| Forum Index > Closed |
|
DocSnyder
Germany137 Posts
Im not sure but i think SC2 is not optimized for milti-GPU cards like mine,i cant imagine this setup can only mange SO much PFS even with the 1920X1080,moreso lowering gx setting also doesn't change anything,turning on GPU off ->still no change.  Can anyone confirm or deny this,also how much performance detrimental is a virus,just out of curiosity,same with defragmentation? | ||
|
Dmytro
United States19 Posts
On July 01 2010 01:01 Qlinic wrote: did anyone else have problems in the beta with the i7? i noticed some lag spikes and heard it was in relation with i7 cores ;o I have a i7 920 and I have had no problems what so ever. Which operative system are you running? if its windows 7 make sure that you unlock half of your cores as windows 7 parks every other core by default that is core 2 4 6 and 8 | ||
|
Baksteen
Netherlands438 Posts
CPU Type: AMD Turion(tm) X2 Ultra Dual-Core Mobile ZM-80 CPU Speed (GHz):2.12 System Memory (GB):3.217 Video Card Model:ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3650 I just installed windows 7 over vista, hopefully it will improve! When i ran at vista i could do medium settings until i hit big battles, then it started to lag hardcore Thinking of maybe buying a new desktop when the official release hits! | ||
|
skipdog172
United States331 Posts
Your hardware is beyond sufficient to run SC2 on Ultra settings at that resolution. There has to be a software issue or something else going on. I can't believe how many of you are saying his 3GB of RAM is slowing him down and 4 or 6GB would speed it up. That is just laughable, sorry... | ||
|
Polska
Canada83 Posts
CPU: Intel® Core2 Duo Processor E6850 CPU Speed: 3.7Ghz Ram: 2 GB Video card: ATI 5850 From my own experience and other sites testing the biggest difference was made by higher clocks and more cache on the cpu. So oc as high as you can ><. The game is not optimized for quads, just need high clocks. Perhaps that will change down the line, but don't get your hopes up. I have found that 2 GB of ram is just enough for Ultra settings (I play 1680x1050). Windows 7 seems to utilize and allocate RAM really well when the game needs it. Having said that, If I am running some other ram intensive apps while I play it is not enough, so I have to make sure to close things like photoshop/browsers. 3 or more would probably be ideal (unless you like to leave all your apps running while you play for some reason then get more  ).I had performed some tests near the beginning of beta (maybe optimizations have been made since then). This was a replay where max pop banelings go on a rampage, so an instance where the action is intensive. Here are some rest results. 1680x1050 Ultra Settings - min / max / avg i7 920 (quad) @ 4.0ghz (ATI 5970) - 27 / 73 / 41 Q9550 E0 (quad) @ 4GHz (ATI 5850) - 17 / 41 / 24 e6850 (dual) @ 3.7ghz (ATI 5850) - 12 / 40 / 20 As I said this was around a 30 second test where the action was intense and lots of units on screen. So an extreme case. Still, you can see in this case even higher end rigs can crawl. Having said all that, the only time I have really noticed slowdowns during beta has been in very large 3v3 battles. So I am happy. | ||
|
DocSnyder
Germany137 Posts
On July 01 2010 01:54 Polska wrote: OS: WIndows 7 32 bit CPU: Intel® Core2 Duo Processor E6850 CPU Speed: 3.7Ghz Ram: 2 GB Video card: ATI 5850 From my own experience and other sites testing the biggest difference was made by higher clocks and more cache on the cpu. So oc as high as you can ><. The game is not optimized for quads, just need high clocks. Perhaps that will change down the line, but don't get your hopes up. I have found that 2 GB of ram is just enough for Ultra settings (I play 1680x1050). Windows 7 seems to utilize and allocate RAM really well when the game needs it. Having said that, If I am running some other ram intensive apps while I play it is not enough, so I have to make sure to close things like photoshop/browsers. 3 or more would probably be ideal (unless you like to leave all your apps running while you play for some reason then get more ).I had performed some tests near the beginning of beta (maybe optimizations have been made since then). This was a replay where max pop banelings go on a rampage, so an instance where the action is intensive. Here are some rest results. 