Crysis Remastered Performance Transformed - Patch 1.3.0 Delivers Huge Performance Gains

Can it Run Crysis Mode - Major performance gains at all resolutions

Crysis Remastered Performance Transformed - Patch 1.3.0 Delivers Huge Gains

Can it Run Crysis Mode - Major performance gains at all resolutions

In Can it Run Crysis mode, patch 1.3.0 delivers a downright transformative performance improvement to Crysis Remastered. 30+ FPS performance is now achieved throughout our benchmarking scene at 1080p, and the game's 4K performance has shot up from an 18.8 FPS average framerate to 25.2 FPS. 

These results alone should show how much additional optimisation work has gone into Crysis Remastered's patch 1.3.0, as our 1080p results below are entirely CPU-limited and the 4K results below are almost entirely GPU-limited. Seeing such large gains in both datasets is an impressive feat.  

It will be a long time before any system will be able to run Crysis Remastered in "Can it Run Crysis?" mode at 4K 60+ FPS, but rapid advancements are already being made.  
  

Crysis Remastered Performance Transformed - Patch 1.3.0 Delivers Huge Gains  

«Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next»

Most Recent Comments

26-11-2020, 09:49:19

AngryGoldfish
Why on earth didn't they delay the release (everyone else does) until they had this patch ready? Did they need to use the public's systems as a beta for the game to find out what work needed doing? That's a huge performance uplift.Quote

26-11-2020, 09:54:56

AlienALX
So it's now fully playable at 1440p for me with the max settings.

Ooo, ya sexy dancer.

Nice one Mark, thanks for putting the effort in mate !Quote

01-12-2020, 03:46:43

MiNo
I'm missing a evaluation of (any) games own performance - as in is it sloppy code or optimized code? This article puts much needed focus on it, but not enough.



I realize this harder to do than to slap a card in a build and watch a FPS counter but perhaps this is so easy (albeit time consuming) that there is room to get into the other parts?


Once in a while, yes there is a comment about poorly optimized game but I think it should be taken a big step further. As it is, the focus is always on the hardware, but as we already know the performance levels of the cards then we get too little out of the game performance reviews. Perhaps title is slightly better for team red .. so what? The interesting part would be to evaluate the games optimizations like it is being done for new hardware. It should not be a comment, it should be analyzed and ranked in table form. Obviously very difficult, but who better to do it than the crew here?


Sure it may fail, but it would be a chance of doing something new. And to put the pressure on sloppy coders just like the pressure is on the hardware builders when they cut corners or make poor design choices.



And in the end, optimizations in software tends to be much more important than hardware. Just look at the 'demoscene' to truly understand what is possible using optimized code.


Yes I do understand this is a hardware review site :-) But measuring HW performance without even considering the 'input' is missing a important part of the 'ecosystem' of performance.Quote

01-12-2020, 11:10:41

Dicehunter
Quote:
Originally Posted by MiNo View Post
I'm missing a evaluation of (any) games own performance - as in is it sloppy code or optimized code? This article puts much needed focus on it, but not enough.

I realize this harder to do than to slap a card in a build and watch a FPS counter but perhaps this is so easy (albeit time consuming) that there is room to get into the other parts?

Once in a while, yes there is a comment about poorly optimized game but I think it should be taken a big step further. As it is, the focus is always on the hardware, but as we already know the performance levels of the cards then we get too little out of the game performance reviews. Perhaps title is slightly better for team red .. so what? The interesting part would be to evaluate the games optimizations like it is being done for new hardware. It should not be a comment, it should be analyzed and ranked in table form. Obviously very difficult, but who better to do it than the crew here?

Sure it may fail, but it would be a chance of doing something new. And to put the pressure on sloppy coders just like the pressure is on the hardware builders when they cut corners or make poor design choices.

And in the end, optimizations in software tends to be much more important than hardware. Just look at the 'demoscene' to truly understand what is possible using optimized code.

Yes I do understand this is a hardware review site :-) But measuring HW performance without even considering the 'input' is missing a important part of the 'ecosystem' of performance.

For the type of indepth detail you want would take way more time that it's worth for a review site mainly about the general performance of said hardware, There are places dedicated to this though, Digital Foundry being the main one who do get detailed information from game developers about various optimisations etc...Quote
Reply
x

Register for the OC3D Newsletter

Subscribing to the OC3D newsletter will keep you up-to-date on the latest technology reviews, competitions and goings-on at Overclock3D. We won't share your email address with ANYONE, and we will only email you with updates on site news, reviews, and competitions and you can unsubscribe easily at any time.

Simply enter your name and email address into the box below and be sure to click on the links in the confirmation emails that will arrive in your e-mail shortly after to complete the registration.

If you run into any problems, just drop us a message on the forums.