Ray Tracing and Quality Comparison

We wanted to hone in and do some more granular testing, starting with Ray Tracing performance and how the different settings scale in performance.  Therefore, on the GeForce RTX 3080 FE only, we set the game to 1440p and did tests at “Very High” graphics quality and “Can It Run Crysis?” graphics quality comparing the four Ray Tracing modes.  We compared performance with No RT, then Performance RT, then High RT and then Very High RT, and then Can It Run Crysis? RT.  This lets us see how much each quality setting has a burden on performance.

In this graph, we are running at 1440p with “Very High” graphics quality.  You can see without RT the RTX 3080 FE is 69FPS, which is very playable.  Turning on Performance RT brings that down to 56.6, which is a drop of 18% in performance.  However, what really gets weird is that as we keep upping the quality, the framerate doesn’t change.  Can It Run Crysis? Ray Tracing is just as demanding as Performance Ray Tracing.  We will have more on this below.

In this graph we are running at 1440p with the “Can It Run Crysis?” graphics quality.  You can see without Ray Tracing performance is at 47.3FPS.  Dropping to Performance RT has a drop of 14% in performance.  However, once again every quality setting of RT is pretty much the same.  More on this below.

Ok, so when we got the results from the two graphs above, we had to think about what could be causing it.  It could be a bottleneck, or it might also be our particular run-through not taking advantage of all the goodness of Ray Tracing.  Therefore, we created a new alternate run-through that takes place solely along the water and out into the water (ocean) where Ray Tracing is used most.  This surely would put a burden on Ray Tracing reflections, right?

Well, apparently, it’s a little bit better in separation, but not all that much.  We are still seeing very small differences in performance between each Ray Tracing quality level, even in an area that it should be using Ray Tracing the most.  This is just really odd behavior.

BTW the drop in performance here from No RT to Can It Run Crysis? RT is 24%, and that’s the largest drop we saw due to Ray Tracing.

Graphics Quality Comparison

The next thing we wanted to test closer is the difference that “Can It Run Crysis?” Quality Mode has over “Very High” Quality Mode.  We wanted to see how much of a drop in performance “Can It Run Crysis?” actually make, especially compared to the drop with Ray Tracing to see which is more of a burden.

In the above graph, we have the game running at 1440p with No Ray Tracing at all to get in the way.  We are simply comparing the “Very High” global setting to the “Can It Run Crysis?” global setting with NO Ray Tracing.  You can see here that turning on Can It Run Crysis? Causes a huge drop in performance, it goes from near 70 FPS down to 47 FPS.  That’s a 31% drop in performance which is much larger than the drop in performance Ray Tracing alone cost.

In this graph we are now looking at 4K resolution between “Very High” and “Can It Run Crysis?” again with NO Ray Tracing.  Here we see a 24% drop in performance, actually less than 1440p, which is odd, but there you go. 

Now in this graph, we wanted to see what both combined “Very High” with “Very High” Ray Tracing and then “Can it Run Crysis?” with “Can It Run Crysis” Ray Tracing is compared.  This means all global settings are at Very High and all Global Settings are at Can It Run Crysis?  We see a big drop between Very High and Can It Run Crysis?  Going up to Can It Run Crysis is a 28% total drop in performance.

The same thing as above is being compared, now at 4K.  The drop here is 29%.

Brent Justice

Brent Justice has been reviewing computer components for 20+ years, educated in the art and method of the computer hardware review he brings experience, knowledge, and hands-on testing with a gamer oriented...

Join the Conversation

11 Comments

  1. Man, that’s disappointing. I never played the original and I was hoping this would be worthwhile on 30XX/Big Navi.
  2. Thanks, @Brent_Justice for all your hard work in researching this. At this point, at least until, if, Crytek puts updates out to perhaps improve it, I recommend to people wanting the best version of the original to go to gog.com. While reading the review thread there I came across a post stating it is the 64-bit version and @Armenius , who has the original physical copy of the game w/ 64-bit executable, went there are bought it as well. It’s now been verified to be true. I’m thinking of doing the same soon.
  3. This ‘Remastered’ version might be as unoptimized as the original…

    The only real extra draw here is the ‘Can it run Crysis?’ meme tie-in, but since they didn’t port it to a version of CryEngine that supports DX12 or Vulkan, among other features like proper multithreading support, it really seems to fail on that front.

    Had they ported it to a ‘modern’ engine, it could have been a knockout.

  4. Thanks, @Brent_Justice for all your hard work in researching this. At this point, at least until, if, Crytek puts updates out to perhaps improve it, I recommend to people wanting the best version of the original to go to gog.com. While reading the review thread there I came across a post stating it is the 64-bit version and @Armenius , who has the original physical copy of the game w/ 64-bit executable, went there are bought it as well. It’s now been verified to be true. I’m thinking of doing the same soon.

    GOG is definitely the best place to buy the game.

  5. GOG is definitely the best place to buy the game.

    At this point, at least until, if, Crytek puts updates out to perhaps improve it, I recommend to people wanting the best version of the original to go to gog.com. While reading the review thread there I came across a post stating it is the 64-bit version and @Armenius , who has the original physical copy of the game w/ 64-bit executable, went there are bought it as well. It’s now been verified to be true. I’m thinking of doing the same soon.

