Crysis Remastered Webpage
Image: Crytek

The long wait is over. Crysis Remastered has officially been released today, and now, everyone will have the opportunity to see what improvements have been made. After a tumultuous road, more than a few people are curious to see how modern hardware will fare with the various upgrades made to the PC version. Yesterday, there was a Crysis Remastered pre-launch stream. In it, folks got to see some real gameplay in action. We also got to hear a little bit more about the new “Can It Run Crysis?” mode.

Well, the stream brought us back to 2008 again. It seems the developer’s rig was challenged in both 1080p and 4K, and ultimately unable to provide a consistent average of 60 FPS in either resolution using the new max settings. The stream was broadcast in 1080p, which affects the visual fidelity of their presentation, but here’s a screen capture from the demo.

Image: Crytek

In it, we can spot a couple of things right off. Firstly, this demo is being run at 1080p and using DirectX 11. As Crysis is already known to be both CPU and GPU dependent, this could be impacting performance. Furthermore, DirectX 12 offers a number of features that could help leverage usage for both. Here’s another screencap showing the end results from four demo run-throughs.

Demo Results

Image: Crytek

They never fully display the exact specs of the rig being used. You can just barely make out an AMD Ryzen 7 3700X in Task Manager behind the results. It is also believed the GPU may be a GeForce RTX 2080 Ti, but that is not confirmed. We can also see memory usage sitting around 10 GB on the previous screen capture. If this is VRAM, then it could actually be the brand-new GeForce RTX 3080, since it has 10 GB of VRAM. If it’s not VRAM, then the rig is using a minimum of 16 GB RAM. The benchmark launcher is also seen behind the results. From there, it is evident they are running with ray tracing and other settings on very high at 1080p using TSAA. Lastly, even though the run-through saw peak FPS in the 80-90 FPS range, it was only averaging around 38 FPS.

Image: Crytek

“No card out there…”

Ultimately, this had led the developer to claim that “there is no card out there” that can run the game above 4K/30 FPS currently. So, for better or worse, once again the answer is “no” to that iconic meme. In the video, the developer also explains how the PC had a separate pipeline from the Xbox/PS4 versions. These versions, in turn, were separate pipelines from the Nintendo Switch. He also states how the “Can It Run Crysis” mode enables unlimited view distances. Combine that with some 8K texture upgrades and ray tracing, and it becomes obvious why this new remaster is able to punish even the most powerful GPUs.

Crysis Remastered is currently an Epic Games Store exclusive. It is not yet known if this is a timed or permanent exclusive. The full retail price is $29.99, but some lucky people may be able to get it with a $10 Epic coupon for a limited time, bringing the price down to $19.99.

Don’t Miss Out on More FPS Review Content!

Our weekly newsletter includes a recap of our reviews and a run down of the most popular tech news that we published.

Peter Brosdahl

As a child of the 70’s I was part of the many who became enthralled by the video arcade invasion of the 1980’s. Saving money from various odd jobs I purchased my first computer from a friend of my...

Join the Conversation

36 Comments

  1. DirectX 12 can certainly help, but it is good to see that this version much like the original was created with future hardware in mind. That is why the original Crysis still looks good 13 years later.

    Saw a post somewhere saying that a 2080 Ti was seen running “Can it run Crysis” detail mode at 38 FPS in 4K. So a 3080 should be able to do it at 50 FPS.

  2. I bought it this morning and hopefully I’ll begin testing/playing with it tonight on my 3700X/2080 Ti rig. I’ll let you know what I encounter.

  3. Also, naturally different areas tested respond to performance differently, so transparency is needed on where people are testing, or if they are using the built-in benchmark, which includes 2 test scenarios.

  4. Considering the nature of the PC audience that would play this game I was kind of shocked they didn’t provide more details on what equipment was being used.

  5. Is it really an achievement to put out software that can churn process cycles?

    The question is – is really because Crysis is going to run so beautifully that it needs those cycles, or did the devs just throw some random inefficient code in there to slow things down just because people expect Crysis to bring a computer to its knees.

