All Channels
Popular
1150°

Crysis and CoD 4 rendered by the CPU

Some days ago, the software rasterizer Swiftshader from Transgaming was released as a demo. It's way than the software rasterizer from Microsoft itself. Currently, Swiftshader supports Shader Model 2.0 which means that a lot of DX9 games work solely on the main processor. The CPU does all the computation in this case like pixel shading, texture filtering and transform and lighting.

German website PCGH.de did some benchmarks (3DMark, Crysis) and shows the visual difference when rendered with the CPU compared to the GPU. So maybe this is a trend like raytracing? Who knows...

Read Full Story >>
pcgameshardware.de
Harry1906605d ago

better in the top images.
Can someone explain to me how this works,
i'm not a big techie.

JsonHenry6605d ago

Maybe combine this WITH GPU acceleration and we got ourselves a winner folks!

Marceles6605d ago (Edited 6605d ago )

Usually a GPU (video card) is needed to render the game's graphics, but in this case because of Swiftshader, the CPU (processor) is able to render the graphics by itself without needed the help of the GPU. Of course the GPU's graphics are gonna look better than the CPU, that's its job, but the bottom image is still impressive considering that it's able to render Crysis and COD4 without aid since rendering graphics isn't normally the CPU's job. This just gives you an idea that if you had a Core 2 Quad processor without a video card, how well it could handle graphics without the aid of the GPU.

Supposedly the Cell processor on the PS3 can render graphics as well without needing the RSX.

Richdad6605d ago

Be benifical for PC in the first place because in a year or 2 PC Cpu will be all 8 cores with very high processing speed and cache.

JsonHenry6605d ago

Well, what I meant was that if you have extra cores laying around and you combined the software/CPU rendering with GPU aided effects it would make your machine more powerful automatically by simply adding support for the CPU to help render the frames.

And yeah, the CELL was made to render graphics. But apparently it was not that great at it in its current form or else Sony would have never bothered paying Nvidia a royalty fee for every PS3 sold.

travelguy2k6605d ago

was originally supposed to have 2 cell processors and i think a) because of the cost of the cell at that point, B) the power consumption of that size of die was too high, and c) the heat produced by the cell used at that time was too high.

so with all these reasons against 2 cells in the PS3 we now have the RSX. If the PS3 was released today then we would get to cells and no RSX because all these issues have been fixed.

Marceles6603d ago

travelguy2k you're right about everything, Kutaragi said it was supposed to have 2 Cell processors but he overestimated how well it could handle graphics without a GPU. I only wish the RSX would've been based on the G80 Nvidia series, but if the graphics from future PS3 games truly look like how we've been seeing on previews I don't think it would make much of a difference

jsonhenry you're also right with combining the fact that the CPU + GPU together makes the machines much more powerful, and with the PS3 being able to do that, I think alot of people who don't understand are underestimating the PS3's graphics potential

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 6603d ago
Solid_Malone6605d ago

GPU seems to be the best- you can tell from the lighting

Richdad6605d ago

GPU rendered is easily looking better. But this give new tools to dev although this software needs more work.

Daishi6604d ago

The main point of this demonstration isn't that they plan to run games on CPU alone but better cooperation between CPU and GPU. Imagine running Crysis at max with a 128mb video card...

jackdoe6605d ago

GPU seems to be the better, though CPU rendering comes close. Anyway, those Crysis shots look like its running on medium settings.

poopsack6605d ago (Edited 6605d ago )

does that mean i can now run these on my computer? it can do everything except shaders (it has 00) so i dont know, not really i wiz on pc gaming. can someone please explain?

Is this all hardware?

tweaker6605d ago

This is great! Imagine the fastest CPU working with a top of the line graphics card at the same time. Graphics would be dramatically superior from consoles. I'd get serious with PC gaming all over again.

Show all comments (37)
140°

Only nine franchises make up the top 20 all-time best-selling PlayStation chart in the US

In honour of PlayStation's 30th birthday yesterday in the US, data company Circana has dug out figures showing the top 20 best-selling PlayStation video games ever (date-range Jan 1995 to July 2025). Don't get too excited.

Read Full Story >>
eurogamer.net
JEECE237d ago

This is a great reminder of how game sales have become more concentrated in a smaller number of games/series over time. In the PS1/PS2 era a game was a success if it sold a million or a few million copies. The GTA games (3/Vice City/San Andreas) were pretty big outliers in selling as much as they did during the PS2 era. So in the minds of a lot of gamers something like FF VII feels like it was as big of a PS1 game as God of War 2018 was for PS4, but in reality far fewer people bought it (though it has obviously reached additional people through remasters, etc.).