    Yeah I was gonna say, grab dat shiznit on GOG. I managed to grab it and Crysis Warhead for $5 each on GOG back in 2017, and yeah they both come with the 64-bit exes.

    Between Brent’s review and the DF review, it is extremely clear this "remaster" is a nice big hearty bowl of feces.

  6. it and Crysis Warhead

    Years ago I cobbled together the 64-bit executable for Warhead into the original 32-bit version. That one was pretty easy to find. Seems Crytek fully committed with Warhead. That project sort of worked(deleted 32-bit folder and replaced w/ Warhead’s). The only problem was that it was a bit crash-happy. It was funny seeing the Warhead menu but they must’ve coded both the same way because it knew how to load all assets/levels.

    Well went ahead and got it from GOG last night. Should’ve done it a long time ago. Only had a few minutes to tinker but saw it support 32:9 5120×1440 from the start(although I had select the res a couple of times before it stuck during the first start-up). The game just worked at a solid 60 fps with my 2080 Ti hanging around 70-80%. Granted I didn’t really go beyond the beach but that’s still night and day compared to this remaster. The remaster can look better but the play experience is garbage by comparison.

    There are rumblings around the net that DLSS is coming in a patch soon.

  7. Years ago I cobbled together the 64-bit executable for Warhead into the original 32-bit version. That one was pretty easy to find. Seems Crytek fully committed with Warhead. That project sort of worked(deleted 32-bit folder and replaced w/ Warhead’s). The only problem was that it was a bit crash-happy. It was funny seeing the Warhead menu but they must’ve coded both the same way because it knew how to load all assets/levels.

    Well went ahead and got it from GOG last night. Should’ve done it a long time ago. Only had a few minutes to tinker but saw it support 32:9 5120×1440 from the start(although I had select the res a couple of times before it stuck during the first start-up). The game just worked at a solid 60 fps with my 2080 Ti hanging around 70-80%. Granted I didn’t really go beyond the beach but that’s still night and day compared to this remaster. The remaster can look better but the play experience is garbage by comparison.

    There are rumblings around the net that DLSS is coming in a patch soon.

    Note that it still has the issue of picking the lowest or first refresh rate listed for your monitor. My usual trick of setting preferred refresh rate in the NVIDIA control panel didn’t work this time around, so I was stuck at 24 Hz. Unfortunately I already forgot what I did to fix it this time…

  8. There has been a recent update to this.

    Brent,

    Running Crysis Remastered at 4K, starting with the highest quality preset to the lowest while staying in the game, Mission 2 Recovery. Using 16gb Vega FE. When going from the higher preset quality setting to the lower ones, the vram allocation went down each time, in other words the game is not automatically allocating the vram capacity of the video card but appears to be what the game needs.

    • "Can It Run Crysis?" took 13gb at 4K, very consistent in the level
    • "Very High" took 11.2gb at 4K, very consistent
    • "High" took 6.7gb
    • "Med" took 4.8gb, this turns off raytracing
    • "Low" took 4.4gb, also has no raytracing

    The 3080 would not have enough vram at 4K with "Very High" or Can It "Run Crysis?" – I Would expect stalls, stutters at points in the game and would not be smooth.

    Raytracing is doing more than just reflections, it does bounce as in GI for color as well as shadows, indoor scenes can be greatly improved in IQ. Digital Foundry did a rundown of raytracing and settings to get 60fps. The presets are really unbalanced, you can get some good IQ and fps with settings. You can run a number of the settings at "Can It Do Crysis?" while others best be on high or even medium.

  9. There has been a recent update to this.

    Brent,

    Running Crysis Remastered at 4K, starting with the highest quality preset to the lowest while staying in the game, Mission 2 Recovery. Using 16gb Vega FE. When going from the higher preset quality setting to the lower ones, the vram allocation went down each time, in other words the game is not automatically allocating the vram capacity of the video card but appears to be what the game needs.

    • "Can It Run Crysis?" took 13gb at 4K, very consistent in the level
    • "Very High" took 11.2gb at 4K, very consistent
    • "High" took 6.7gb
    • "Med" took 4.8gb, this turns off raytracing
    • "Low" took 4.4gb, also has no raytracing

    The 3080 would not have enough vram at 4K with "Very High" or Can It "Run Crysis?" – I Would expect stalls, stutters at points in the game and would not be smooth.

    Raytracing is doing more than just reflections, it does bounce as in GI for color as well as shadows, indoor scenes can be greatly improved in IQ. Digital Foundry did a rundown of raytracing and settings to get 60fps. The presets are really unbalanced, you can get some good IQ and fps with settings. You can run a number of the settings at "Can It Do Crysis?" while others best be on high or even medium.

    I’m not sure when Brent will be revisiting this to do an update for the performance review but I’m sure he will. I’d expect though, it might be after one, or more, updates to the game. There have been rumors they are planning to patch in DLSS as well. I did finish my playthrough of it this weekend, after this update, and noticed significant performance improvements. I’d say the game is mostly playable at this point, at least with a 2080 Ti @ 5120×1440. VRAM usage is a bit insane. It’ll interesting to see how much it thinks it needs when I’m able to get a hold of a 3090. I witnessed it hammering 11 GB using settings at high or above. The game still needs work but, for me at least, it seemed to play much better than at launch. I was even able to use ray tracing at the performance level with 58-80 fps. If I lowered some other settings a little I could even crank it up one more level.

Leave a comment