PDA

View Full Version : Should I Even Bother? (ATI Card)


wexer9
06-29-2010, 09:34 AM
This game looks very compelling, but I have read that there are serious performance problems on ATI cards. Should I even bother buying it with the following specs?

AMD Athlon II X3 440 3.0GHz
Gigabyte GA-MA790FXT-UD5P
Asus EAH5850 Radeon HD 5850
G.SKILL ECO Series DDR3 1600MHz 4GB (2x2GB)
Cooler Master CM690 ATX (Case)
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit

Edit: I plan on running it on 1920x1080.

held
06-29-2010, 10:39 AM
I also have an ATI-Card. Can run it on 1980 x 1200.

wexer9
06-29-2010, 10:44 AM
Which card? And without PhysX, I assume?

held
06-29-2010, 11:07 AM
ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4850, PhysX I don't know.

liamsharkey
06-29-2010, 11:40 AM
if its ati theres definatly no physx

RockPaperNinja
06-29-2010, 05:52 PM
its a great game, though it has a bad framerate

_jema987
07-01-2010, 04:27 PM
There is a demo out, try that first. However I have the same graphics card as you and for me it is unplayable. If you turn of PhysX important parts of the game just disappear.

http://download.nvidia.com/downloads/nZone/demos/nzd_cryostasis_demo.zip
http://www.gamershell.com/download_44390.shtml

Grandmaster B
07-01-2010, 05:17 PM
I've HD 4670, its playable but not on high details. I believe this game runs better with Nvidia cards - on purpose. Still its a very good game - if you are not to scary.

killab2oo5
07-01-2010, 05:38 PM
Well, the game runs pretty nicely all high with no AA or physx. I have a 9600gt. You could always try THIS (http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=8672) to get much better performance. Great game. It's kinda like...Condemned mixed with Silent Hill.

proto1000
07-02-2010, 02:34 AM
I've HD 4670, its playable but not on high details. I believe this game runs better with Nvidia cards - on purpose. Still its a very good game - if you are not to scary.
http://www.bigdownload.com/games/cryostasis-sleep-of-reason/pc/cryostasis-sleep-of-reason-demo/

another place to get the demo.

This is the worst game I have ever run.Turned off Physx, lowered detail, nothing helped. Using an ATI 4850. Meh, if the demo won't work, I ain't jumping through hoops for a $3 dollar game to get it to work.

lpipkin
07-02-2010, 12:06 PM
go buy stalker kinda the same game and it was made for ATI cards and has a huge mod community that has patched it to even where clear sky works with no bugs.

Grandmaster B
07-03-2010, 03:11 AM
I found a image with a performance chart:

http://www.gamestar.de/specials/spiele/1954854/technikcheck_cryostasis_sleep_of_reason.html

Kiljoy66
07-03-2010, 04:38 AM
I just finished the game a few hours ago, freaking awesome, ATI 4850, 1920x1080, no aa or af, game ran just fine until a few certain key points and specific baddies with lights would make the fps kinda slow way down, but not so much that it was unplayable, just annoying.

jsk68
07-04-2010, 02:32 AM
if a HD5850 cant run this game something is terribly wrong (nvidia optimized to the point they sabotage ATI, aka physx) if you can disable physx then it wont be a problem, maybe not maxed settings but it should run great.
my 5850 flat out owns crysis warhead, mostly enthusiast settings and 4x AA
I'm running the 10.5 drivers they are a little more stable than the 10.6's
anyway im downloading it now, I'll check it out tomorrow and report back,for the other ATI guys

EDIT:
seems I may have underestimated this game, some people are saying it's more demanding than warhead, now I'm hell bent on making it run good, I'll do some research and see what we need to do.

Alastayr
07-04-2010, 11:35 AM
I played the game on a single Radeon 3870 + Phenom X4 9850 @ 1280x800 with medium-low settings, SM 2.0 and PhysX off. Ran very well 30-45fps. However, I only got to the second or third level. I don't know if it gets heavier later on.

