Crysis crashing during opening video... can someone help?

[Kai]

I've seen this twice now. Do a google search; it takes about 10 seconds. People are working on DX10 for XP. Why? Because they hate Vista and want DX10. In the opinion of many people, the only reasons to upgrade to Vista are for DX10 and capability for more RAM, and many of them won't gimp their system for these features when XP runs fine at it's "limits". Just because it isn't an official release on the Microsoft website doesn't mean people aren't using it or it doesn't exist. That's like saying "Workstation 2008 doesn't exist. No forward hacks available".

That being said, the fact that it is an unsupported bastard-child mod of an official product for GAMING, and is working on a platform for which it was unintended from the get-go, would make me point fingers toward it when bad things started happening with games.

Normally I wouldn't recommend a fresh install, but if you deleted or modified the wrong files here and there when it comes to system files, you may have to invest a little time with a reinstall.

If you have things just how you like them and don't want to wipe that away, I would suggest disconnecting the hard drive and throwing another in there for your experiments. They are pretty cheap, and you don't need a high-capacity drive for an install of XP, drivers, essentials and a few games. Like I said, it will take a little time but if you have something else you can do while the installation takes place [and you intervene/guide it here and there when needed], it won't be so bad. Then you can disconnect the drive and put it away somewhere for experimenting later on; it can become your "control group".

For crysis, you can enable most DX10 exclusive features, but there are still a few that are DX10 ONLY. I've seen plenty of bunk about DX10 on XP, but really, thats all they are - bunk. Oh i'm sure theres some kludge that cobbles bits and pieces together to EMULATE the featureset - but without the WDDM driver support (which doesn't EXIST in XP driversets), you're not actually running DX10 on a hardware level at all. GPU memory is virtualised in DX10, something that XP is incapable of doing full stop.

Anyway...phoenix6 - i hate to tell you this, but don't believe the marketing hype - it may say 3200 on teh label, but theres no way in hell it's as fast as a REAL 3.2Ghz CPU. If it's clocked at 2.2Ghz then thats what it is, 2.2Ghz. It has a shorter pipeline compared to the P4's of the time, meaning it was as fast as a 3.2Ghz P4 in certain tasks, but because of the SSE implementation, it behaved exactly like a 2.2Ghz CPU. And THATS the important bit - the specs dont ask for something that runs LIKE a 2.8Ghz, they want a CPU that DOES run at 2.8Ghz.

I don't want to have to be negative, but realistically, your rig doesn't stand much chance of running Crysis anywhere NEAR as effectively as one that the minimum specs ask for

Realistically, you're looking at 12 to 15fps maximum due to being severely CPU limited.

If you'd posted this topic 2 weeks ago, i'd have sent you an E4300, 4gb of memory, P5B-E and an 8800GT for free, instead, i binned them

 

[phoenix6]

Well, there was one site, forget the name, that rates my entire computer and tells me if I can run whatever app I picked from the menu, in this case Crysis... under min specs, I passed, and well at that.

When I had it running in Vista, the game actually ran pretty decent, 27 - 30fps. Problem was the fucking sound, in and out, crackled, huge mess. Now in XP, when I DO get to the opening of the game, for the 3 seconds I had earlier in the opening skydive sequence where i could control things for a second, it was smooth as hell.

I have no doubts I can run this game, at a playable level, just getting it past this glitch is the challenge.


All that stuff for free would have been for fucking win.. bummer

Its all good though, This is a hold me over as this computer is reached its maximum limit of additions, its time to do a full upgrade, which Im saving for (have bigger priorities right now, like getting Serena out here and settled)

If I do anything soon, Im going with AMD still, Quad Core, and possibly an NVidia 260 GTS, although I am liking ATi, so far...

 

[Kai]

260? Not worth it, at all. Radeon HD4870 = cheaper + better all rounder.

And AMD now would be fail++ as the CPU's are possibly the biggest pieces of junk possible compared to the Core2's. You could put together a good Core2 rig that would blow it away for less money.

 

[phoenix6]

Ive always been AMD loyal, and up until last week, nVidia loyal.

Ive NEVER had intel, so maybe Ill give it a shot, I want quad core rig though. I was looking into the 4870s but the 260s just dropped the price, I can get one for $270 now, cant find a good 4870 for less than $300.

 

[Poodles]

If you have a good enough cooler (swiftech with a delta hairdryer of death fan) you'll be able to overclock the piss outta that CPU...

You could remove your cooler, clean the hell outta it, and use arctic silver. Stock AMD coolers are fine, even for considerable overclock, but it seems like either the fan isn't pushing the air it needs to, or the interface between the CPU and heatsink isn't good.

 

[phoenix6]

I pulled off the fan and cleaned it, but didnt apply any new thermal grease, its ok tho like I said b4, I just ordered a new heatsink and some artic 5 thermal compound. The heatsink its entirely copper, 60mm fan and micro fins. I think after I get that I MIGHT do some OCing with the CPU. Might as well.. the vid card is safely clocked at 590mhz core and 540mhz memory speed and CCC tested it at full load, only hits 44ºC TOPS (Stock cooler)

EDIT: Forgot to mention, the CPU heatsink now WITH all the dust had the same temps, so I think lack of new grease possibly just made what I did pointless... I dont know... this new one was from NewEgg.com and the reviews were great, it was cheaper but everyone reported 10 - 20ºc cooler.