Crysis on MBP?

[Ryuukumori]

So I read up on Gamespot that Crysis takes the following specs into consideration:

Recommended:
System: Dual-core CPU (Athlon X2/Pentium D) or equivalent
RAM: 2048 MB
Hard Drive Space: 6000 MB
Other: Graphics: Nvidia 7800GTX/ATI X1800XT (SM 3.0) or DX10 equivalent

The MBP has all of these, and if I were to go Pro, I'd most likely up to 4 GB RAM via 3rd Party chips.

Has anyone tried running Crysis at full maximum graphics on their MBP? Or at least medium? How well does it run with dual booted Vista? I have heard some people on their iMacs have to update graphics cards/ patches to get the game to run, but I am focusing on the capability on a MBP. Thanks.

 

[Erasmus]

HAHAHAHAHA!!! Crysis on full maximum graphics on a MBP!!!

HAHAHAHA!!!

On minimum settings, the 2.2 GHz MBP handles Crysis alright, only getting slightly annoyingly low frame rates on the very last level. The recent patch allows Medium settings to be used on the first few levels, but I'm still looking at ~20 fps, and this quickly becomes unplayable on later levels (maybe 5-10) and so I have to drop back to low.

This is at 1024 x 640 mind you. I would expect that the 2.4 might be able to go a little better. Maybe play at medium throughout the game? But on a Macbook Pro, for at least a couple of years, playing Crysis at other than low-medium with a tiny screen res is impossible.

Oh, and in future, do a search. It works great.

 

[Chone]

Yeah Crysis gets more demanding as you progress through the game.

A nice thing about Crysis is that the heavy amount of post-processing and motion blur makes 20-30 fps feel pretty smooth and playable so if you get you'll probably enjoy the game.

If you play at 800x600 (which doesn't look that bad on my MBP) you can run medium settings.

 

[Ryuukumori]

Thanks. I wonder how it would run if the graphics card would be upgraded a bit. I don't understand how the MBP can't run the game at high settings if the recommended specs are above and beyond what is needed! :\

 

[exabytes18]

While the processor and the RAM are fine, the graphics card is the limitation. Crysis was not intended to run with max settings on today's boxes. Triple 8800Ultras in SLI manage very well, but Crysis can even rock that rig if you wanted it to.

 

[Ryuukumori]

I see, so no true gaming machine can run Crysis at PERFECT speed at highest capabilities yet...

So the final question about Crysis on a MBP...

Is the game preferable on the MBP? Is it worth buying if I waited for a Pro that could have a slightly better graphics card for it? How about the MBP now? Is it a good investment to buy and play on it with bootcamp (not parallels since I have heard of 3D problems)?

Thanks for all the help.

 

[Tunero]

I see, so no true gaming machine can run Crysis at PERFECT speed at highest capabilities yet...

So the final question about Crysis on a MBP...

Is the game preferable on the MBP? Is it worth buying if I waited for a Pro that could have a slightly better graphics card for it? How about the MBP now? Is it a good investment to buy and play on it with bootcamp (not parallels since I have heard of 3D problems)?

Thanks for all the help.

Actually you are not above the required specs because the 7800GTX is a better card than the 8600gtm.

 

[Ryuukumori]

Actually you are not above the required specs because the 7800GTX is a better card than the 8600gtm.

Really? Probably in terms of clocked speed... how much better is it, and can you predict a graphics card similarly equal to the recommended one be in the soon- to- be updated MBP?

So to say, is an 8800GT equal in terms of a 7800GTX? Or does an 8800GTX the same? I don't truly understand graphics cards very much... any help is appreciated.

 

[Tunero]

The thing is that the 7800GTX is a desktop graphics card while your MBP has a mobile variant. Desktop cards are generally more powerful than a mobile variant for various reasons such as power usage and heat. 8800GT is miles ahead of the 7800GTX in performance terms. Also there is no point in buying a 8800GTX as it doesnt give much frame rate boost over an 8800GT.

You can still play Crysis on the MBP though you just have to lower settings and lower resolution. I can't predict what graphic cards going to be in the next MBP but all i know is that there is new ATI HD 3 Series and Nvidia 9 series coming out really soon. Also i think graphically Crysis is incredible but on the gameplay side it lacks. If you haven't played Call of Duty 4 , I'd recommend that you do! Great bu single player and the multiplayer is intense providing endless hours of fun. IMHO COD4 was the best shooter of 07. You don't need ultra high end hardware to play. Your MBP could handle it fine with pretty good settings too.

 

[Bigsam411]

I cannot remember the res I play on but I get respectable framerates on my MBP at medium settings. FPS does get rocked during some areas though.