    They should have just released a 100% ray traced edition and said “there you go, suck on that for a while”

  6. [QUOTE=”Brian_B, post: 18402, member: 96″]
    Is it really an achievement to put out software that can churn process cycles?

    The question is – is really because Crysis is going to run so beautifully that it needs those cycles, or did the devs just throw some random inefficient code in there to slow things down just because people expect Crysis to bring a computer to its knees.

    They should have just released a 100% ray traced edition and said “there you go, suck on that for a while”
    [/QUOTE]
    Nothing inefficient about purposefully inserting code to slow a program down. Why would anyone would do such a thing? Sounds like a ridiculous question to pose.

    Before the Crysis 2 tessellation controversy comes up, Crytek quickly fixed that in a patch. Their explanation as to why it shipped that way was understandable, as I could see a simple value or dev flag being missed or overlooked when finalizing the release build.

  7. [QUOTE=”Brian_B, post: 18402, member: 96″]
    inefficient code in there to slow things down
    [/QUOTE]
    Not so much that but they did say that the can it run mode set some views to unlimited. Basically the more pixels you have the more it’s going to try to render. After tinkering a lot with Kingdom Come: Deliverance, which also uses Cryengine, and has a lot of view distance settings, I can verify that they can be exceptionally taxing when maxed out.

  8. There are rendering techniques I hope they implement to optimize things but I’m glad they are releasing a mode that will push hardware to the breaking point just because.

    DLSS should also be killer when it’s in.

  9. [QUOTE=”kcthebrewer, post: 18406, member: 498″]
    There are rendering techniques I hope they implement to optimize things but I’m glad they are releasing a mode that will push hardware to the breaking point just because.
    DLSS should also be killer when it’s in.
    [/QUOTE]
    That’s kind of how I feel about RDR2 on PC. That game will be crushing cards for at least 2 more gens in 4K. I’m looking forward to having a 3090 at some point but I’ve got no illusions about it being the one that’ll fully support these games, or Cyberpunk 2077, or about a half dozen others already out. It’s one of the best things about gaming on a PC. You can see your games get better through time with new hardware even when they don’t need a remastered edition.

    edit: Doing to many replies and noticed I didn’t fully type out my above reply. That should read “no illusions about it [I]not [/I]being one”

  10. I’m going to grab this right now and probably start using it in my reviews. I’m interested to see how it performs on a variety of CPU’s given the way it behaved on the original game. As I recall, it worked well on dual core CPU’s, but quad core CPU’s saw virtually no benefit to it. It’s been a very long time since I’ve done testing with it, but that’s what I recall from back in the day.

    EDIT: Purchased and downloading now.

  11. Been playing with the game since last night, the benchmark mode has 2 different run-throughs, and you can change the game settings and ray tracing setting independently. It runs the demo 4 times as fast as possible. I think it will be pretty good. I might add it to GPU reviews. The game is only DX11 though, it’s multi-thread aware, but I’m not sure it uses more than 4 cores or 8 threads. My 3900X was pretty much at 20% max utilization. But more testing is warranted.

  12. [QUOTE=”Armenius, post: 18403, member: 180″]
    Nothing inefficient about purposefully inserting code to slow a program down. Why would anyone would do such a thing? Sounds like a ridiculous question to pose.
    [/QUOTE]
    Because crytek is on the brink of bankruptcy has been for a while. Anything to try and bring back their glory days with member berries.
    The code being inefficient only means that it adds features that give little practical or visual benefit but demand a lot of computational power. I assume this is what they are doing.

  13. [QUOTE=”MadMummy76, post: 18431, member: 1298″]
    Because crytek is on the brink of bankruptcy has been for a while. Anything to try and bring back their glory days with member berries.
    The code being inefficient only means that it adds features that give little practical or visual benefit but demand a lot of computational power. I assume this is what they are doing.
    [/QUOTE]
    That is what the Epic sellout was for (guaranteed money). I find that comments point to more people who refuse to buy a game when “bad” performance numbers are publicized these days than it does to compel people to buy it, so if anything they are actively turning away potential customers if they purposefully sabotaged their game.

