Via's upcoming Isaiah chip can run Crysis
By Paul Miller 
posted Jan 27th 2008 4:27AM
posted Jan 27th 2008 4:27AM
[Via Wired]
Please note: If you're a current Engadget commenter, you do not need to re-register. Simply login and you will be prompted to select a username.
Hope this would be cheaper than intels cihps
It may be able to run Crysis, but will it be playable?
I heard it ran it at medium-high settings at 1280x960 with a nvidia 7850 and an average framerate of 60.
That's not to shabby.
more importantly: will it blend?
That's quite an ironic user name, because that's how you make people feel.
Also: your face.
wtf would you blend a chip that can play crysis?
and dont ask if it can play doom either, because if you have crysis you wouldnt bother with doom
Good Lord, imagine the graphic settings you'd have to set it at in order to play.
800x600, your window into a world of jaggies.
That's a Crysis indeed.
You kids and your fancy HD. 800x600 is a decent resolution
Hell! In my days, 640 x 480 was awesome, and 800 x 600 was to die for. Heck, before then 320 x 200 was great; all those CGA colors just made your eyes beg for glasses. You kids nowadays are spoiled I tell ya'.
Then came 1024 x 768 and so on and the rest was history...
God! I feel old, and I'm only 27! LOL
Now, where's my SNES? I need to relieve some good 'ol 16-bit fun.
Oh, speaking of this new-fangled Via chip, did they benchmark this at the lowest settings possible or at a low resolution like 640 x 480 and maxed the settings? >_>;
1.7Ghz Intel Centrino notebook, 256mb RAM, Internal Intel graphics accelerator... Yeah, it didn't even load.
octoberasian:
you're my hero
finally a CPU that can make Windows Mobile run halfway fast.
Not funny.
@Jon
You must have never used windows mobile for any period of time....
Windows Mobile doesn't really need a speed boost. UMPCs, they need a speed and graphics boost.
I do (check my history).
WinMob runs on ARM, this is a X86 processor. One wonders if YOU actually used WinMob.
I wanna see some benchies...
bye-bye AMD, hello via.
But...can it play doom?
And how is Ron P-
/gets dragged away by the 1000 people that promised to do it if RP was ever mentioned again/
Bugger is a vulgar word used in vernacular British English, Australian English, New Zealand English, South African English,
Did you get cut off mid-sentence or something?
I guess he buggered that sentence up...
probably capitalized his comma, which causes the rest of the comment to go bye bye...
Not that it's really a big deal, since he was telling us bugger is a dirty-word (no shit).
I'm amazed Via has made a chip that can run anything, let alone Crysis.
The CPU wouldn't have to be particularly good to 'run' crysis. What they should also tell us is whether they have quadruple overclocked graphics cards of doom paired with it.
Doesn't matter if they did.
You know the phrase "a chain is only as strong as it's weakest link?" Well its the same with computers, and the CPU would bottleneck it- the ultra powerful super-duper video cards would only do so much.
Anything under a dual-core would bottleneck that setup in Crysis. Crysis doesn't really care what clock your cores run at, only that you have two or more of them. The GPUs take care of the rendering but, physics and everything else is put on the CPU and is multi-threaded.
Hey Hung....
it's a single core cpu, bud. no dual core of this setup yet, but they have said that it can be done and they're working on that now.
Yeah, I know it's a single core. I'm saying that it doesn't matter what the capabilities of a processor is, if it isn't multi-cored, it'll hold back the GPU. Even a 5 GHz Pentium 4 does a poorer job than a 1.83 GHz E6300 when it comes to Crysis.
Dude, dual cores can bottle neck a system. ANY processors can bottle neck a system. Don't talk if you're this ignorant, ok? An E4200 will bottle neck an 8800 GTX or Ultra, and even more so in an SLI setup. It depends on the architecture of the core, the speed, its caches, and so on.
Do some research, please.
@ Zeus.:God
Yeah, that's in GENERAL. We're talking only about Crysis (possibly gaming in general). Have you ever played Crysis? It's a complete GPU hog. As long as the processor is dual-cored and isn't an ULV, the GPU will bottleneck the performance.
Anandtech's Triple SLI-setup showed that the 70% clock difference from a 3.33 GHz and 2.00 GHz shows at 39% decrease in perfomance (43.2→30.9)*. But the 40% rendering ability difference from a single GPU to SLI (2-way, mind you) shows a 108% increase in the frame rate (13→27)*. And in less physics intensive games such as Bioshock and Oblivion, the CPU makes even less of a difference.