It's important to say that even with all settings at medium, the game still looks great enough to enjoy it.

_jema987
07-04-2010, 04:59 PM
I'll have to revise my previous statement, yes I bought it even though the demo ran like crap. Sticking with SM2 and turning of vsync and all things physic and physx doesn't make it run light lightning, which it doesn't really need, but it is playable.

jsk68
07-04-2010, 06:25 PM
ok my system specs are c2q9550 @ 3.6, HD5850 @ 1920x1080, 4gigs of ram on vista 32.
I set most settings to high and turned on AA, the game runs really good, I was expecting much worse.
I should add I run vista tweaked with only 39 running processes, it tends to make your whole pc a lot smoother.

I cant really say im impressed by the graphics in this game, it's just all visual effects that tend to be overused and cost more than they are worth.
it is interesting though, and seems like a very unique game.
anyway if your pc is similar to mine you can run this game no problem at all.
so dont avoid it just because you have an ATI card.

floyd_99
07-04-2010, 08:48 PM
Out of box, the performance is terrible on my Core 2 Duo 3ghz + ATI 4890 - at 1080p res. Even the very first room of the game is shockingly laggy.


I turned off physx and it didn't seem to help much. Res down to 1368x768 and its marginally playable. I'm fairly annoyed...

jsk68
07-04-2010, 08:56 PM
hmm here's my config, give these settings a try.

//=================== video settings =====================
@v.gamma = 32
@v.sx = 1920
@v.sy = 1080
@r.sky = 1
@r.realshadows = 1
@r.softshadows = 0
@r.projectives = 1
@r.motionblur = 0
@r.cameramotionblur = 0
@r.diffusemap = 0
@r.normalmap = 0
@r.specularmap = 0
@r.waterreflection = 0
@r.waterenvreflection = 1
@r.view = 40
@render_vfx = 0
@r.viewkoef = 1.000000
@hitfx_lifetime = 18
@r.shadermodel = 2
@r.anisotropy = 0
@r.antialiasing = 1
@r.vsync = 0
@r.fur = 1
@r.postglow = 1
@r.caustic = 1
@r.aspectratio = 1.777778

lots of odd settings in this game,I'm pretty sure there's 1 or 2 settings that are causing most performance issues

floyd_99
07-05-2010, 12:47 AM
I tested every setting and the only one other than resolution that made a big difference was vysnc. With vsync on, its a choppy and laggy experience. Off, and you get awful tearing but the framerate is much better. I absolutely hate tearing but in this case, the tradeoff is worth it.

jsk68
07-05-2010, 03:24 AM
did you check this thread out?
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=8672

floyd_99
07-05-2010, 02:25 PM
I'm not really interested in playing using a ultra-low cfg... If you are disabling all glow, water effects etc - that is a good portion of what makes this game artistically unique. Might as well just play a Half Life mod instead otherwise.

jalong
07-05-2010, 07:46 PM
I finished the game and am profoundly amazed at how good the story was. That being said, it IS hard on ATI cards. I'm used to turning every thing to ultrahigh at the highest resolution and I could not do that with cryostasis. My relevant specs are 5970 clocked to 850/1200 and a I7 930 clocked to 4.2 GHz.

I was able to achieve an average of 40 FPS with it sometimes dipping as low as 28 FPS. Occasionally it would go as high as 65 or 70 FPS. At 1920 x 1200 I had:
- vsync off
- shader model 2.0
- hardware PhysX off (of course)
- textures high
- normal maps medium
- specular maps medium
- shadows off
- blur on
- water reflections on
- water caustic on
- AF on
- AA off

This is a game well worth playing, though. It starts out as an "First Person horror adventure" and the First Person Shooter aspects gradually build up by the time the first quarter of the game is done. The vintage WWI soviet rifles are fun to play with because they are realistically slow. And did I mention the story is fantastic? :)

