Crysis 3

Still one of our most punishing benchmarks, Crysis 3 needs no introduction. With Crysis 3, Crytek has gone back to trying to kill computers and still holds “most punishing shooter” title in our benchmark suite. Only in a handful of setups can we even run Crysis 3 at its highest (Very High) settings, and that’s still without AA. Crysis 1 was an excellent template for the kind of performance required to drive games for the next few years, and Crysis 3 looks to be much the same for 2014.

Crysis 3 - 1920x1080 - High Quality + FXAA

Crysis 3 - 1920x1080 - Medium Quality + FXAA

Crysis 3 - 1920x1080 - Low Quality + FXAA

Battlefield 4 Crysis: Warhead
POST A COMMENT

184 Comments

View All Comments

  • oleguy682 - Tuesday, February 18, 2014 - link

    Except that unlike Apple, Sony and Microsoft are selling each unit at a loss once the BOM, assembly, shipping, and R&D are taken into consideration. The PS3 was a $3 billion loss in the first two years it was available. The hope is that licensing fees, add-ons, content delivery, etc. will result in enough revenue to offset the investment, subsidize further R&D, and leave a bit left over for profit. Apple, on the other hand, is making money on both the hardware and the services.

    And believe it or not, there are a lot more console gamers than PC gamers. Gartner estimates that in 2012, PC gaming made up only $14 billion of the $79 billion gaming market. This does include hardware, in which the consoles and handheld devices (likely) get an advantage, but 2012 was before the PS4 and Xbone were released.

    So while it might be off-the-shelf for this generation, it was never advertised as anything more than a substantial upgrade over the previous consoles, both of which were developed in the early 2000s. In fact, they were designed for 1080p gaming, and that's what they can accomplish (well, maybe not the Xbone if recent reports are correct). Given that 2160p TVs (because calling it 4K is dumb and misleading) are but a pipe dream for all but the most well-heeled of the world and that PCs can't even come close to the performance needed to drive such dense displays (short of spending $1,000+ on GPUs alone), there is no need to over-engineer the consoles to do something that won't be asked of them until they are near EOL.
    Reply
  • Rebel1080 - Tuesday, February 18, 2014 - link

    PC Gaming is growing faster globally than the console market because purchasing consoles in many nations is extremely cost prohibitive due to crushing tariffs. Figure that in 3yrs time both Intel and AMD will have IGPs that will trounce the PS4 and will probably sell for under $99 USD. PC hardware is generally much more accessible to people living in places like Brazil, China and India compared to consoles. It would actually cost less to build a gaming PC if you live there.

    The console market is the USA, Japan and Western Europe, as the economies of these nations continue to decline (all 3 are still in recession) people who want to game without spending a ton will seek lower cost alternatives. With low wattage cards like the 750Ti suddenly every Joe with a 5yr old Dell/HP desktop can now have console level gaming for a fraction of the cost without touching any of his other hardware.
    Reply
  • Rebel1080 - Tuesday, February 18, 2014 - link

    http://www.gamespot.com/articles/sony-says-brazil-... Reply
  • oleguy682 - Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - link

    Brazil is only Brazil. It does not have any bearing on China or India or any other developing nation as they all choose their own path on how they tax and tariff imports. Second, throwing a 750Ti into a commodity desktop (the $800-1,200 variety) from 3 years ago, let alone 5, is unlikely to result in performance gains that would turn it into a full-bore 1080p machine that can run with the same level of eye-candy as a PS4 or XBone. The CPU and memory systems are going to be huge limiting factors.

    As far as the PC being a faster growing segment, the Gartner report from this fall thinks that PC gaming hardware and software will rise from the 2012 baseline of 18.3% of spending to 19.4% of spending in 2015. So yes, it will grow, but it's such a small share already that it barely does anything to move the needle in terms of where gaming goes. In contrast, consoles are expected to grow from 47.4% to 49.6% of spending. The losing sectors are going to be handheld gaming, eaten mostly by tablets and smartphones. PCs aren't dying, but they aren't thriving, regardless of what Brazil does with PS4 imports in 2014.
    Reply
  • Mondozai - Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - link

    USA in recession? You are either ignorant or use your own home-cooked economics for "special" people like yourself.

    As for consoles. Sure you can get low-end cards for cheaper sums a PC but people buy consoles for their games, simplicity and the fact that they are increasingly multimedia machines for a low cost.

    These factors will not change with these new cards.
    Reply
  • Yojimbo - Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - link

    I thought I remember reading a headline a while back that said Sony or Microsoft or both were not planning on selling their hardware for a loss this time... Reply
  • madmilk - Tuesday, February 18, 2014 - link

    The launch PS3 cost over $800 to manufacture, and Sony lost something like $3 billion in the first two years from hardware sales even though the PS3 wasn't even selling that well. To a lesser extent, Microsoft had the same problem with the Xbox 360. Of course Sony and Microsoft would go for cheaper, mid-range off-the-shelf components this time around. No one wants to make the same mistake twice. Reply
  • npz - Tuesday, February 18, 2014 - link

    The PS4 is equivalent to an overclocked 7870 or R9 270X with much more memory.
    Remember, 1280 GCN cores.

    Please show how it's "getting spanked by $119-149 cards"

    Even without the current markup, you won't cannot even come close to buying a computer with PS4's equivalent specs and form factor using an R9 270X for $400.
    Reply
  • npz - Tuesday, February 18, 2014 - link

    And in all these tests, the lower spec R7 265 still handily beats it Reply
  • Rebel1080 - Tuesday, February 18, 2014 - link

    The PS4 is an underclocked Pitcairn gpu with 2 CU units disabled making only 1152 sp @800mhz = 1.84 glops which is lower than both the 260X and 265, I'll even take 750 Ti to challenge it since it out performs the 260X handily. If you need proof so the PS4 crappy performance take a look at the link below and pause different scenes thought the video to compare image quality. As far as $400 you forgot to add the cost of a game $60 + PSN $50. Now we're talking $510 just to start!!!!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cZGw92feB0
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now