The only real matter is whether or not the CPU contains multiple cores. Sure, an extremely poor multi-cored CPU will bottleneck SLI graphics, but not an average card. Pretty much any non-nitrogen cooled single-core processor, however, will bottleneck even integrated graphics.
You seriously need to shut up and stop telling people to do research. I've seen your comments on many threads and they always go back to how you know so much about computers and that others need to get their facts straight. You, Zeus.:God, need to follow your own advice.
*http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3183&p=4
Hung: Ignorance at its finest. Do you always go off on a rant when you're word is contested?
Yes, I have played Crysis, yes, I know that its a hog, but not just a GPU hog; its a CPU hog, a memory hog- its an everything hog. Any type of processor can bottleneck a system, even if it was a quad core.
You pretty much just agreed with me in your last few statements. You went so far off from what I was saying, its not even funny.
My word is contested? You're calling me ignorant? That's the hugest load of horseshit I've ever seen somone dump into a comment. My word wasn't even contested; the guy read my comment wrong. You're the one that tried acted like a know-it-all and failingly attempted to correct me when our comments were in accord. Then you go and talk shit about me for no reason at all.
"CPU would bottleneck it" -you
"Anything under a dual-core would bottleneck that setup in Crysis" -me
"ANY processors can bottle neck a system. Don't talk if you're this ignorant" -your anus
Seriously, how desperate for attention do you need to be in order to start shit with someone who isn't even talking to you? Nevertheless, someone who is right and CAN ACTUALLY support their claims?
"You pretty much just agreed with me in your last few statements. You went so far off from what I was saying, its not even funny."
You're right: it's not funny. It doesn't even make sense. I agreed with you, but strayed off? We weren't even addressing the same question. You said that the CPU would bottleneck that setup. I'm saying that Crysis is more dependent on multi-threading than it is on raw processing power.
"Any type of processor can bottleneck a system, even if it was a quad core." For the last time, this is true in general, but NOT in fucking Crysis. Yes, a C2D clocked at 2.66 GHz and a C2Q clocked at 3 GHz will yield different results, but minutely. Nothing like how a 3 GHz Pentium 4 and a 1.6 GHz C2D would differ. It has nothing to do with the CPU cache. Crysis NEEDS multi-threading to not turn into a powerpoint.
"An E4200 will bottle neck an 8800 GTX or Ultra" Do you know what bottlenecking is? It's not when you increase one thing and it shows no improvement. It's when you increase one thing and see some improvement, but the same degree of increase on another component yields a much greater improvement.
It's not when increasing the clock two-fold yields some difference. It's when increasing the rendering ability some yields twice the performce. And, no, an E4200 would not bottleneck an 8800 Ultra if you use that definition (NOT the system in general, JUST Crysis). Throwing on another 8800 would double the performance, but doubling the clock and core count would increase performance less than 50%.
My word isn't contested. It's like when people who are legitimately right get undercut by crazies because the listeners are too ignorant to tell the difference. Perhaps I'm too adamant on making sure people know I'm right when I know that I'm right. But you need to shut the fuck up and quit acting like you know something, because I haven't seen you write anything but shit. This debate is fucking over. Ask anyone who will read this thread. They'll tell you that (1) you don't know what you're talking about; (2) I've shown that I am right and you are wrong; (3) not just wrong, but conscious of being wrong; (4) way too confident of your computer knowledge, if it can be called that; and (5) desperate as hell to start an argument for no reason, whatsoever.
FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT
lol
Hung definately wins that fight. He is much more coherent and actually address the damn post
actually Hung's wrong on one point. I'm pretty sure Crysis only uses 2 cores even with a quad core CPU. I saw a Crysis benchmark for a quad-core processor, and it fared only marginally better than a comparable clock speed dual core.
fine, i'll take the effort to back up my argument with sources...
http://www.hothardware.com/Articles/Intel_Core_2_Extreme_QX9770_Performance_Preview/?page=9
Oh please, please stop starting so many of your posts with "Sure,"!
It's driving me batty!
Sure, I'm sure they will take your opinion into account, and surely won't do this anymore
sorry, couldn't resist
what are ya talkin about! there is only 2 posts counting this one that starts with sure on the front page.
I can't remember if Crysis is designed to work with a PhsyXics card, but if it was you could easily build a rig with a couple of good graphics cards and a couple of physXics cards, and that would take so much load off the processor that you could run it on pretty much any modern processor.
By run, they probably mean that the installer doesn't come up with incompatible hardware message.