Wolfram23
07-07-2010, 06:45 PM
This game is definitely an ATI hog. I'm running crossfire 5850s that are overclocked to 960/1200 and I get between 35 and 75fps, generally around 50ish at maximum settings 1920x1080. Lots of lights causes it to dip down the most. I'm also running a dedicated GT240 for PhysX.
The worst part for me is that the game occasionally freezes up and I've got to ctrl alt del and close it (manager says it's "not responding") which is a huge pain in the ♥♥♥ :o

jsk68
07-07-2010, 10:08 PM
This game is definitely an ATI hog. I'm running crossfire 5850s that are overclocked to 960/1200 and I get between 35 and 75fps, generally around 50ish at maximum settings 1920x1080. Lots of lights causes it to dip down the most. I'm also running a dedicated GT240 for PhysX.
The worst part for me is that the game occasionally freezes up and I've got to ctrl alt del and close it (manager says it's "not responding") which is a huge pain in the ♥♥♥ :o

probably not crossfire compatible, disable crossfire and try it.

Raefzm
11-27-2010, 09:14 PM
i've got ati and the game runs crap for me. Like 20-35 fps on high settings (not full AA)
unplayable at current state!

Hertston
11-28-2010, 05:23 PM
The game seems very resolution sensitive, particularly in regard to WS (which is just stretched 4 x 3 anyway). Unless you have a beast of a graphics card try dropping that, even to 800 x 600 if necessary, and you should still get decent framerates even with everything else maxed (except Phys X if your GPU doesn't support it).

20-35 fps is perfectly 'playable' for a SP only game, if not ideal.

Ohlalala
11-28-2010, 05:46 PM
20-35 fps is perfectly 'playable' for a SP only game, if not ideal.

25-30 is bad, like really bad for a fps. But since this game is not a real fps and the action is pretty slow, a low framerate doesn't make it unplayable.

Raefzm
12-01-2010, 02:15 AM
The game seems very resolution sensitive, particularly in regard to WS (which is just stretched 4 x 3 anyway). Unless you have a beast of a graphics card try dropping that, even to 800 x 600 if necessary, and you should still get decent framerates even with everything else maxed (except Phys X if your GPU doesn't support it).

20-35 fps is perfectly 'playable' for a SP only game, if not ideal.

i lol'd

20-35 FPS is unplayable.

Hertston
12-16-2010, 09:11 AM
i lol'd

20-35 FPS is unplayable.

Once upon a time there were two games called Unreal Tournament and Quake 3 Arena. Both had hundreds of thousands playing perfectly happily and NOBODY had a rig that could deliver much more performance than that when they were released. Things have moved on and I doubt I could put up with a fast MP game with those frame rates now, but a fairly slow single player FPS is just fine. 20-35 IS perfectly playable as long as your FPS does stay within that range at all times. That does sometimes need very careful balancing of settings, though; averaging 30 is useless if you spike down to single figures when it counts.

If folks demand 40+ fps in high res with all settings maxed, either I seriously envy them the monster gaming rigs they own, or Cryostasis isn't for them. The game simply is a complete system hog, and that can only be put down to poor programming. It is, though, still a great story and a great experience and well worth the price IMHO. It just depends what you value in a game.

bobsbarricades
12-16-2010, 03:47 PM
I'm told the demo has worse performance than the main game. I own the main game...but haven't installed it to verify if this is true or not. I want to wait till I can really git a rockin rig to play this.

that being said, I just got Metro2033 a couple weeks ago and on the LOWEST settings, I'm getting a BEAUTIFUL game that runs really smooth. Wish Cryostasis was coded as well =/

Hi2u! Tw1TcH
12-16-2010, 04:24 PM
Alot of the complaints are PhysX based as well. ATI owners need to turn off the hardware physics in options or it will utterly crush your system. You miss out on some nice effects, but nothing that detracts from the experience. Very fun, atmospheric game to play through.

