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

  • Mondozai - Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - link

    Wait for 800 series budget cards if you have the patience. Hopefully no more than 4-5 months if TSMC does very well on 20. Reply
  • Jeffrey Bosboom - Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - link

    I understand the absolute hashrate on these cards will be low, but I'm interested to know how the focus on power consumption improves mining performance per watt. (Though I can't imagine this lowish-end cards would be used, even if efficient, due to the fixed cost of motherboards to put them in.) Reply
  • Antronman - Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - link

    Nvidia's best cards have tiny hash rates compared to 95% of every AMD GPU ever released. Reply
  • JarredWalton - Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - link

    Apparently you're not up to speed on the latest developments. GTX 780 Ti as an example is now hitting about 700 KHash in scrypt, and word is the GTX 750 will be pretty competitive with 250-260 KHash at stock and much lower power consumption. Some people have actually put real effort into optimizing CUDAminer now, so while AMD still has an advantage, it's not nearly as large as it used to be. You could even make the argument that based on perf/watt in mining, some of NVIDIA's cards might even match AMD's top GPUs. Reply
  • darthrevan13 - Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - link

    Why did they chose to retire 650 Ti Boost and replace it with 750Ti? 650 Ti B is a much better card for high end games because of the memory interface. They should have marketed 750Ti as 750 and 750 as 740.

    And why on earth did they not include full support for HEVEC and DX11.2? You're limiting the industry's adoption for years to come because of you're move. I hope they will fix this in the next generation 800 cards or when they will transition to 20nm.
    Reply
  • Ryan Smith - Thursday, February 20, 2014 - link

    Not speaking for NV here, but keep in mind that 650 Ti Boost is a cut-down GK106 chip. All things considered, 750 Ti will be significantly cheaper to produce for similar performance.

    NVIDIA really only needed it to counter Bonaire, and now that they have GM107 that's no longer the case.
    Reply
  • FXi - Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - link

    No DX 11.2 or even 11.1 support? For THAT price??
    Pass...
    Reply
  • rish95 - Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - link

    According to GeForce.com it supports 11.2. Not sure what's up with this:

    http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/gefor...
    Reply
  • willis936 - Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - link

    You don't need to be compliant to support something. Compliance means you meet all required criteria. Support means you can run it without having necessarily all the bells and whistles. If console hardware has DX compliance then the devs will take advantage of that and when they're ported you'll lose some of the neat graphics tricks. They might still be able to be done in software, you'll just need a bigger GPU to get the same frame rates :p Some things might not be able to be done in software though. Idk enough about DX to say. Reply
  • sourav - Wednesday, February 19, 2014 - link

    does it will support on a pci v2? Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now