|
|
 |
| [Dec 03, 2012, 11:19 am ET] - Share - Viewing Comments |
The Crysis 3 Website now offers system specifications for Crysis 3, the next installment in Crytek's shooter series (thanks VG247). They outline the typical minimum and recommended systems for playing the game, as well as a "hi-performance" spec for the ultimate experience:
MINIMUM SYSTEM OPERATING REQUIREMENTS FOR PC:
- Windows Vista, Windows 7 or Windows 8
- DirectX 11 graphics card with 1Gb Video RAM
- Dual core CPU
- 2GB Memory (3GB on Vista)
- Example 1 (Nvidia/Intel):
- Nvidia GTS 450
- Intel Core2 Duo 2.4 Ghz (E6600)
- Example 2 (AMD):
- AMD Radeon HD5770
- AMD Athlon64 X2 2.7 Ghz (5200+)
RECOMMENDED SYSTEM OPERATING REQUIREMENTS FOR PC:
- Windows Vista, Windows 7 or Windows 8
- DirectX 11 graphics card with 1GB Video RAM
- Quad core GPU
- 4GB Memory
- Example 1 (Nvidia/Intel):
- Nvidia GTX 560
- Intel Core i3-530
- Example 2 (AMD):
- AMD Radeon HD5870
- AMD Phenom II X2 565
HI-PERFORMANCE PC SPECIFICATIONS:
- Windows Vista, Windows 7 or Windows 8
- Latest DirectX 11 graphics card
- Latest quad core CPU
- 8GB Memory
- Example 1 (Nvidia/Intel):
- NVidia GTX 680
- Intel Core i7-2600k
- Example 2 (AMD):
- AMD Radeon HD7970
- AMD Bulldozer FX4150
Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment
you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at
the bottom of the form.
 |
| 34. |
Re: Crysis 3 Specs |
Dec 3, 2012, 15:54 |
theyarecomingforyou |
|
|
Fion wrote on Dec 3, 2012, 15:18:
We all know Crytech that Crysis 3, just like Crysis 2, will still look worse than Crysis 1. Lower texture resolution, lower polygon count per asset, lower overall poly cap per scene. Given that Crysis 2 includes DX11 tessellation, it obviously has a higher polygon count. Meanwhile, Crysis 3 was built around tessellation from the start so it will be better implemented. Take a look at this gameplay video, because if you think that looks worse than the original Crysis you're delusional.
Fion wrote on Dec 3, 2012, 15:18:
The only reason Crysis 2 and 3 appear better in some ways is the improved lighting engine. Frankly in Crysis 1 they skimped on lighting largely so the game would run on systems of the time heh. It was simply a poorly written engine, hence why it hasn't scaled well with newer hardware. And they pushed the lighting with Crysis anyway, so let's stop with the revisionist history - it was the best available at the time. Don't forget that the competition of the time was games like Unreal Tournament 3 (with the 'cutting edge' Unreal Engine 3), so I don't know where you get the idea that Crytek held back.
Far Cry 3 has demonstrated that current multi-platform engines blow Crysis out of the water, so it's likely that Crytek will have made serious advances too - in fact the videos seem to support that. Crysis hasn't been the definitive visual leader for years and it certainly isn't now, so please stop pretending that modern games have to compete with it.
Crysis was a game that ran poorly on most systems and still does, over 5 years later. It had very good visuals but it was a terrible engine. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Core i7 2600-K (4.6GHz) | 12GB DDR3 | GTX680 SLI (1215/1605) | OCZ Vertex 3 120GB SSD | Windows 8 Pro
Hazro HZ30Wie 30" | Saffire PRO 40 | Razer Mamba | Coolermaster RP1000W
SteamID: theyarecomingforyou |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Twitter 