  14. [QUOTE=”Brent_Justice, post: 18429, member: 3″]
    Been playing with the game since last night, the benchmark mode has 2 different run-throughs, and you can change the game settings and ray tracing setting independently. It runs the demo 4 times as fast as possible. I think it will be pretty good. I might add it to GPU reviews. The game is only DX11 though, it’s multi-thread aware, but I’m not sure it uses more than 4 cores or 8 threads. My 3900X was pretty much at 20% max utilization. But more testing is warranted.
    [/QUOTE]
    Thanks Brent!

  15. We’ll just have to wait and see. We’ve already got word today about that 3080 test being done and it pulled the same FPS at 4K whatever card they used in this test did at 1080p. To me that sounds like a 3090 could get really close to 60 FPS, and perhaps with some updates, actually get there.

    I say let the numbers speak for themselves because the bottom line is there’s a lot of people who love to hate and they’ve got a lot of energy to do it with too. Not expecting miracles with this game, and at $20 I paid, I’m happy for whatever it offers. The truth will be whatever it ends up being but I’m not about to jump on any bandwagon until I see for myself. I’m sure we’ve all got stories about a vendor, or review, or some YT twit, that trashed on something we were interested in only to find out that it worked for us. I will admit, though, I wasn’t overly impressed with the video but that’s my personal opinion and shouldn’t reflect on the game at all. Considering it was a half hour long it seems like they could’ve gone into more depth about it.

  16. [QUOTE=”Armenius, post: 18434, member: 180″]
    That is what the Epic sellout was for (guaranteed money). I find that comments point to more people who refuse to buy a game when “bad” performance numbers are publicized these days than it does to compel people to buy it, so if anything they are actively turning away potential customers if they purposefully sabotaged their game.
    [/QUOTE]
    It’s not sabotage, they are doing it to stay relevant, to be in people’s minds. Epic money is one thing, but it doesn’t make you relevant.
    Any developer could add features to their games that would make it run like a dog on current hardware.

    What I mean is that it must also look better than everything else to be justified in running worse than every other game. Crysis when it came out did, I’m not so sure about this one.

  17. Honestly, what are they doing to the quality settings to tax card to much? 16x shadows, 200% draw distance. 64x tessellation? If you put everything to medium, does it look the same and perform better?

  18. [QUOTE=”THUMPer, post: 18450, member: 111″]
    Honestly, what are they doing to the quality settings to tax card to much? 16x shadows, 200% draw distance. 64x tessellation? If you put everything to medium, does it look the same and perform better?
    [/QUOTE]
    Don’t know but just did a quick test. Some good news, HDR works, supports 32:9 5120×1440 without any tweaking. However, OC’d 2080 Ti avgs 50-55 FPS at ‘high’ settings.

  19. [URL unfurl=”true”]https://www.dsogaming.com/pc-performance-analyses/crysis-remastered-suffers-from-single-threaded-cpu-issues-just-like-the-original-game/[/URL]
    Source: [URL]https://hardforum.com/threads/crysis-remastered.1995364/post-1044731123[/URL]

  20. I have no doubts that Brent will give us a much more detailed explanation of what’s happening with this but I can quickly tell you the issue is Ray Tracing. Turned it to performance mode and gained almost 30 fps. After that I switched textures, particles, and water, all to ‘can it run’ mode and still average 50-70 fps. It doesn’t feature DLSS so Ray Tracing doesn’t get to use the tensor cores to help compensate. It’d be a whole different story if DLSS 2.0 was present.

  21. [QUOTE=”Peter_Brosdahl, post: 18454, member: 87″]
    I have no doubts that Brent will give us a much more detailed explanation of what’s happening with this but I can quickly tell you the issue is Ray Tracing. Turned it to performance mode and gained almost 30 fps. After that I switched textures, particles, and water, all to ‘can it run’ mode and still average 50-70 fps. It doesn’t feature DLSS so Ray Tracing doesn’t get to use the tensor cores to help compensate. It’d be a whole different story if DLSS 2.0 was present.
    [/QUOTE]
    and yeah it’s not pinging those extra threads either. 3700x rarely goes above 20%

  22. and yeah, it’s not pinging those extra threads either. 3700x barely goes above 20%, mostly in the 12-17% range.

