Crysis system requirements released

Anusha

Member
Jun 13, 2006
25,864
5
0
The 2nd game from Crytek after Farcry is the game everyone is looking forward to. The developers have released the system requirements for the game and it looks like that these will be final. Here's the requirements:

Minimum Requirements
CPU: Athlon 64 3000+/Intel 2.8ghz
Graphics: Nvidia 6200 or ATI X1300 - Shader Model 2.0
RAM: 768MB on Windows XP or 1GB on Windows Vista
HDD: 6GB
Internet: 256k+
Optical Drive: DVD
Software: DX9.0c with Windows XP

Recommended Requirements
CPU: Dual-core CPU (Athlon X2/Pentium D)
Graphics: Nvidia 7600GT or ATI X1800GTO (SM 3.0) or DX10 equivalent
RAM: 1.5GB+
HDD: 6GB
Internet: 512k+ (128k+ upstream)
Optical Drive: DVD
Software: DX9.0c with Windows XP

Source: www.crysis-online.com

Seems like my new video card is supported. Yippie...:love:
 

Anusha

Member
Jun 13, 2006
25,864
5
0
LOL.
However, considering what people used to tell, I'm relieved that it's this good. I first heard that you would at least need a Geforce 7 series card just to run it - not play it (if you get what i mean ;))
 

HishamZz

Member
May 5, 2006
432
1
0
woofah.. oh wel.. @least ma colour card is just AT the minimum requirements.. lmao.. freakin RAM needs a upgo though.. shit..

Zz
 

thilinapm

Active member
  • Sep 11, 2006
    1,743
    0
    36
    Panadura
    Anusha said:
    The 2nd game from Crytek after Farcry is the game everyone is looking forward to. The developers have released the system requirements for the game and it looks like that these will be final. Here's the requirements:

    Minimum Requirements
    CPU: Athlon 64 3000+/Intel 2.8ghz
    Graphics: Nvidia 6200 or ATI X1300 - Shader Model 2.0
    RAM: 768MB on Windows XP or 1GB on Windows Vista
    HDD: 6GB
    Internet: 256k+
    Optical Drive: DVD
    Software: DX9.0c with Windows XP

    Recommended Requirements
    CPU: Dual-core CPU (Athlon X2/Pentium D)
    Graphics: Nvidia 7600GT or ATI X1800GTO (SM 3.0) or DX10 equivalent
    RAM: 1.5GB+
    HDD: 6GB
    Internet: 512k+ (128k+ upstream)
    Optical Drive: DVD
    Software: DX9.0c with Windows XP

    Source: www.crysis-online.com

    Seems like my new video card is supported. Yippie...:love:


    wht a f***...
     

    HishamZz

    Member
    May 5, 2006
    432
    1
    0
    @ Novidhu - at da rate dese bastardz are creatin hi-req gamez no gamer could live in peace wit a single pc dude.. lol.. datz da scrwed part..

    Zz
     

    Novindu

    Well-known member
  • Jun 10, 2006
    21,983
    34
    48
    Mellbourne, AU
    HishamZz said:
    @ Novidhu - at da rate dese bastardz are creatin hi-req gamez no gamer could live in peace wit a single pc dude.. lol.. datz da scrwed part..

    Zz
    hell yeah.... damn dey rapidly change da req's........dats shit....... how can we ppl afford??????????:(:(
     

    HishamZz

    Member
    May 5, 2006
    432
    1
    0
    one way to beat da time factor is to buy the highest performance components available in the market.. and be satisfied as it would be guaranteed to last prob a year or 2 depending on the technology... but hel.. datz need money too hehee..

    Zz
     

    Anusha

    Member
    Jun 13, 2006
    25,864
    5
    0
    HishamZz said:
    woofah.. oh wel.. @least ma colour card is just AT the minimum requirements.. lmao.. freakin RAM needs a upgo though.. shit..

    Zz

    Well, if you go for Vista, then take NO notice of Microsoft's claims. You need 2GB RAM to run Vista fine.

    You know. Vista will even benefit going from 2GB to 4GB RAM. In XP, people might not even see a difference unless they game, going from 1GB to 1.5GB. The way Vista treats RAM is completely different. It will use RAM as a cache. If you have 1GB RAM, you will have 0MB free physical RAM. Same if you have 2GB. No change for 4GB as well. At least, it's using the RAM without wasting it by not using them.
     

    Anusha

    Member
    Jun 13, 2006
    25,864
    5
    0
    HishamZz said:
    one way to beat da time factor is to buy the highest performance components available in the market.. and be satisfied as it would be guaranteed to last prob a year or 2 depending on the technology... but hel.. datz need money too hehee..

    Zz

    I don't think that's a good thing. Think about this...

    Geforce 7950GX2, which is the fastest single card, is available for Rs.75,000 at EPSI. My new card only cost me Rs.9,500 which is only about 4 times slower. Now, that 75,000 card will be superseded by even a Geforce 8600GT or at least come close to the performance. It should not cost more than US$200 (but no idea how much it will be in Sri Lanka). Say it will be Rs.35,000. If you buy that card in another year, you have got the same performance as the 75,000 card but only 1 year late.

    My new card (X800GTO flashed to X800XL and overclocked further) can play almost every game at max details at 1280x960. Say I'm getting 30fps in a game. 7950GX2 can't give more than 100. Ok, say it's giving 100fps. If you disregard the framerates, with both cards, you can play the game at max details without lagging. So why pay Rs.65,500 more for 70fps which is not noticeable for real world game play?

    Best thing is to get a video card which is in the mid-range, and upgrade it constantly (say, every 12, 15 or 18 months). You still can play almost all your games with lots of details, and you are spending less. Remember, also inflation will result in lower money spending in another year's time. 35000 today will have higher value than 35000 next year.

    So in the end, you are only spending half the price, and still getting a marvellous gaming experience.

    Oh I forgot. Remember, 7950GX2 is only DirectX9 card. 8600GT is a DirectX10 card. In Crysis, DX10 card will shine a lot more than the DX9 card. (Crysis is natively DX10).
     
    Last edited: