Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Crysis 2 on high end macbook pro 15, 2011, or xbox?
- Thread starter TheGingerNinja
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Not the same thing. You can't compare a console GPU to a desktop GPU. Also, it won't work the same way.
Remember, the X-Box version is an adapted and optimized version for the XBoox hardware, same deal with PS3.
The PC version is the full blown thing with the console dumb downs on the controls area. However, graphics are full blown.
As another poster pointed out, desktop and mobile GPUs can't be compared at all, even if they are generations apart.
Look at two current GPUs for instance. The GeForce GTX 460 and 460M. Even though they're the same in name, when it comes to performance, they're WORLDS apart. They're as different in overall performance as comparing a 4WD truck to a sports car.
And as the other poster pointed out, optimization is key. As a result, the Xbox 360 version of the game looks exactly like the PC version does at the same resolution. Looking at benchmarks of the 6750m http://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-HD-6750M.43958.0.html it's hard to say that a MacBook Pro would be able to match the Xbox 360's performance at the same resolution. The Xbox 360 has hardware scaling built-in as well, so if you have a 1080p display, the Xbox 360 version will look and run better than the 6750m trying to push the game at 1080p natively.
The Radeon 6750M is only considered a "mid-range" GPU. Granted its towards the top of the mid-range column, it's still a mid-range mobile GPU. You're absolutely not going to be able to run any modern games at 1080p with settings at high and all of that good stuff.
Crysis 2 is also one of those games that stresses the entire system. It will make full use of all of the components in the computer. So heat would be a MAJOR concern.
I'm well aware that there is a big difference between desktop and mobile parts.
But, the x1900XT (desktop version) is aging and 3Dmarks for about 5000, while the 6750M almost doubles that.
The x1900 has gddr3 vram and a band with of 46Gbit/sec while the 6750m has gddr5 and a bandwidth of 57GBit/sec
Xbox is aging, and uses what was the best hardware available in 2005/2006, and until recently it was comparable to midrange PCs, but not anymore.
I'm aware that the versions for xbox/ps3 is more streamlined version, but that doesn't change the fact that they have to cut some corners get there.
The PC version has better graphics because the hardware is better and the macbook pro will be able to run graphics higher than a xbox will.
You can still say to yourself that the xbox is better, but that is your own opinion, because the hardware in the macbook pro can pump out almost twice as much data as the hardware on the xbox.
This here is very handy, as the only Graphic Options on Crysis 2 are the presets "High, Higher and Extreme"
Here is a Crysis 2 Graphics Mod, which allows you to manually customize all the Graphics options, allowing a much smoother experience.
I find a massive jump in performance is given if you disable Anti-Aliasing and Shadows, which doesnt compromise too much on the graphics.
Crysis 2 Advanced Graphics Mod
Here is a Crysis 2 Graphics Mod, which allows you to manually customize all the Graphics options, allowing a much smoother experience.
I find a massive jump in performance is given if you disable Anti-Aliasing and Shadows, which doesnt compromise too much on the graphics.
Crysis 2 Advanced Graphics Mod
On the rather comical side of things, the first achievement/trophy for the console versions is "Can it run Crysis?" 
(not kidding!)
I bought the PS3 version today, never had a strong enough machine to run the first game for Windows.
Then again, would my MacBook Pro run it...
13" MBP with Nvidia 320m, 8GB of memory, Windows 7 home premium on bootcamp.
(not kidding!)I bought the PS3 version today, never had a strong enough machine to run the first game for Windows.
Then again, would my MacBook Pro run it...
13" MBP with Nvidia 320m, 8GB of memory, Windows 7 home premium on bootcamp.
3DMark doesn't mean anything. It's a synthetic benchmark that doesn't even use real game engines or even provide benchmarking situations that reflect real world use or performance.
The Xbox 360 also does things a bit differently than a traditional GPU and the PS3.
The Xbox 360 has 512MB of main system memory shared with the entire system, but it also has a 10MB frame buffer where all of the anti-aliasing, lighting, post processing, scaling, and other effects happen. It has a bandwidth of 256GB/sec. Only nvidia and AMD's most recent dual GPU high end cards have more bandwidth than that available to them.
And I'm sorry to say, but playing Crysis 2 on my system with a GeForce GTX 460 1GB at 1080p set to extreme, it's pretty clear that they used the same texture set from the consoles on the PC version. I mean, my Crysis 2 install folder is barely over 7GB. What does that tell you?
At best, the 6750M will only be able to keep pace with the Xbox 360 at the same settings when all of the post processing, lighting, and anti-aliasing are taken into account thanks to the 10MB eDRAM's 256GB/sec bandwidth.
It shouldnt tell you anything, my Crysis 2 folder is 9.5GB, It will be smaller than 8.5GB on the Xbox, because Xbox games are compressed to fit on the DVD, because the Xbox 360 is capable of de-compressing and reading data fast enough to present it on the screen for gaming.
You'll probably find the PS3 version of the game is something like 15GB, because there has never been a PS3 game that has come close to filling a Blu-Ray disk, even Metal Gear Solid 4, which the developers boasted that they almost couldnt fit it onto a disk only came in at 34GB, So all the data on PS3 versions is uncompressed, in its natural state.
Most of the time, many PS3 games install common assets (textures etc.), but the Blu-Ray stores uncompressed 1080p video for cut scenes etc. Mainly due to the dreadful slow access times.
Crysis 2 moves along well despite the Xbox 360 having the edge in texture resolution. When it comes to the benchmark on the PS3, I give the nod to God of War 3 or Uncharted 2 but have no idea how much data is crammed on the disc.
In the end, I'm happy to enjoy the experience of playing Crysis 2 and hope the first sees a console release as my Nvidia 320m would choke along with my Core 2 MBP.
Uh........... Xbox 360 uses DirectX just like Windows PCs. Whatever the Xbox does for decompression, PCs do as well. The Xbox 360 and DirectX on Windows use the same type of texture and audio compression.
Plus the PC version of Crysis 2 is on a single dual layer DVD just like the Xbox 360 version. In fact, I put the disc in my DVD drive now and it shows up at 7.58GB used. Install folder is 7.61GB. No decompression during the install process, obviously.
Actually, that isn't true at all. The only thing thats ever "uncompressed" in PS3 games is the audio. The blu-ray reader in the PS3 is so slow that if uncompressed textures and models were being pulled off the disc, the already snail like loading times would turn into an eternity of waiting. Plus you'd have the issue of RAM. Uncompressed textures would fill up the 256MB+256MB memory nearly instantly without room for anything else. And the PS3 simply doesn't have the bandwidth to be moving around uncompressed textures.
PS3 games are mostly redundant data. Do some google searching. Multi-platform games are almost always the same size on the PS3 and Xbox 360 once the redundant data has been removed. In fact, if you google back to the time when the first Resistance game came out, you'll see that Sony made a big deal out of the fact that the game used 22 out of 25GB of the blu-ray disc. Actual users later posted the fact that the disc was actually filled with 15GB of redundant data.
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2007/01/6658.ars Theres a good article from a few years ago discussing how PS3 game developers use redundant data to pad the blu-ray disc to cut down loading times.
Very very few PS3 games legitimately use blu-ray disc capacity. The vast majority of those are just using uncompressed audio as well.
Crysis 2 is definitely the overall best looking console game out there on both platforms. But when it comes to texture resolution, Gears of War 2 has all console games beat.
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=46241 Good list there showing how many multi-platform games actually run at a higher resolution on the Xbox 360 and sometimes with significantly higher anti-aliasing to boot. Call of Duty Black Ops is interesting. On the PS3 it runs at a lower resolution than an iPhone 4 game with 2xAA while the Xbox 360 version runs at a higher resolution than previous Call of Duty titles with 2xAA, and the in game performance is significantly better than the PS3. GTA4 and RDR pretty interesting as well. PS3 runs at 1152x640 with QAA while Xbox 360 runs at true 1280x720 with 2xAA. In fact, FF13 is the only game that looks better on the PS3 and, if you read the Digital Foundry breakdown of it, you'll find out that its the result of FF13 being a PS2 port to the PS3 that was then a code port to the Xbox 360 all written in just a couple of months time.
It tells us that the game does things smarter as opposed to just using brute-force big textures. Like using two textures overlaid on top of each other.
Anyway, considering the original Crysis folder is like 6.7GB, and Warhead is 6.2GB, I don't think your point is relevant at all.
Personally, I'm hoping other companies start making games that use CryEngine 3, as it has damn good performance on moderate hardware. It is marginally frustrating that the High vs Very High vs Extreme range in performance and quality is so narrow however. They should have added Low and Medium options as well.
Although I tend to disagree alot with mosx, so far he has proven his points inline with what is considered correct here.
XBox versions of Crysis 2 will run better because of the high optimized code. Plain and simple. Also, Crysis for Xbox and PS3 have dumb down graphics. They don't and will never give you the full blown graphics experience the PC version does.
There are tons of videos on Youtube demonstrating what I just said. Pretty much everything revolves around the old hardware in todays gaming consoles. PC verisons of Crysis choke computers because although parts are faster in raw performance, the PC port is unoptimized (even under nVidia's bribery) and has everything Crytek threw in graphics. Hence its expected to see midrange GPUs choke.
I for one, still don't have problems with my HD 5850s. But I know they are being greatly tasked (heat output is high and fans are always at high revs). However, I can easily play at 1920x1200 resolution with extreme settings with every extreme graphics boost. Something the XBox nor PS3 will ever do.
PS - Size of the game folder (in GBs) means nothing.
XBox versions of Crysis 2 will run better because of the high optimized code. Plain and simple. Also, Crysis for Xbox and PS3 have dumb down graphics. They don't and will never give you the full blown graphics experience the PC version does.
There are tons of videos on Youtube demonstrating what I just said. Pretty much everything revolves around the old hardware in todays gaming consoles. PC verisons of Crysis choke computers because although parts are faster in raw performance, the PC port is unoptimized (even under nVidia's bribery) and has everything Crytek threw in graphics. Hence its expected to see midrange GPUs choke.
I for one, still don't have problems with my HD 5850s. But I know they are being greatly tasked (heat output is high and fans are always at high revs). However, I can easily play at 1920x1200 resolution with extreme settings with every extreme graphics boost. Something the XBox nor PS3 will ever do.
PS - Size of the game folder (in GBs) means nothing.
Yes, you are right about the technical aspects. But it doesn't matter. At all.
Nowadays, games are designed for consoles or even mobile gadgets - not PCs, not Macs. Just because your notebook or desktop hardware is so much superior to the console does not mean that you will have a superior gaming experience on your ten to twenty times more expensive rig. And to add insult to injury, many blockbuster games are not even ported to the PC/Mac anymore, or if they are ported, it happens with a delay of several months.
And again: Games are ported TO the PC. The times when they were ported FROM the PC are over.
So what real advantages do you expect from a ported version of a console game on your high-end hardware? That playing it with a keyboard and mouse is more efficient or feels better? That you have a chance of stress-testing the cooling fans of your Mac and finally find out how loud that machine can be? Or that you can play it at the full native resolution of the 27" display with all effects turned on only to find out that the game does not even take advantage of that anymore because it was optimized for much weaker hardware and thus does not even look that much better on your desktop machine than it does on the console?
Spending money on high-end gaming equipment just isn't worth it anymore. You'll still have all the drivers and copy-protection issues that we've had ten years ago, it'll still cost you an arm and leg to keep your hardware up to date but you'll get only little - if anything at all - in return.
Here's the ideal equipment for those purposes: A 27" iMac on OS X with a Belkin adapter and the Xbox 360 connected to the Belkin adapter via HDMI. Great computer, great display AND a great gaming rig that can run all of the latest titles perfectly - because they were made for it.
I've been playing computer games since 1980, with a strong preference for shooters since Wolfenstein 3D and Catacomb Abyss, and you won't see me spending any money on PC hardware anymore just to play games.
Have you actually played the Xbox version? Theres very few differences. Take out the extra few shadows on the PC version and the ability to run at 1080p native versus 1152x720 and 1024x720 (PS3, both resolutions according to digital foundry), and theres overall very little difference. The PC version's only real advantages come in the form of being able to apply higher levels of anti-aliasing or other types of filtering, like anisotropic filtering.
nvidia's bribery?
I actually think Crysis 2 looks better on the "High" settings versus "Extreme" because it turns off all of the stupid blurring effects.
