Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
https://www.dsogaming.com/pc-performance-analyses/crysis-remastered-suffers-from-single-threaded-cpu-issues-just-like-the-original-game/
"Crysis Remastered uses the DX11 API and the VKray extension in order to support hardware-accelerated Ray Tracing. However, it appears that Crytek has not made any CPU improvements or optimizations to the game.
In order to test the game, we used an Intel i9 9900K with 16GB of DDR4 at 3600Mhz and an NVIDIA RTX 2080Ti. We also used Windows 10 64-bit and the latest version of the GeForce drivers."
The most CPU intensive setting is "objects". Don't put it above high on OG. If you have remastered, then leave it on medium (on this setting it looks better than very high on the original Crysis whilst having much better performance)
see, this is why DSO got a bad rep, because they sometimes talk a load of crap. Whilst I'll say a lot of bad things about remastered, the CPU related performance is much better and it appears to use at least 3 cores, whereas OG crysis was thrashing 1 core and using 50-60% of another.
but then again, I'm sure DSO lollfully believe that low objects on OG is the same as using low objects on remastered.
Crysis Remastered doesn't look better than OG Crysis though.
Even on "Can it Run Crysis" setttings.
The OG shaders look better, they perform better too. All GPU.
But CPU wise, and LOD/dither/draw distance wise, remastered really is a remaster.
What isn't reasonable though, is the AI, on Delta, sometimes I am having huge stuttering even if the frame counter says 75 FPS, by entering sys_AI 0 not only the framerate jumps to 95 FPS but all the stuttering is gone !! Well, the AI too so the game is not interesting to play anymore, but it is the AI that is so badly optimized after all...
yes that's right, the AI is done on the CPU and is very demanding.
When the limiting factor to the frame rate is the CPU, you will see stuttering. you can mitigate this by limiting the frame rate to something you never drop under.
But the problem is, sometimes you will drop down to 30-40fps, even on highly overclocked i9 etc, because the OG Crysis can only use 2 cores.
here is comparison video I made with OG crysis running in warhead engine, to crysis remastered. both on 'high settings' (high objects, done by CPU) but with low shaders and post processing (done by GPU), so that the only limiting factor to both is the CPU (no frame rate cap). GPU never reaches 100%, because of the low resolution. CPU usage in OG crysis reaches its max cores (25%, ie 100% of 2 cores on HT quad core). Crysis remastered reaches 40-50% of HT quad cores (ie thrashing 3-4 cores).
this is one of the most CPU demanding parts of the game, the warship in the harbour. there's lots of soldiers and that's what makes the frame rate tank on OG crysis. The new crysis remastered has some flaws, but it seems to be able to utilise 4 cores now, the minimum frame rate is higher:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jllz8CHcJME&feature=youtu.be
The framerate limiting this is a good idea, and I can confirm that it works, but indeed the game will go low framerate at some points anyways...
maybe it stutters less because of the AI in lower difficulties ? maybe there is less enemies or less complex behaviors ?
yeah, you could be right. Also, they may have culled some AI in Crysis remastered to get it to run at higher CPU related frame rate.
btw, the AI is part of the objects imo to an extent, since they are in field of view when the objects radius is increased with the objects draw distance.
damn this game gives me blue balls... I limited the framerate at 60 FPS with RivaTuner for the moment... seems to be a good compromise, as it will only stutter when the framerate goes below 60 and at lower framerates the CPU stutters are less noticeable somehow.
It is crazy that we have to limit the framerate just to give some headroom to the main core so the lua scripts execution for AI doesn't go over the frame budget... lol
It's almost never a problem when the GPU is the only thing stopping the frame rate going higher. With the GPU drivers, they make frame pacing fix by making it so that GPU is not allowed to reach 100% usage. it can reach very close to 100%, like 99.x%, because if it hits 100%, the GPU has no slack in it's frame queue and you run out of frames. This is why enabling low input lag can sometimes result in more stutter, and also why AMD crossfire (and even sli) stuttered (because one GPU was waiting for the other one to hand it a frame, it runs out of frames to give you) until they made frame pacing fix.
Sadly, there is no such thing as this with CPU, so we have to do it ourselves often with RTSS or other frame rate cap. though some games don't have any issue with it. I think GTA IV is the worst possible example of unrestricted CPU related frame rate, just stutter city.
I discovered this game high thread was running on logical core 2 in my 5900X. Hence logically that thread was pegged at 100% no matter what, even at 60fps low settings.
I set the game to run on 0,2,4,6,8,10 (all physical cores) and the usage went down dramatically so I can play at 4K / 90Hz with most settings maxed out in my 120Hz M28U monitor and 3090.