience.
 
raggedjimmi said:
Some might say that time for Crysis is already here with CoD4.
Click to expand...
CoD4 is very far away from Crysis on the graphics/technology scale. I've played through both games at fully maxed out settings and CoD4 isn't even close, really. I'd say that judging my the looks of these games, it's very much expected to see Crysis running at about one third the speed.

Sure, Crytek could have decreased the visual quality to make it faster, but what's the point when they give the end-user that control anyway? If your computer can't handle it, then just run it at medium instead. Problem solved.
 
How do you guys think it will run with the stock video card?

I have the 2 x Quad 2.8 GHz model, with ati hd2600xt, and 6 GB 800mhz ram.

I would try the demo, but I don't have a copy of xp yet.

Thanks
 
Mercuric Oxide said:
How do you guys think it will run with the stock video card?

I have the 2 x Quad 2.8 GHz model, with ati hd2600xt, and 6 GB 800mhz ram.

I would try the demo, but I don't have a copy of xp yet.

Thanks
Click to expand...

Gamespot shows @ 1024x768 w/medium quality = 29fps
@ 1280x1024 w/medium quality = 20fps

They used a dual core rig. I've read that at lower resolution more cores can help increase performance, but at high resolution its all about your gpu. I think its definitely playable for you at 1024x768, I can run the demo at the same resolution with low-medium settings on a P4 and 1650xt.

But I'm sure you will get much joy when you swap the card for the 8800GT. 😀

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6182806/p-5.html
 
fblack said:
Gamespot shows @ 1024x768 w/medium quality = 29fps
@ 1280x1024 w/medium quality = 20fps

They used a dual core rig. I've read that at lower resolution more cores can help increase performance, but at high resolution its all about your gpu. I think its definitely playable for you at 1024x768, I can run the demo at the same resolution with low-medium settings on a P4 and 1650xt.

But I'm sure you will get much joy when you swap the card for the 8800GT. 😀

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6182806/p-5.html
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info
 
Mac Pro 8 core Arrived today, loaded Cryisis and Bioshock

Hi, this is my first post. My Mac Pro 8 core arrived yesterday. I immediately loaded Vista 32 bit on it and of course Crysis and Bioshock. I have the stock Ati 2600 xt and have the 8800 on order, acually a whole new system but thats a later thread😕 I ran windows and installed all the updates and ran Crysis. Optimal settings for my system were 1024 x 768 medium 4x aa Dx10. I also have a PC with a 8800 ultra sli x2 so I am aware of what the game should look like with a gaming rig. to be brife the game ran quick and smooth, you would have thought I had a 8800gt installed as it ran so well. I then loaded into my Dell quad core and did not have such good luck, same settings ran so horrible I had to change to 800 x 600 to get decent game play, this was using the same Ati 2600 xt that came with the Mac, no PC cards do not work in the Mac tried them, they only work in the PC. Bioshock same results. I do not have the FPS but if you would like I can get them. I am very happy with my new Mac Pro and think it is a great platform for games as well as apps. I am just writing this post as I see so many questions regarding what the capabilities are and specs, I hope I cans help, I am new to using Macs so be patient I am learning. Any help will be appreciated.
 
jrichman63 said:
New Mac Pro Octo-core / 8800GT / Crysis

Has anyone tested it? post it here and post a vid to youtube.

This is the official - New Mac Pro / 8800GT / Crysis - Thread
Click to expand...
I think your target group must be fairly small.

An octo-core Mac Pro/8800 GT is a machine for grown-ups.

"Shoot-em-up" games are for kids.
 
Virgil-TB2 said:
I think your target group must be fairly small.

An octo-core Mac Pro/8800 GT is a machine for grown-ups.

"Shoot-em-up" games are for kids.
Click to expand...

Sorry, you reply confuses me "games are for Kids" and a Pro/8800 GT is for grown ups? Are you implying I am a kid ? or ....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back