  23. after I got a bit deeper things got worse. turned RT off put everything to ‘high’ and still saw dips to 30 FPS. This game needs work.

    Plus side-it does look great except for explosions. HDR is awesome as is 32:9 support. Image really pops. In terms of optimization-yeah, it needs work.

    edit: one last thing I’ll say is that I agree with what [USER=6]@Dan_D[/USER] said in another thread. It feels like things are the same under the hood. Even some of the stutters feel like they happen in the same places. Still having fun playing it but it could be better.

  24. [QUOTE=”MadMummy76, post: 18443, member: 1298″]
    It’s not sabotage, they are doing it to stay relevant, to be in people’s minds. Epic money is one thing, but it doesn’t make you relevant.
    Any developer could add features to their games that would make it run like a dog on current hardware.

    What I mean is that it must also look better than everything else to be justified in running worse than every other game. Crysis when it came out did, I’m not so sure about this one.
    [/QUOTE]

    For a 13 year old game it looks absolutely stunning. Textures look pretty good, etc. Foliage and other things do as well. The rocks and some environmental details look good for being so old, but still look quite dated. Also, it doesn’t run bad. I haven’t taken it up to 4K, but at 3440×1440 its fine so long as you don’t max out ray tracing. Even then, it’s playable.

    [QUOTE=”Peter_Brosdahl, post: 18456, member: 87″]
    and yeah, it’s not pinging those extra threads either. 3700x barely goes above 20%, mostly in the 12-17% range.
    [/QUOTE]

    I wouldn’t think that it would. It only handled two to four cores well if I remember right. I don’t think they did much besides improve the textures, add ray tracing and tweak some visuals.

  25. [QUOTE=”THUMPer, post: 18450, member: 111″]
    Honestly, what are they doing to the quality settings to tax card to much? 16x shadows, 200% draw distance. 64x tessellation? If you put everything to medium, does it look the same and perform better?
    [/QUOTE]
    The draw distance is one of the biggest culprits after “ray tracing” from what I’ve seen so far.

  26. [URL unfurl=”true”]https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2020-crysis-remastered-pc-tech-review[/URL]

  27. Well, I can confirm that the bastards didn’t do anything to the CPU threading. It uses only one or two CPU cores like the original game.

    [QUOTE=”DrezKill, post: 18453, member: 230″]
    [URL unfurl=”true”][URL]https://www.dsogaming.com/pc-performance-analyses/crysis-remastered-suffers-from-single-threaded-cpu-issues-just-like-the-original-game/[/URL][/URL]
    Source: [URL]https://hardforum.com/threads/crysis-remastered.1995364/post-1044731123[/URL]
    [/QUOTE]

    Even worse, that same site asserts that the game is based on the code for the XBOX 360 version of the game. It shows too. There are control issues, a missing mission and more. Jesus Crytek, way to phone in your remaster.

  28. [QUOTE=”Dan_D, post: 18738, member: 6″]
    Well, I can confirm that the bastards didn’t do anything to the CPU threading. It uses only one or two CPU cores like the original game.

    Even worse, that same site asserts that the game is based on the code for the XBOX 360 version of the game. It shows too. There are control issues, a missing mission and more. Jesus Crytek, way to phone in your remaster.
    [/QUOTE]
    So the assumption early on that this was a port of a console port of a PC game was true. Epic can have this one, then. I’ll stick with the original.

