So I used to be confident that I could run pretty much any game at max at around 60 fps, but I've been having problems with Crysis so bad that it's making me re-think that. For example on high at 1680x1050, it will be at around 35 - 40 fps during normal battles, more intense ones will make it drop to 25 - 35 and just walking around is around 60 - 80.

Here are my specs -

Intel Core i7 920 2.66Ghz

Gigabyte GA-EX58-UD5

GTX 570

Corsair 6GB Kit (3x2GB), PC-12800 (1600MHz) DDR3

Western Digital 1TB, Caviar Black, SATA-II, 7200RPM, 32MB Cache

HAF 932

Noctua NH-U12P-SE2 All-In-One CPU Cooler

Would I be able to run Far cry 3 at max without any issues? And what is the weakest part of my system that is letting me down?

Thanks.

That HAF 932 is seriously slowing your computer down. You should at least be rocking a HAF 940 XL, preferably a HAF 951. (I'm just partially joking here . . nahh, I'm full-on joking)

maxed out.

@Winternet said:

That HAF 932 is seriously slowing your computer down. You should at least be rocking a HAF 940 XL, preferably a HAF 951. (I'm just partially joking here . . nahh, I'm full-on joking)

You could run it well but as far as I know the game is a difficult one to run.

You should be fine. I have comparable specs, only I have a 7970 and it runs fine.

my guess is you can max it or near max it.

@Spuirrel said:

You could run it well but as far as I know the game is a difficult one to run.

Nope, pretty well optimized actually.

@NekuSakuraba: You'll be able to max it out, no problem.

im running a i7 2600k with a GTX570 and i can pretty much max it out.

The 570 is pretty easily your bottleneck, though not because it's a bad card. You've actually got a pretty strong PC otherwise though, so an even more expensive GPU would be where you'd see the biggest improvement. So long as you're not setting your AA/FxAA to 16x or something stupid like that, you'll be able to run the game pretty much at max just fine. The game's pretty well optimized, which Crysis is effectively the antithesis of.

I'm on a i3-540, 4GB of slow-ass RAM, and a GTX 560 (I'm probably going to get new Mobo, CPU, and RAM sometime this month), and I can run at 1920x1080 on mostly High settings. I think you'll be just fine.

You should be able to run it pretty close to maxed out.

@NekuSakuraba said:

GTX 570

You'll be fine. Not on "Ultra" but probably do fine on "High" and certainly playable on "Very High"

The game does a pretty decent job of selecting the best balance of image quality setting from the get go ('Optimal'), so I'd leave it on that. With your current rig I'd imagine you'll probably get most stuff set to "High" with a few on "Very High". Turn MSAA off and I'd reccommend doing the ini tweak to turn SSAO/HDAO/HBAO off entirely.

Honestly the quality difference from Very High to Ultra is negligible. You'll get slightly better shadows, post-fx and geometry but textures, terrain, vegetation water, environment will stay the same.

My setup is not that far off from yours (580, 3rd gen i5), I play on the same resolution and get 50 in most places and 40 in heavy fighting.

This is what I use:

• i5 3570K 3.40Ghz
• 8.00GB RAM
• GTX 680 2GB (Driver 310.70)

Putting the resolution to 1920x1080 Fullscreen, Vsync to 1 Frame, setting the presets to Ultra, AO to HBAO (Nvidia), Transparency to Enhanced, MSAA to OFF I get 60 & over frames per second. However, This game is poorly optimized, or something is broken. The game can easily stutter randomly, & shooting People up Close makes these weird slow Downs. It's not good at all. Maybe I have some settings enabled that shouldn't be enabled, but I didn't change anything except for the one stated above. There was some settings I didn't know much about, but I did not touch them.