As can I on my GeForce GTX 460 1GB at 1920x1080. But I wouldn't brag too much about it "tasking" your system, because it is a very unoptimized port. It's very dependent on post processing effects to make it look good.
Yes it does, in fact. Goes to show that no significant change was made to the texture set for the PC version. If you want an example of a PC game that was upgraded in the process of being ported from consoles, look at Grand Theft Auto 4. That game is twice the size of the Xbox 360 and PS3 versions. The in-game textures are significantly higher resolution than those found in the console games, especially when compared to the already lower resolution PS3 version. Even Bad Company 2 has a few extra gigs on the Xbox 360 version. Ten to twenty times more expensive than the consoles? You don't need to spend $2,000-$4,000 on a PC to get a better experience than the consoles. $600-$700 on a PC will get you a system that is capable of running all modern games, including Crysis 2, at 1080p native with details set to highest, with 4x MSAA and other settings not usually available to the console versions at lower resolutions. That will have a GeForce GTX 460 1GB or better GPU, 4-6 core CPU, 4-8GB of RAM depending on where you shop, etc.
Only a few games these days have long delays. And usually it is an upgrade. Look at GTA4. Significantly upgraded graphics compared to the Xbox version.
Only a few games don't get ported, and those are generally the console exclusives. Like Halo 3, or Uncharted. I couldn't care less about the PS3 exclusives. But the $199 Xbox 360 is good enough to keep around for Xbox exclusives, like Halo, Gears of War, Forza. There are quite a few PC games that will never make it to console, like Starcraft 2. Or when certain PC specific games are ported, they're basically terrible watered down versions, like every single non-PC version of every Sims game.
Thats not true. EA has confirmed that Battlefield 3's lead platform is the PC. And they've gone on record as saying that, since the current consoles are so old, more games will have the PC as the lead platform.
That's not always the case at all. Look at Battlefield Bad Company 2 and DiRT 2. Both were console ports. However, they did have DirectX 11 features added in. Subtle effects that basically added more natural shading. But combined with the fact that they did actually include higher resolution textures, at 1080p native, those games compared to the console versions are absolutely gorgeous. And they run significantly better. Look at DiRT 2. On the PS3 it runs at 1280x720 with QAA. The Xbox 360 version runs at the same resolution but with 4xAA. The PS3 version struggles to maintain 30 frames per second. On the PC you can run it at any resolution you want, turn on the DX11 features, turn post processing and other features up higher, including setting anti-aliasing higher, all while maintaing a higher steady frame-rate. On my GTX 460 1GB I can set everything to the highest setting and run 4xMSAA and maintain a solid 60fps regardless of environment and with all cars on screen. A friend of mine is the only person I know with a PS3, doesn't own an Xbox 360. He recently bought a new notebook with a GeForce GTX 460m in it. Always emailing me about how amazed he is at how much better the PC versions of the same game look.
Even a game like Modern Warfare 2 or Black Ops, where every asset is the same on the Xbox 360 as PC (in MW2 for PS3, certain lighting effects are missing and it has severe frame-rate issues, also Black Ops runs at a significantly lower resolution compared to the Xbox 360 version), theres a big difference. You can set resolution up as high as you like, add in as much anti-aliasing as you like, set anisotropic filtering so high that textures miles off are still full quality.
So even in games where there is no change in assets, such as the PC and console versions having the same textures, just being able to set the resolution way higher is a big plus. Especially if you're coming from a PS3, where more games than not run at sub-720p and have horrible screen blurring and even worse frame-rate issues.
What driver issues? I've NEVER had issues with nvidia drivers and I've always bought hardware from reputable vendors, so none of my add-in cards or motherboards have ever given me driver issues either. In fact, nvidia GPU drivers can uninstall old drivers and clean install new drivers without a system reboot these days.
Copy protection can suck. But thats when you speak with your wallet and don't buy games with bad protection. Most non-Steam EA games aren't bad. I bought retail copies at Best Buy of Bad Company 2 and Crysis 2. Both use SecuROM online authentication. Activation and De-Activation are done automatically.
Not really. Best to let the Xbox 360 do scaling for displays. The Xbox 360's scaling hardware is definitely the best of the current consoles and it does a pretty good job at scaling 720p games up to 1080p and making them look NEAR native 1080p quality.