    This post does a pretty good job of summarizing the issues not being articulated due to everyone talking about the way the game looks and performs:
    [MEDIA=reddit]pcgaming/comments/iw0zxa/_/g5xlk6y[/MEDIA]

    [indent]This fails to address some of the other problems with the PC version, and I think the vast majority of these issues are oversights from Saber Interactive and Crytek since this port is based on the console port from 2011. Here’s a list of problems outside of performance that are worth considering:
    [LIST]

  29. Leaning is gone, likely since in the console port they had no way to map it on to the gamepad along with everything else without conflicts. This feature was not restored for the PC version.
  30. The game uses the “new” suit control scheme by default, which functions much like the scheme that Crysis 2 and 3 uses. Again, this is due to the remaster being based on the console port, where the classic control scheme would not be suitable.
  31. The “classic” nanosuit control option is not the same as the controls found in the original PC release. You get the radial menu that lets you select each mode at will, but the hotkey mapping is gone and you can no longer seamlessly chain powers, like speed sprinting in to a strength jump. This sounds minor but it’s actually a huge deal, especially when it comes to the harder difficulties where chaining powers like that is crucial. Plus, it’s just fun to do and not having the ability to anymore is complete and utter bull shit.
  32. The new armor mode was reworked to behave more like it does in the sequels. This means it slaps an intrusive overlay effect on the screen and there’s a constant energy droning sound that plays while it’s active. Additionally, it slowly drains your energy while active, but I suspect it tanks more damage to compensate for that. In my opinion this is one of the more egregious changes that only serves to disrupt the balance the original game had. Plus…armor mode is just plain annoying as fuck to use now.
  33. If you’re using the modern control scheme, you can’t sprint normally unless armor or cloak mode is active. Since armor mode is now annoying as hell and drains your energy while idle and cloaking is costly thus meant to be used tactically, both options are less than ideal for when you just want to run around an area without becoming a human battering ram.
  34. There’s no idle strength mode available with the modern control scheme since you have to hold jump to strength jump or hold melee to strength melee.
  35. Crouching is bugged to where the input is delayed in some manner and you basically have to stop moving in order to crouch reliably. It feels bad.
  36. Quick grenade throwing no longer exists. Probably another holdover from the console port.
  37. Apparently some of the foliage physics were cut back. I haven’t tested this myself, but supposedly some physics interactions like when you walk through grass or when an explosion makes trees and bushes sway violently no longer exist. What’s puzzling is that I’m pretty sure these things existed in the original port, but maybe I’m wrong about that.
  38. [/LIST]
    With all of that said, even if this remaster was optimized properly and utilized mutlicore processors correctly, I still wouldn’t play it with all the problems I listed above. There are some fixes people have found to address some of those issues, but some of the more critical ones currently have no solutions to them and likely never will without an official patch from Crytek and Saber Interactive.

    It no longer plays like the original which gives me the impression that the PC version was a complete afterthought outside of “lol can it run Crysis.” The improved graphics are not [I]that[/I] remarkable and the only thing this remaster got right was that it runs like shit on even high end hardware like the original did back in 2007. The enhanced graphics in my opinion do not make up for this though since the way the game utilizes your hardware is still fundamentally flawed at its core, and Crytek has only exacerbated the problem with all the fancy new graphics they tacked on.

    Needless to say, I was disappointed and refunded it. It could be much better. It [I]should[/I] be.[/indent]

  39. I couldn’t agree more. Crytek did a terrible job with the remaster and absolutely missed an opportunity to do something good. Instead, they polished an inferior version of the game made for consoles. As I said earlier, they did the bare minimum to get this working on a modern PC.

  40. [QUOTE=”Dan_D, post: 18796, member: 6″]
    I couldn’t agree more. Crytek did a terrible job with the remaster and absolutely missed an opportunity to do something good. Instead, they polished an inferior version of the game made for consoles. As I said earlier, they did the bare minimum to get this working on a modern PC.
    [/QUOTE]
    So sad but so true. I really wanted to think better of this game but after spending time with it on the weekend my biggest take away is, at times, it sure looks pretty but that’s about the best I could do. Just sad. I’ll probably end up buying the original GOG now just to have the legit 64-bit version of the original.

  41. DF also looked at the console versions: [URL]https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2020-crysis-remastered-console-tech-review[/URL]
    Related video: [MEDIA=youtube]qXtZeHmcaNk[/MEDIA]

Leave a comment