StoneTitan236d ago

this was alwalys the case and will always be the case. with everything

237d ago
Zerobalance237d ago (Edited 237d ago )

What this says to me is, not many people are buying a PS to play PS exclusives. Like so many false narratives, like Xbox gamers don't buy games! It seems Playstation as a default system is a vanilla system to play call of duty, Minecraft, GTA games and a sports games.

badz149237d ago (Edited 237d ago )

if you look back into the PS history, it has always been the 3rd parties who sells the most games. it was just that the PS1 and PS2 were so dominant that many of those 3rd party games were exclusives. so, back during the PS1 and PS2 days, the strategy was "to sell as many consoles as possible in order to sell more 1st party exclusives" to ride on that wave. The strategy to push many 1st party exclusives to sell consoles only started with the PS3 when many of those prior 3rd party exclusives went multiplat but more accurately, it started with the PSP.

Sony saw with the PSP, which was being trounced in sales by the DS, that 3rd party exclusives are hard to come by if you're not dominating the market. So they started building more 1st party games and when the PS3 were facing difficulties in sales, they knew they had to rely on their own to differentiate the PS3 from the 360. So the strategy back then changed to "release more 1st party exclusives in order to sell more consoles".

the only manufacturer that is still consistently selling their hardware to play 1st party exclusives, is Nintendo, and that was because they gave up the armrace for power thus they can't rely on 3rd parties anymore as all multiplats play better on competing consoles. AND that's also why they are the most ominous in going after emulators and also patent trolling!

so, you're not wrong there, but not an "aha!" moment or anything. it has been this way since the last, at least, 15 years for Playstation.

237d ago
Deathdeliverer236d ago

@zerobalance

So... what this tells you is that Call of duty, being the absolute check writer that it is, has been outsold by Last of us, God of war, 2 Spider man games..... Saying Playstation exclusives doesn't sell is like saying call of duty doesn't sell because they have outsold some of iterations. Does that make sense to you?

237d ago
237d ago
Show all comments (13)
90°

Can you run Crysis in VR? Crysis VR Mod Available for Download

Holger Frydrych has just released a cool VR Mod for the 2007 version of Crytek's first-person shooter, Crysis.

Read Full Story >>
dsogaming.com
PrinceOfAnger467d ago (Edited 467d ago )

Playing it right now looks amazing! :D
so much fun, i hope they make a vr mod for crysis 2 / 3 too!

DivineHand125466d ago

This is amazing. This is the direction VR should go in to boost adoption. Since I have beaten every Crysis except 1, this is now a good excuse to correct that problem.

200°

Crytek Wanted Crysis To Be "Future-Proof"

According to Crytek CEO Cervat Yerli, "I want[ed] to make sure Crysis does not age, that [it] is future proofed, meaning that if I played it three years from now, it should look better than today." Yerli and the team designed Crysis' highest graphical settings for the PC hardware of 2010 and beyond.

While Crytek has officially announced Crysis 4 is in development, nothing new has surfaced. For now, gamers' only way to scratch that itch is to play the Crysis Remastered Trilogy available on PC and consoles.

Read Full Story >>
dualshockers.com
RaidenBlack471d ago

OG 2007 Crysis (not the remastered weirdo), is & will forever be a legend amongst the PC community.

PrinceOfAnger471d ago

This video will always be impressive to me, even for years to come. Some things here are better than games we have today, OG crysis is the best version!

https://youtu.be/SVg63_aNr-...

RaidenBlack471d ago

OG Crysis physics, man ... amazing! Thanks for the reminder!

PrinceOfAnger470d ago (Edited 470d ago )

Looks really nice with VR mod too

FinalFantasyFanatic470d ago

I'm still shocked that it looks as good as it does today, puts some modern games to shame.

Profchaos469d ago

I thought the remaster was fine tbh some rough edges at launch but after some patches it's decent

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 469d ago
isarai471d ago

I mean the lighting and physics still hold up extremely well. I still revisit it from time to time.

RedDeadLB470d ago

That CPU performance thing is preventing it.

isarai469d ago

Yeah unfortunately Crystek's decision to bet on the linear progression of clock speed in CPUs was derailed by the unforseen shift towards multicore CPUs. It just wasn't built with that in mind because that wasn't even in the conversation at the moment

DivineHand125470d ago

I remember when I tried to play Crysis with my Intel Pentium Dual core E2200 @2.2GHz , 4GB ram and GeForce 9400gt. I was a kid back then and that was the best I could do. I would get about 15 to 20 fps. When I over clocked the CPU to 2.8GHz I would get about 40fps. The experience wasn't good at all and it was the only PC game I could not run back then unless and put the settings on low. At that point the game went from cutting edge graphics to PS2 graphics. To this day I haven't completed the OG Crysis. I was able to complete Crysis 2 and 3 after building a new PC when I got my first job.

HyperMoused470d ago

Never played it, worth a try you think?

Profchaos469d ago (Edited 469d ago )

Worth a try just because it's the only game that lets you pick up a turtle on the beach and throw it at enemy soldiers that should have been a back of the box feature.

But nah seriously unless you're nostalgic for it I'm not sure if it will hold up

Show all comments (17)