For the price, the 27" iMac has both a weak CPU and GPU and only about 1/4 of the RAM as it should at that price.. You can get FAR better for significantly less if you build a Windows PC. Plus games run way better in Windows than on OS X. For a few hundred dollars, you can build a Windows PC with a GPU that smokes the Radeon 5750 in the iMac, like a now cheap GeForce GTX 460 1GB (around $180, $130 with rebates) or an even faster, but still relatively cheap, GTX 560 1GB (around $230). You can get either one of the AMD Phenom II X6 CPUs or Core i5 or Core i7 (if you want to spend a little extra), 8GB of RAM, blu-ray reader, all of the necessities. You'd also be able to throw in a nice MATTE (no glossy!) LCD with an IPS panel and true RGBLED backlighting versus Apple's edge-lit LED backlights. Even after all of that you would have only spent about half as much as the iMac. And two years from now the only upgrade you'll need is a faster GPU. And, unlike the iMac, you'll actually be able to upgrade it.
Gaming is really about the games in the end right? PC is looking mighty tasty for me since I like MMO's. Here are the exclusives I'm looking forward to:
Guild Wars 2
Diablo III
Star Wars the Old Republic
The Witcher 2
I won't touch my 360 until Gears of War 3 and probably Skyrim. That and to finish up the DLC on Mass Effect 2. I haven't bothered paying for Xbox Live since it ran out. I have a year card waiting but have no major reason to just yet.
My thoughts are that xbox 360 makes for easier gaming experience but a lot of those games are kind of limited. The most popular games are shooters First and third person. PC usually gets most of the shooters too but also gets the full MMO market which is pretty big. PS3 has DCUO but that doesn't look so great, lack of content and the user interface seems wack. Here "consolization" kind of failed it.
A nice little chart =D
Guild Wars 2
Diablo III
Star Wars the Old Republic
The Witcher 2
I won't touch my 360 until Gears of War 3 and probably Skyrim. That and to finish up the DLC on Mass Effect 2. I haven't bothered paying for Xbox Live since it ran out. I have a year card waiting but have no major reason to just yet.
My thoughts are that xbox 360 makes for easier gaming experience but a lot of those games are kind of limited. The most popular games are shooters First and third person. PC usually gets most of the shooters too but also gets the full MMO market which is pretty big. PS3 has DCUO but that doesn't look so great, lack of content and the user interface seems wack. Here "consolization" kind of failed it.
A nice little chart =D
Macbook will play Crysis 2 better.
All of you who are saying the Xbox version will run better are talking complete crap. I have a 2.4ghz core 2 duo setup on my tv. Graphics are handled by a HD5570. It runs THE SAME as the xbox version does.
My processor is borderline minimum requirements! The xbox version runs between minimum and medium.
It will look better, and most likely play better on your Macbook.
No matter what others say. The xbox is 6 years old. Its technology is severly outdated.
All of you who are saying the Xbox version will run better are talking complete crap. I have a 2.4ghz core 2 duo setup on my tv. Graphics are handled by a HD5570. It runs THE SAME as the xbox version does.
My processor is borderline minimum requirements! The xbox version runs between minimum and medium.
It will look better, and most likely play better on your Macbook.
No matter what others say. The xbox is 6 years old. Its technology is severly outdated.
I have the game for my xbox (which I will prompltly put up for sale on e-bay) and on my 2011 2.2 Macbook pro (bootcamp)
I play 720p on "very high", and my framerates are a lot smoother than the xbox even when all hell is breaking loose on the screen. The xbox might play at 1080p but during many firefights the game drops to below 25fps which is very noticeable IMO.
I play 720p on "very high", and my framerates are a lot smoother than the xbox even when all hell is breaking loose on the screen. The xbox might play at 1080p but during many firefights the game drops to below 25fps which is very noticeable IMO.
xbox doesn't play at 1080p, just scales. Just as if you set your computer to run at 1280x800 on a 1920x1080p full screen. But yeah, like I've mentioned Crysis 2 on xbox is still below mediums which is the low setting on pc.
kinda pointless if you ask me. It'll run fine on the high res screen with Gamer settings but crysis 2 is a crappy game and isa far cry from the firs tone. the firs tone is the best. Second ones decent, this one is CRYSIS of duty. I looks like call of duty with some super powers. and the powers have been crappily implemented. I'm skipping 2.
