Crysis DirectX 9 & 10 MP Performance [Sep 13, 2007, 9:23 pm ET] – Share – Viewing Comments
Total Crysis offers an update on how
multiplayer will work in Crysis (thanks
Voodoo Extreme). A number of topics are covered, including how DirectX 9
servers will be limited compared to DirectX 10 servers, not because of software,
but hardware:
DX9 vs. DX10 – The endless question
To shed some light into one of the most discussed topics regarding Crysis multiplayer I would like to explain you the differences between Crysis MP DX9 and DX10.
As for the DX9 version we won’t have physics and day and night cycle in-game. That means you won’t be able to shoot down trees and/or alter any other objects than vehicles on the map. Additionally the time of day setting doesn’t change dynamically. This is caused due to the tremendous server load such physics might cause on crowded gaming servers. Still you will be able to experience maps with different time of day settings since the maps can be altered in the Sandbox2 Editor.
Rather than providing the community partially working features we limit this for the DX10 version only. Due to the strong hardware available with DX10, server load is less and performance is increased. This ensures the pure physics and day and night cycle experience without any limitation.
Gamers with a DX10 card are able to play on DX9 servers, but with the limitation of the respective server. Vice versa it is not possible for gamers with DX9 cards to play on DX10 servers due to the limited features.
Okay, I'll be the first to admit that I am not very technically saavy when discussing things like API's, OS's, Networking, programming, etc. So I understand that just because it seems logical that since no previous api is in now way tied to the OS, neither should DirectX 10 be, doesn't necessarally make it true.
But I do understand things like Frames per second, game performance, lag, stuttering, the cost of upgrading. So I am supposed to "upgrade" to Vista, and suddenly the 2GB of ram I had been getting by beautifully with in XP is now barely adequate, and all of the games I had been playing without a hitch now run 10 to 15% slower. It seems like a "downgrade" that I have to spend $200 for. Kinda hard to swallow.
If things start looking up in the Vista world,maybe I'll think differently. As of right now, I am growing more and more irritated by the day at the mess Vista and it's DirectX 10 exclusivity are creating.
But I do understand things like Frames per second, game performance, lag, stuttering, the cost of upgrading. So I am supposed to "upgrade" to Vista, and suddenly the 2GB of ram I had been getting by beautifully with in XP is now barely adequate, and all of the games I had been playing without a hitch now run 10 to 15% slower. It seems like a "downgrade" that I have to spend $200 for. Kinda hard to swallow.
If things start looking up in the Vista world,maybe I'll think differently. As of right now, I am growing more and more irritated by the day at the mess Vista and it's DirectX 10 exclusivity are creating.
"We live on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was not meant that we should voyage far."
"Universal compassion is the only guarantee of morality."
"Universal compassion is the only guarantee of morality."
Date
Subject
Author
Copyright © 1996-2025 Stephen Heaslip. All rights reserved.
All trademarks are properties of their respective owners.
Privacy Policy. Manage Cookie Settings.
News CGI copyright © 1999-2025 James "furn" Furness & Blue's News. All rights reserved.
Chatbear v1.5.0/blue++: Page generated 6 December 2025, 12:39.