It runs Crysis! Woohoo! 1 fps makes people happy.... No one said they got 60 fps, no one said they got at least 10 fps. No, it won't be playable.
"I'm amazed Via has made a chip that can run anything, let alone Crysis."
They didn't say it will be able to run anything else ;)
I still think that if Mac Air can be done with dual-core processor, so can be UMPC! But that makes UMPC look as a better alternative compared to a Laptop (hint: compare prices of UMPCs and super-compact laptops).
Ok Via made a chip that can run Crysis. And IBM made a chip that powers PS3. So what? We want numbers!!! :)
Well I'm sure when they say run they mean at least 15FPS. They might have been running it at lowest settings at 800*600, but so what?
I think your computer cost more than my car.
does anybody knows what is the percect setup to run crysis at full resolution with with every setting set on highest?
No.
A quantum computer?
your mom
A human brain with a monitor plugged into it.
Want one, need one, will probably keel over and die without one. come little chippy and live in me lappy.
The 9800GX2 is out? Yeah that's what I thought. Take your wishlist elsewhere.
The 9800GX2 is out? Yeah that's what I thought. Take your wishlist elsewhere.
Oh shit triple post! lol Also Crysis doesn't need much more than 4Gbs of RAM...
9800gx= FAIL!
Here's hoping you meant 8800 and weren't being a douche.
I really hope this gets out into the open market, and gives intel some good competition in the mobile market.
This a prefect fit for the OQO. http://www.oqo.com/
Is this a dual core?
this is awesome. I run a 1.5Ghz C7 powered server that sits under my tv. I love that it's low power, runs Xp great and makes an awesome itunes box, but hate that it just doesn't have enough speed to play 720p vids.
Since this is pin compatible I look forward to dropping it in my socket (lol) and testing it out.
I take you saw this section of the article:
"We saw a 1.4GHz CN processors running a Blu-ray HD video easily as well as a 1.2GHz passsively cooled CN running 720P video content and plowing through a desktop application benchmark."
I only wish they had mentioned if the 720p content was encoded with h.264 or some other codec, as well as the bitrate. Both are important factors in determining actual performance.
You're right. I was referring specifically to 264 encoded 720p videos I've tried playing back on the box.
now days its pointless announcing stuff without video evidence
Meh, Crysis is nothing more than sub par game play and pretty graphics.
It wouldnt have sold half as well as it did if it had lower graphics.
One of the main reasons I bought it was bragging rights. I knew none of my friends could run it.
Oops, comments system messed up what was supposed to be a reply and put it further down.
If it can run it, the resolution doesn't matter. Play roguelikes and you'll see what I mean. I am not above playing an FPS at 320x200. Yes. I have. And I enjoyed it. And it ran smoothly. At near maximum settings on a year and a half old laptop. It runs, it's cool, resolution doesn't matter.
I thought it was fun. Less frustrating and more freeform than Call of Duty 4 imo, although that was fun too. Haven't been bothered to try the multiplayer though, and I'm still enjoying CoD4 mp months after buying.
Crysis ran barely on my 7600GS AGP then upgraded to 2600XT AGP sold that and it runs so great on my new 3850 AGP with P4 prescott overclocked to 3.4ghz, 1.5gigz of ram and 4 hard drives SATA RAID-0. That's the defining bottleneck is the raid controller and hard drive speeds. As data is constantly loaded off the drives, you need to have it delivered fast. Everyone is focussed on cpu, gpu, and etc, but... the slowest component, FSB and HDD... my fsb runs at 1000MHz, and single hard drives are about 50-80MB/s, with RAID its about 250MB/s so the information that needs to be accessed doesn't mess with slow transfer rate...
Too bad my mobo is AGP, cuz now i'm stuck with the limitations of every single game needing dualcore. Too bad we can't just PCI another one on there like before... I'd have 4 cpu's hanging off my mobo like i do with SATA RAID.
FAR CRY Maxed out @ 1280x720 2xAA 4xAF = 50-200fps
Crysis Maxed out DX9 XP SP3 @ 1280x720 0xAA 0xAF = 20-45fps
Crysis Maxed out DX10 VISTA SP1 @ 1280x720 0xAA 0xAF = 15-37fps
But, when playing Far cry i feel like i have the immersive response and quickness to do anything that comes to mind because of the sheer performance, and Crysis on high xp and very high vista i have to lay low when things get crazy cuz i die too fast, no matter the strategy.
HL2 i get shivers because its so quick at 100-200fps always