Your loss. I have the same kit as you, overclocked the 6750 to 780/880 and get amazing smooth gameplay on Extreme settings at 1440x900, way better than xbox/ps3. I find Crysis 2 to be great fun; didn't enjoy Crysis 1 at all!
In the end of all things...
Crysis 2 is a great technical marvel on all platforms. If you're the type of individual that looks down your nose at those filthy console gaming peasants since your PC gaming rig makes your pixels so much prettier, shame on you.
Yes, shame on you.
I thought games were meant to be enjoyed and to be played regardless of what they were made for. Anyone still enjoy 8 bit gaming? I'm sure a lot of real gamers here do or even the 16 bit era of consoles and computers.
Yes, I still have an old Macintosh SE that I play Shufflepuck Cafe on. Is it pretty to look at in it's 1 bit black & white glory in this day and age? Not really. Is it still fun? Hell yeah!
I guess my point here is I see a lot of petty bickering here about what is best to play Crysis 2 on (I have the PS3 version) and if you're not playing it on a monster of a PC gaming rig, you should be ashamed? Hell no!
You bought the game, for pete's sake, enjoy it already! I know I am despite the 360 having better textures, blah, blah, blah. When I game on my Mac, I do compare Bioshock to my PS3 version and notice differences in texturing and effects. Still, a romp through Rapture is always fun regardless.
Happy gaming folks, time to fire up the Wii and play some Geometry Wars.
Crysis 2 is a great technical marvel on all platforms. If you're the type of individual that looks down your nose at those filthy console gaming peasants since your PC gaming rig makes your pixels so much prettier, shame on you.
Yes, shame on you.
I thought games were meant to be enjoyed and to be played regardless of what they were made for. Anyone still enjoy 8 bit gaming? I'm sure a lot of real gamers here do or even the 16 bit era of consoles and computers.
Yes, I still have an old Macintosh SE that I play Shufflepuck Cafe on.
Is it pretty to look at in it's 1 bit black & white glory in this day and age? Not really. Is it still fun? Hell yeah!I guess my point here is I see a lot of petty bickering here about what is best to play Crysis 2 on (I have the PS3 version) and if you're not playing it on a monster of a PC gaming rig, you should be ashamed? Hell no!
You bought the game, for pete's sake, enjoy it already! I know I am despite the 360 having better textures, blah, blah, blah. When I game on my Mac, I do compare Bioshock to my PS3 version and notice differences in texturing and effects. Still, a romp through Rapture is always fun regardless.
Happy gaming folks, time to fire up the Wii and play some Geometry Wars.
nvidia's bribery?
Yes, nVidia bribery... PhyX, CUDA, and "Meant to be played" logo? Dude, nVidia pays developer big money to have their games support nVidia technologies and give their software better optimization under nVidia GPUs.
That way it seems nVidia GPUs are better, but in reality they are not.
Crysis 2 is a great technical marvel on all platforms. If you're the type of individual that looks down your nose at those filthy console gaming peasants since your PC gaming rig makes your pixels so much prettier, shame on you.
Yes, shame on you.
I thought games were meant to be enjoyed and to be played regardless of what they were made for. Anyone still enjoy 8 bit gaming? I'm sure a lot of real gamers here do or even the 16 bit era of consoles and computers.
Yes, I still have an old Macintosh SE that I play Shufflepuck Cafe on.
I guess my point here is I see a lot of petty bickering here about what is best to play Crysis 2 on (I have the PS3 version) and if you're not playing it on a monster of a PC gaming rig, you should be ashamed? Hell no!
You bought the game, for pete's sake, enjoy it already! I know I am despite the 360 having better textures, blah, blah, blah. When I game on my Mac, I do compare Bioshock to my PS3 version and notice differences in texturing and effects. Still, a romp through Rapture is always fun regardless.
Happy gaming folks, time to fire up the Wii and play some Geometry Wars.
Nice....
8-Bits, why so many?
I use my XBox 360 for Joust and Robotron...
Just downloaded Atari Greatest Hits on my old iPhone...