DOOMJESUS
01-04-2011, 02:46 PM
Alot of the complaints are PhysX based as well. ATI owners need to turn off the hardware physics in options or it will utterly crush your system. You miss out on some nice effects, but nothing that detracts from the experience. Very fun, atmospheric game to play through.

actually there are a lot of graphics in this game that simply don't appear on the screen without physx hardware.

if you don't have a physx card in your machine, this game is going to run like ♥♥♥♥, no matter what other "fixes" you try. my system is easily double the recommended requirements, i've been through three gfx card upgrades since i first tried this game and the game still runs like ♥♥♥♥ for me with a phenom ii 965 and a 6970.

the reason: because nvidia owns this game.

so unless you own a physx card, you can forget about running this game because the performance will always be miserable no matter what kind of "fixes" you attempt.

oh sure, you could always choose to turn everything to low and run at a low resolution. then and only then can you enjoy it without physx and you'll still be missing half the graphics but yeah, enjoy, enjoy, enjoy your game with everything turned off...

luckily i got it for a dollar so i don't care that runs like ♥♥♥♥ on my four hundred dollar gfx card. but if you don't own physx hardware and want to save yourself some frustration, just forget this one and play something a little less boring because it's not much of a game anyhow, you won't be missing much...

and that concludes my cool story brah...

bobsbarricades
01-04-2011, 03:13 PM
=,( but it won best story last year!

MattyD242
01-05-2011, 12:12 PM
People saying this game doesn't work on ATI cards are full of ♥♥♥♥. I played through it with my 5870 just fine. You still get all the realtime ice and water effects, they're just run through software instead. Just make sure you've got the latest drivers and you'll be fine.

DOOMJESUS
01-12-2011, 10:27 PM
People saying this game doesn't work on ATI cards are full of ♥♥♥♥. I played through it with my 5870 just fine. You still get all the realtime ice and water effects, they're just run through software instead. Just make sure you've got the latest drivers and you'll be fine.

you're worng. unless you've seen it rendered by an nv card then you have no point of reference. check out some videos to give you insight into what you are missing.

physx done in software, the watergun is like a squirtgun stream with a couple of bubbles, with physx hardware it puts tons of water all over the screen. this is a deliberate and ♥♥♥♥ty act of nvida alone. i have a 3850, a 4850, a 5870 and a 6970, i know what it looks like on ati hardware.

Aura891
01-13-2011, 02:22 PM
you're worng. unless you've seen it rendered by an nv card then you have no point of reference. check out some videos to give you insight into what you are missing.

physx done in software, the watergun is like a squirtgun stream with a couple of bubbles, with physx hardware it puts tons of water all over the screen. this is a deliberate and ♥♥♥♥ty act of nvida alone. i have a 3850, a 4850, a 5870 and a 6970, i know what it looks like on ati hardware.

Lol @ people in these forums like this guy, i mean really? I'm sorry that ATI decided not to jump on the bandwagon, but that's not nvidias fault, that's ATIs, try harder next time to be a fan-boy, thanks :)



the reason: because nvidia owns this game.


Funny, considering it was developed by Action Forms and published by 1C Company / 505 Games, and non of those companies are, or ever have been, owned by Nvidia

DOOMJESUS
01-13-2011, 06:57 PM
Lol @ people in these forums like this guy, i mean really? I'm sorry that ATI decided not to jump on the bandwagon, but that's not nvidias fault, that's ATIs, try harder next time to be a fan-boy, thanks :)



Funny, considering it was developed by Action Forms and published by 1C Company / 505 Games, and non of those companies are, or ever have been, owned by Nvidia

there is no bandwagon to jump on, dullard, physx is owned by nvidia exclusively and by that fact, so is this game. you have no clue what you are talking about.

when a game dev partners with a hardware manufacturer and allows the game's fundamental operation to be hardware "brand dependent", that automatically sends the game into the crapper by alienating half the consumers in the market. and this is why cryostasis is where it is today...