 

[happydudeca]

I've got a 2.2 MBP, stock.

I'm running Crysis, which I honestly don't like , at Medium settings. That is what the auto-detect gave me. In one of the cave levels I had a moment of serious lag, then total freeze up, then the BSOD, but I don't think that's related. I switched to low settings but I don't think I needed to.

Maybe it's just me, I think it's a game with great visuals, a neat story, and some innovative features but I think the game play sucks.

Aside from that, it runs like a champ. Expect your fans to blaze away though.

 

[exabytes18]

Maybe it's just me, I think it's a game with great visuals, a neat story, and some innovative features but I think the game play sucks.

I agree with ya. It is a visually stunning game, but the game play could be better. The only thing I liked about SP was the incredible physics and graphics. MP is fine except for all the hackers... though they have died down a bit since the latest update.

There's screenies of crysis all over the web, but i took a couple of my own here. They're at 1680*1050, high settings, no AA all with an 8800GTS. Fairly smooth frame rates throughout.

 

[Ryuukumori]

The thing is that the 7800GTX is a desktop graphics card while your MBP has a mobile variant. Desktop cards are generally more powerful than a mobile variant for various reasons such as power usage and heat. 8800GT is miles ahead of the 7800GTX in performance terms. Also there is no point in buying a 8800GTX as it doesnt give much frame rate boost over an 8800GT.

You can still play Crysis on the MBP though you just have to lower settings and lower resolution. I can't predict what graphic cards going to be in the next MBP but all i know is that there is new ATI HD 3 Series and Nvidia 9 series coming out really soon. Also i think graphically Crysis is incredible but on the gameplay side it lacks. If you haven't played Call of Duty 4 , I'd recommend that you do! Great bu single player and the multiplayer is intense providing endless hours of fun. IMHO COD4 was the best shooter of 07. You don't need ultra high end hardware to play. Your MBP could handle it fine with pretty good settings too.

I see. I own COD4 for the xbox 360 and play it all the time on xbox live. It's a great game, I agree!

I have never played Crysis, only seen vids. You think the MBP will install the 9000 series on NVidia in their 2nd update if they don't get them by the next one coming up? What would benefit over 9000?

 

[happydudeca]

I see. I own COD4 for the xbox 360 and play it all the time on xbox live. It's a great game, I agree!

I have never played Crysis, only seen vids. You think the MBP will install the 9000 series on NVidia in their 2nd update if they don't get them by the next one coming up? What would benefit over 9000?

On a side note, I also have COD4. My router/ISP are having issues that prevent me from gaming online and the SP story is short... but the game runs great. No lag, forget the settings but they're high, but again the fans kick up to around 4-6k because of heat.

As for the a video card update, I'm not sure it would make a big difference. When the major shift happened in June this past year and the MBP's received the new NVidea cards, most folks were logging only minor FPS increases. RAM seems to make a bigger difference, but getting one of the 256MB cards probably wouldn't hurt either.

 

[Ryuukumori]

On a side note, I also have COD4. My router/ISP are having issues that prevent me from gaming online and the SP story is short... but the game runs great. No lag, forget the settings but they're high, but again the fans kick up to around 4-6k because of heat.

As for the a video card update, I'm not sure it would make a big difference. When the major shift happened in June this past year and the MBP's received the new NVidea cards, most folks were logging only minor FPS increases. RAM seems to make a bigger difference, but getting one of the 256MB cards probably wouldn't hurt either.

Hm, so 256 video sounds alright. What about 512? Is that a big difference for RAM on the graphics card?

 

[happydudeca]

Hm, so 256 video sounds alright. What about 512? Is that a big difference for RAM on the graphics card?

http://barefeats.com/santarosa.html
http://barefeats.com/rosa03.html

With 3D games, bigger and faster and newer is always better. The question of how much you want to spend will be important, but keep in mind laptops, though the MBP's are quite capable of successful midlevel gaming, are not purebred gaming machines.

Also keep in mind that something new is always around the corner. If you wish you can wait until a massive update but the exact date and time of when that will be is nothing but guess work. If you need and want a new computer now, go for it, if you want to wait for a massive update then go for it. If all you want to do is play games then build a PC or buy a Mac Pro and be done with it. The MBP's can hold their own, but will never be maxed out for gaming.

 

[mdio1234]

Well I wouldn't recommend Crysis for the Macbook Pro, 800 by 600 is pretty stretched out on any MBP, with my pc im able to play native res at nearly full settings with 30 fps avg framerate. Playing a game like that on a macbook pro is seriously going to stress its thermal capabilities and really get that/those fan(s) going. I would recommend it on a pc.

