And WE have been discussing 1080p/1920x1200 at 60 fps on Very High/Ultra. You're just playing semantics now.

Semantics? I'm trying to make people realize that maxing Crysis is not possible on cheap PC's, my very first post was aligned with the other posts I've made. Every time a Crysis thread comes along people are claiming all sorts of incredible performances from low, medium and high spec PC's, and every time me and a couple of others do our best to try to explain that this game cannot be run properly on any PC at max settings.
I may have ventured slightly off topic from the OP, but I have stayed the course and stuck to the same points and topic all along.
And even if the argument was (on my part) 1920x1200 (which is PC monitor equivalent of full HD) the point would stand; 60 fps on full settings = unpossible (without a seriously expensive rig).

^^I concur good sir.

As in a $20k rig like you mentioned several posts above?  JaggedSac, I don'k think you want to concur with that, do you?

Yes, as in such a rig. The 3.0 GHz Quad-Core with 16 GB RAM, 150 GB Raptor drive and triple 8800GTS Ultra SLI (which alone cost over 1800$) that barely managed an average of 38 fps (and dips into 14...) @ 1920x1200 should put things in perspective.
I don't see why this is so hard to believe? The figures are clear and the game runs like crap!

The attempt in the firt link is not even with all settings to max! And see the pics for the amazing performance this rig had in other games, like 144 fps average in 2560x1600 in the demanding Unreal Tournament 3! This PC is insane but not even close, with all settings to max and in 2560x1600 it would have crawled and I don't get how this does not put things in perspective...

1. Don't take much to ramp up a Core 2 Quad to well over 3.0 even on air.
2. 8800 Ultras are not top dog on the graphic food chain anymore and you're about $400.00 to expensive on your price as well.
3. 16 GB of RAM is pointless and even inefficient if the data were spreading among 4 dimms.
4. 150 GB Raptors only cost $170.00
5. No way this rig cost $20k anyway.


Wait for an quad-crossfire rig of 4870x2's takes a crack at Crysis on a good driver.

No, this rig did not cost 20.000$ and I never said so. Read again, this was an insane computer (the story is 8-9 months old as well, the newest cards were not available in SLI) with GPU's worth over 1800$ (at the time) but it was not even close to doing the job. Most PC geeks and hardware experts agree that there is no hardware, regardless of price, available commercially that will run Crysis absolutely maxed out. Crossfire 4870 won't help much since it is not the overall tech req's that are hogging the resources, it is the programming/optimization and this is (again) the basis of the entire situation and my whole point.
Crytek are sloppy at optimizing (like Rockstar are poor at overall programming) and that is why this game is causing such a headache. UT3 easily looks as good as Crysis but requires only a fraction of the omph to run perfectly because (yet again) the programming and optimization is miles better than on Crysis.

I think people are underestimating nintendo when they think the wii 2 will be only slightly better. The last time nintendo made a console that was thought of as "last gen" was the nes. That was because they were disrupting the market the same way they are now. After that you had the snes which was more powerful than the genesis, the n64 which was more powerful than both the ps1 and saturn, and the gamecube which was more powerful than the dreamcast and ps2, and could hold up to the xbox pretty well. This gen nintendo again is bringing a huge innovation, and if it failed they would have lost alot of money on the wii. So next gen I could see the wii 2 competing graphically with both of the other consoles, unless they inovate again, which they won't on a large scale as this gen. The generation after that I expect nintendo to innovate, and create another weak console, but by then nobody would care too much due to realism probably already being reached.

The thing about multiple cores and sli is that most games(Crysis included) do not really use them right. Only one of the cores does the main lifting while the others handle threads that are running in the background. It helps, but not as much as it could. PC developers cannot spend all their time optimizing for multiple cores and gpus when that would alienate their largest base. Until programming languages efficiently help out with multi-threading, it is like a europeans taking an inline 4 and getting more out of it than an american car with a v8/v10.

This is also the first generation of the three you mentioned that nintendo is ahead again so if they release the wii HD with specs matching the 360 and PS3, both the 360 and PS3 would be a lot cheaper and they would have a lot of catching up to do. Xbox 720 would probably also release shortly after the wii HD but PS4 would be a long time coming. The next generation of consoles are really going to be staggered.

I'm actually worried about PS4 now that Krazy Ken's gone because he developed all the PS consoles/handheld