Crysis Warhead Performance Put To The Test

We know Crysis Warhead has some odd nomenclature for graphic settings, but how well do those graphics settings actually performed. After all of the complaints about the original game's outrageous system requirements, developer Crytek promised that this side story would be tweaked to run well on a much more affordable computer, but did they deliver? The guys over at TechSpot have gone in-depth to analyse the game's performance, providing benchmarks for 14 different video cards at each of the game's three quality levels, and the results aren't too spectacular. What they basically discovered is that said tweaks are negligible, and only a very high-end video card is capable of breaking past 32 frames per second at the lowest resolution they tested, 1440x900.

Hit the link for the full report on Crysis Warhead's performance, including more comparison shots of the three levels of graphical detail.

Crysis Warhead performance in-depth [TechSpot]


    Wow, really? I'm getting better performance then that...

    My bro has an 8600GTS and he plays the game in DX9, Gamer settings and gets 30 - 40 FPS constant. Are we just lucky or what?

    That's really weird. I've got a system that's comparable to the testbed, very slightly lower-end, and I'm posting *much* better results. Don't have exact numbers, but it's exceedingly playable on highest settings at 1680x1050, running much much better than those results claim. It's absolutely gorgeous, and super-fun, so I'd say take these performance numbers with a grain of salt. My recommendation to people is to grab the demo of the original Crysis and use it as a benchmark. Warhead will run slightly better and look slightly prettier than that does.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now