 

[Erasmus]

Hm, so 256 video sounds alright. What about 512? Is that a big difference for RAM on the graphics card?

Think of a graphics card as a mini computer. It takes in information, and converts it into something we understand, being pictures.

A computer with a 3.2 GHz Kentsfield CPU but only 128 MB of RAM is going to suck, even though it has a blazingly fast processor. This is because the processor constantly has to wait for data to be transferred from the HD, as there is not enough RAM to hold everything the CPU needs.

My old G4 Cube would still suck, even if I installed 32 GB of RAM in it. This is because the CPU simply is not fast enough to process all the data that is available to it in RAM.

I hope this shows that increasing the VRAM of a graphics card does not always make it better, and only does so when it doesn't have enough to begin with. I would guess and say that 256 MB is the sweet spot for the 8600M GT. More is pointless, and less is restrictive. Take a faster core, and more RAM becomes useful. And of course it all plateaus at the point where there is simply not enough graphics related game data to fill the VRAM. Then you just want faster memory with your faster cores.

 

[lucky3killer]

Only problem about Apple did underclock the 8600m GT, I had same problem with The Sims 2 for Mac version, it's little choppy on other side but much worse when got in vacation area, ugh to Apple for underclock it.

 

[lucky3killer]

For run Crysis at maximum setting, you need PC desktop with dual GeForce 8800 GTX or Ultra in SLi mode, that what I found from hardcore gamers in other forum.

Toobad, Mac Pro don't support SLi.

 

[diamond.g]

I hope this shows that increasing the VRAM of a graphics card does not always make it better, and only does so when it doesn't have enough to begin with. I would guess and say that 256 MB is the sweet spot for the 8800M GT. More is pointless, and less is restrictive. Take a faster core, and more RAM becomes useful. And of course it all plateaus at the point where there is simply not enough graphics related game data to fill the VRAM. Then you just want faster memory with your faster cores.

Um, for an 8800M I would expect to see 512 MB of VRAM. Less is a serious waste of bandwidth.

 

[Tunero]

Think of a graphics card as a mini computer. It takes in information, and converts it into something we understand, being pictures.

A computer with a 3.2 GHz Kentsfield CPU but only 128 MB of RAM is going to suck, even though it has a blazingly fast processor. This is because the processor constantly has to wait for data to be transferred from the HD, as there is not enough RAM to hold everything the CPU needs.

My old G4 Cube would still suck, even if I installed 32 GB of RAM in it. This is because the CPU simply is not fast enough to process all the data that is available to it in RAM.

I hope this shows that increasing the VRAM of a graphics card does not always make it better, and only does so when it doesn't have enough to begin with. I would guess and say that 256 MB is the sweet spot for the 8800M GT. More is pointless, and less is restrictive. Take a faster core, and more RAM becomes useful. And of course it all plateaus at the point where there is simply not enough graphics related game data to fill the VRAM. Then you just want faster memory with your faster cores.

^Correct!

The ASUS 8800GT 1GB has minimal performance advantage over the regular 8800GT. The difference is a mere 3-5fps which you could get from a regular 8800GT from overclocking in a bit.

 

[Ryuukumori]

So based on EVERYTHING (Thank you all for the insights)...

What has been the BEST performance on Crysis playing bootcamp on a MBP? Tell us what settings you played at, the average (low to best is fine too) FPS rate, and if you recommend it.

Keep the comments a rollin'!

 

[happydudeca]

Frankly, if my 2.2Ghz model with 128mb video card can do it than any of the current and future MBP's can do it. If you want a screaming performance machine than don't get a laptop. If you must have a laptop and are having a hard time choosing between the 2.2 and 2.4 models look at how much you can afford and how important performance is to you. A faster processor, more RAM, and a video card with more VRAM is always going to be better in the MBP range. I can't give you FPS specs but aside from that single incident I haven't experienced any lag issues.

If someone can give me the name of a FPS recorder or another way to calc FPS then I'll see if I can post some numbers.

 

[diamond.g]

Frankly, if my 2.2Ghz model with 128mb video card can do it than any of the current and future MBP's can do it. If you want a screaming performance machine than don't get a laptop. If you must have a laptop and are having a hard time choosing between the 2.2 and 2.4 models look at how much you can afford and how important performance is to you. A faster processor, more RAM, and a video card with more VRAM is always going to be better in the MBP range. I can't give you FPS specs but aside from that single incident I haven't experienced any lag issues.

If someone can give me the name of a FPS recorder or another way to calc FPS then I'll see if I can post some numbers.

FRAPS. Although I would imagine Crysis should have a console command that enables the fps counter.