AlHudsonFX
01-14-2011, 12:59 PM
there is no bandwagon to jump on, dullard, physx is owned by nvidia exclusively and by that fact, so is this game. you have no clue what you are talking about.

when a game dev partners with a hardware manufacturer and allows the game's fundamental operation to be hardware "brand dependent", that automatically sends the game into the crapper by alienating half the consumers in the market. and this is why cryostasis is where it is today...

That's true PhysX is copyrighted for Nvida so AMD doesn't want to pay royalities to them for use it.

Nvidia cards offer:
a) Hardware PhysX
b) Nvidia 3d

AMD cards offer:
a) Cheaper prices
b) Better power consumption
c) Better performance

I stick with Nvidia for 3d and PhysX. However I'm considering buying an AMD card in the future.

Aura891
01-15-2011, 05:36 AM
there is no bandwagon to jump on, dullard, physx is owned by nvidia exclusively and by that fact, so is this game. you have no clue what you are talking about.

when a game dev partners with a hardware manufacturer and allows the game's fundamental operation to be hardware "brand dependent", that automatically sends the game into the crapper by alienating half the consumers in the market. and this is why cryostasis is where it is today...

Man, you really are clueless aren't you? well, there's no use talking to you then, i can tell you're too much of a fan-boy to listen to reason even if the answer was in your face....

Oh wait, it is....

As i said, ATI doesn't want to jump on the bandwagon, they could, if they wanted to, include PhysX into their GPUs, would this require, as said above, royalties? yes, yes it does.

Does this somehow make it impossible for ATI to not have PhsyX? No, no it doesn't

Therefor, is there a bandwagon that isn't being jumped on? Yes, yes there is.

As to what is said about nvidia owning them? Again, nvidia does not own them, you are being foolish to say such a thing, but this is to be expected with fan-boys, can't really help that

But, i must say, i would do just as the developer has done here, and include PhysX as a major part in any game i would make, why? Because if i was a game developer, i wouldn't want to be held back by some company that decides they don't want to support certain features games have at their disposal, which is exactly what ATI is doing, i would rather focus on making a game be what i want it to be, and use everything i have possible at my disposal, and that would include PhysX, we need more developers like Action Forms, if we didn't have developers like them, we'd still be stuck on DX9

Dust-Off
01-16-2011, 11:20 AM
I don't know if this will help anyone else, but turning shader model 4.0 on helped me out a lot. With hardware physics turned off I am even able to turn everything else up. If you see any artifacts try turning gamma correction down.

Here are my specs:

ATI HD5770
4 GB RAM
AMD Phenom II X4 955 BE
Windows 7 64bit

Njord19
01-20-2011, 09:56 PM
I have a Radeon 4600 HD. It just about runs on the lowest settings. I should've assumed it wasn't going to work from the start but was curious :(

jsk68
02-18-2011, 09:04 PM
the sad truth is, if a game has physx it's been bought and payed for by nvidia, nobody would use physx if nvidia didn't pay them to....it's junk! it's just a cheesy marketing tool.

every single physx effect can be done in modern graphics engines, ALL video cards can can easily deal with particle effects.....nvidia just uses a super crappy code to run it on pc's without their cards.

in other words it's designed to choke your pc unless you use their hardware.

pretty unethical, I'll never buy anything nvidia because of this BS.

warning long boring read:http://realworldtech.com/page.cfm?ArticleID=RWT070510142143&p=3

soviet_sharkey
03-03-2011, 04:16 PM
I played on a ATI 5770 with everything maxed (vsync off, physx and aa was either low or off can't mind which) and it ran perfectly fine so if ATI buys turn physx off

Aura891
03-04-2011, 12:32 PM
the sad truth is, if a game has physx it's been bought and payed for by nvidia, nobody would use physx if nvidia didn't pay them to....it's junk! it's just a cheesy marketing tool.

every single physx effect can be done in modern graphics engines, ALL video cards can can easily deal with particle effects.....nvidia just uses a super crappy code to run it on pc's without their cards.

