|
|
[转贴]Crysis Warhead 详尽评测，不过都是0*AA,0*AF测试
http://www.techspot.com/article/118-crysis-warhead-performance/
Roughly this time last year Crytek released the highly anticipated first-person shooter Crysis exclusively for the PC. Since then the game has been used as the prime benchmark for high-end graphics cards, with only a handful of them being able to conquer the title, delivering great frame rates using high quality settings.
Amazingly, even the latest generation AMD and Nvidia graphics cards still struggle in Crysis, and require a great deal of tweaking to get the perfect balance of quality and performance. Result of these insane hardware requirements to play Crysis in all its glory, many gamers have stayed away from this amazing title, which truly is a shame.
That said, we understand just how disheartening it can be to spend big dollars on a new gaming system and have it struggle with a game.
![]()
In the meantime, Crytek has been working hard on a successor of the title called “Crysis Warhead”. This new version of the game updates and refines the gameplay through a parallel story that follows Sergeant Michael "Psycho" Sykes. Psycho is presented with his own challenges on the other side of the island during the same time period of the first game. Crysis Warhead features new fully customizable weapons, vehicles, and enemies, along with new multiplayer content.
Our take on this article will be all about hardware performance considering it is based on an enhanced version of the CryEngine 2. While many gamers were outraged by the lack of optimizations in the original Crysis, we simply felt it was too far ahead of its time.
Crytek claims this optimized version allows for enhanced performance. A headline that caught our attention earlier this year read “Crysis Warhead to run smoothly on a $600 PC?”. Crytek's CEO stated at the time that a PC valued at just over $600 could run the title with high settings enabled at 30 to 35 frames per second.
![]()
This got us wondering just how well Crysis Warhead had been optimized and why these “optimizations” had not been applied to the original. Then again, the developer cleverly missed from mentioning at what resolution gamers could expect this kind of performance (when making the 30 fps claim).
And so today we plan to find out exactly how Crysis Warhead performs using a range of previous and current generation graphics cards. Crysis has renamed their quality presets from Very High, High, and Medium, to Enthusiast, Gamer, and Mainstream, while there is also a Minimum setting.
Our testing covers the Enthusiast, Gamer, and Mainstream quality settings at 1440x900, 1680x1050, and 1920x1200 resolutions.
Image Quality Comparison
Before we get stuck into the performance testing, let’s just take a moment to look at and compare the three main quality presets.
![]()
![]()
![]()
The above images were taken from the level that we benchmarked with. Called “Call me Ishmael”, this is primarily a jungle level. As you can see, there is excellent lighting and a great deal of detail in the enthusiast screen shot. The mountains and trees way off in the distance look impressive, while the water and beaches look extremely real.
Dropping the quality settings down to the gamer setting removes a lot of the realistic looking lighting and shader effects. A lot of detail goes missing as well, such as the trees on the far mountain, and the textures on the mountains themselves are not nearly as nice. The water also loses a lot of its realism, and shadows are a lot less noticeable.
The mainstream quality settings basically turn Crysis Warhead into Far Cry, as the graphics now look very old and outdated. Although the water still looks okay, a huge amount of detail has been lost. Almost all the trees in the distance are missing, there is no haze over the mountains, and the sky has lost its natural color. The mainstream quality settings are very ugly and do this game no justice!
![]()
![]()
![]()
When looking above in Crysis Warhead there are still some pretty amazing sights to be seen, and this is one of them. Using the enthusiast settings made for some pretty amazing effects. The clouds, lightning, and the alien ship all looked very real, making the game more exciting to play.
Reducing the quality settings to the gamer preset killed the atmosphere for me. While the clouds and lightning still looked quite good, it was nothing compared to what I had seen before. The mainstream graphics were again shocking in a bad sense.
![]()
![]()
![]()
The ice levels were extremely demanding, but they also looked really good as you can see from the above enthusiast screen shot.
The level of detail is amazing here and in-game it just looks unbelievable. Reducing the quality settings to gamer killed the lighting and softened the shadows. Some of the shadows in the distance are gone, along with a lot of detail. The mainstream quality setting is again very ordinary, removing even more detail and almost all light sources.
Benchmarks: Enthusiast
Test System Specs: Hardware
- Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 @ 3.00GHz (LGA775)
- x2 Kingston HyperX 2GB PC2-8500 Module(s)
- ASUS P5E3 Premium (Intel X48)
- OCZ GameXStream (700 watt)
- Seagate 500GB 7200-RPM (Serial ATA300)
- ASUS GeForce 9600 GT (512MB)
- Inno3D GeForce 8800 GT (512MB)
- ASUS GeForce 8800 GTS (512MB)
- Inno3D GeForce 9800 GT (512MB)
- Inno3D GeForce 9800 GTX (512MB)
- Inno3D GeForce 9800 GTX+ (512MB)
- Gigabyte GeForce GTX 260 (896MB)
- ASUS GeForce GTX 280 (1GB)
- ASUS Radeon HD 3850 (512MB)
- ASUS Radeon HD 3870 (512MB)
- ASUS Radeon HD 3870 X2 (1GB)
- ASUS Radeon HD 4850 (512MB)
- VisionTek Radeon HD 4870 (512MB)
- Diamond Radeon HD 4870 X2 (2GB)
Software
- Microsoft Windows Vista Ultimate SP1 (64-bit)
- Intel System Driver 8.4.0.1016
- Nvidia Forceware 175.19 WHQL
- Nvidia Forceware 177.79 WHQL
- Nvidia Forceware 177.41 WHQL
- ATI Catalyst 8.9 WHQL
![]()
The enthusiast settings interested us the most, as Crysis Warhead looks phenomenal when using these quality settings. However, just like the “very high” presets in the original Crysis game, the enthusiast quality settings are not a realistic option for most gaming systems. The GeForce GTX 280 (1GB), which was paired with a quad-core processor running at 3.0GHz, managed just 32fps on average at 1440x900.
Unfortunately, this is not a perfectly playable frame rate and gamers will occasionally experience choppy sequences during intense scenes.
Ideally we like to have an average of 45+ fps when playing single-player first person shooters, and you simply are not going to get this kind of performance in Crysis Warhead using the enthusiast settings. At least this is not going to be possible without using a number of GeForce GTX 280 graphics cards.
The dual-GPU Radeon HD 4870 X2 managed an average of just 31fps, followed by the GeForce GTX 260 and Radeon HD 4870 cards, which rendered 29fps. Therefore, at 1440x900 the Radeon HD 4870 X2 was just 2fps faster than the Radeon HD 4870. Clearly Crossfire is not working in this title very well and it may take higher resolutions before we will see any real advantages.
![]()
Bumping up the resolution to 1680x1050 did nothing for the playability of Crysis Warhead when using the enthusiast settings. The GeForce GTX 280 dropped 4fps and remained the fastest graphics card tested. The Radeon HD 4870 X2 was still 1fps slower, rendering an average of just 27fps, making for extremely choppy game play. The Radeon HD 4870 managed just 22fps, making it 5fps slower than its dual-GPU version.
![]() |
|
IP卡
狗仔卡
发表于 2008-9-26 09:12
QQ好友和群
收藏
分享
好贴
烂贴
提升卡
置顶卡
沉默卡
喧嚣卡
变色卡
显身卡