in other words it's designed to choke your pc unless you use their hardware.

pretty unethical, I'll never buy anything nvidia because of this BS.

warning long boring read:http://realworldtech.com/page.cfm?ArticleID=RWT070510142143&p=3

Oh yay, more people spewing out BS, talking out of their ♥♥♥'s, and wearing tin hats

Cmon people i think we're past the tin hat age, learn, before you post

I mean really, is the sky falling again? Because i'd like to know if it was

Minino
03-07-2011, 04:32 PM
Amd x2 4200 HD4870

Barely playable at 800x600, all low or off... do not buy unless you have nvidia or a high profile pc. Do not believe minimal requirements...

fitzroy_doll
05-28-2011, 09:59 AM
In response to the original post: yes, it plays perfectly fine with an ATI card (have recently completed the game using ati 4870). There are issues with the resolution, but this is not related to the card manufacturer. In any case, the graphics are the least important part of the game. Use any settings that work and play it.

wexer9
05-28-2011, 12:14 PM
Hey, this is the OP. I just wanted to say that I have completed Cryostasis twice with an ATI card and it works and looks fine.

It's a fantastic game! :)

Fred DM
07-11-2011, 05:43 AM
i find it weird that some of you with ATI cards claim that the game is running fine.

i just tried the techdemo, and the water splashing down on the character just kills my fps (below 20). [i5 750, 5870, 8GB]

i suppose the rest of the game would run well enough, but the water effects, which seem to be central to the game, slow the game down below playability without at least a secondary NVidia card as PPU.

or am i doing something wrong? :confused:

Edit: tried the playable demo as well. it runs, but the fps never go over 30 and are usually in the 20s. it generally feels choppy and slow.

kenpojujitsu3
07-11-2011, 11:09 AM
It runs fine on ATI cards if you turn hardware physx off (I don't remember if the demo allows you to change this option or not but the full game does).

If you don't disable hardware physx then the game runs physx on a single-CPU thread which kills the performance.

The other option is to use the hybrid Physx mod and have an ATI card with an Nvidia card as a dedicated Physx card as I do.

Fred DM
07-11-2011, 11:12 AM
It runs fine on ATI cards if you turn hardware physx off (I don't remember if the demo allows you to change this option or not but the full game does).

If you don't disable hardware physx then the game runs physx on a single-CPU thread which kills the performance.

The other option is to use the hybrid Physx mod and have an ATI card with an Nvidia card as a dedicated Physx card as I do.

i see. thanks for the explanation. i did experiment with the hardware/software PhysX option in the self-rolling demo, but i couldn't spot a difference in performance.

still, under these conditions i won't be buying this game anytime soon. too bad, because it looks really interesting.

TimM
07-13-2011, 09:56 AM
i see. thanks for the explanation. i did experiment with the hardware/software PhysX option in the self-rolling demo, but i couldn't spot a difference in performance.

still, under these conditions i won't be buying this game anytime soon. too bad, because it looks really interesting.

The demo is very unoptimised. The full game runs REALLY good.

The demo lagged for me with:

ATI Radeon HD 5870
Intel Core I7 960 at 4x3.20Ghz
12 gb ram
Windows 7 64 bit

You will get a lot better experience with the full game as it has been patched.

syobon999
07-14-2011, 04:01 PM
why steam hasn't the sequel? damn I really wanted to play it

fitzroy_doll
07-15-2011, 08:27 AM
what sequel?

wexer9
07-15-2011, 08:44 AM
why steam hasn't the sequel? damn I really wanted to play it

There is no sequel, unfortunately.

foadiron
12-05-2011, 03:48 AM
Amd x2 4200 HD4870

Barely playable at 800x600, all low or off... do not buy unless you have nvidia or a high profile pc. Do not believe minimal requirements...

It runs like a three-legged dog on Nvidia too. Anyone who says different can simply upload a video to Youtube to disprove it.