1680x1050 Ultra Settings - min / max / avg i7 920 (quad) @ 4.0ghz (ATI 5970) - 27 / 73 / 41 Q9550 E0 (quad) @ 4GHz (ATI 5850) - 17 / 41 / 24 e6850 (dual) @ 3.7ghz (ATI 5850) - 12 / 40 / 20 As I said this was around a 30 second test where the action was intense and lots of units on screen. So an extreme case. Still, you can see in this case even higher end rigs can crawl. Having said all that, the only time I have really noticed slowdowns during beta has been in very large 3v3 battles. So I am happy. Pretty much matches my own experience,idk seems like sloppy coding if 3v3 can cause slowdowns,i mean its starcraft,i game like this can NOT throttle on any hardware,thats not virtually obsolete,it seems blizzard has gone for a pretty game ,rather than a stable one. To the op try lowering each graphic setting and tweaking the config folder of SC2,if lowering does enhance performance then youre obviously bottle-necked ,then just go and upgrade whatever s lacking,if not then its sc's fault. Honestly thou ive seem youtube videos 4v4 that were miraculously smooth,so call me jealous. And still other people with fantastic machines,yet sc2 runs between 15-30.Honestly i doubt a virus or anything windows related is at fault. | ||
|
Anther
United States87 Posts
| ||
|
Zeiryuu
Philippines231 Posts
| ||
|
electron
Norway7 Posts
The i7 is basically an i5 with some extra tools for video editing/rendering. So there wont be much (if any) improvement. Might aswell get the i5 if it's only for games. | ||
|
Santriell
Belgium151 Posts
For example I have been running the game perfectly with: - P4 Alderwood 3.4Gz - 2 Gb ddr2 ram - Gforce 6800 256mb ddr 2. ... And I still load up faster than most of you "mah computah need moar cores for SC2" people. Getting an entirely new build just for a game is completely idiotic as most even 'not-so-recent' specs can run the game just fine. At best it points out the utter lack of knowledge & optimization capabilities of computers by an alarming mass of people. At least it's a good thing for video game companies who think visuals outweight playability or entertainment value. | ||
|
Santriell
Belgium151 Posts
On July 01 2010 01:34 Baksteen wrote: I just installed windows 7 over vista, hopefully it will improve! When i ran at vista i could do medium settings until i hit big battles, then it started to lag hardcore Thinking of maybe buying a new desktop when the official release hits! - Use a less memory blackhole of an OS. There is no reason to run WIN7 when XP can run the same way by consuming half the memory. - Avoid vista. - Getting massive lag when rendering lots of units generally means your GPU struggles. If the framerate only drops when they're 'on screen' but not when you're looking somewhere else, save yourself from buying a new computer and just upgrade your GPU. | ||
|
ultratorr
Canada332 Posts
Runs on Ultra at over 20 fps in huge 2v2 battles. Usually runs over 40 fps. | ||
|
jisaeltl
83 Posts
You guys surely have the tendency to grossly underestimate things. Just because there are X-cores and X-Gigs of GPU doesn't mean they're NECESSARY. For example I have been running the game perfectly with: - P4 Alderwood 3.4Gz - 2 Gb ddr2 ram - Gforce 6800 256mb ddr 2. ... And I still load up faster than most of you "mah computah need moar cores for SC2" people. Getting an entirely new build just for a game is completely idiotic as most even 'not-so-recent' specs can run the game just fine. At best it points out the utter lack of knowledge & optimization capabilities of computers by an alarming mass of people. At least it's a good thing for video game companies who think visuals outweight playability or entertainment value. At best this post points out the cancer of TL. people that don't read beyond the first post, and people that post in threads just to troll and not provide any useful information pertaining to the topic. if you want to flame the "utter lack of knowledge & optimization capabilities of computers by people" make your own thread. As i've already stated this upgrade is not only for SC2 but for many upcoming games. obviously upgrading parts for a single game would be stupid. the point of the thread is also asking for help on why a decent system is having troubles getting higher fps. | ||
|
ProxyPanda
Sweden17 Posts
| ||
|
Dohrann
United States7 Posts
OS: Windows 7 Ultimate Processor: 2.00 gigahertz Intel Core2 Duo 64 kilobyte primary memory cache 2048 kilobyte secondary memory cache 64-bit ready Multi-core (2 total) Display: ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3400 Series Multimedia: High Definition Audio Device IDT High Definition Audio CODEC Main Circuit Board: Board: Dell Inc. 0P132H A06 Bus Clock: 533 megahertz BIOS: Dell Inc. A06 No clue what to upgrade first. I dont really want to run SC2 on Ultra or anything, just medium or so. Any help would be much appreciated. Thank you. | ||
|
Aberacht
United States12 Posts
I'll try and provide as many numbers and stuff that I can: Resolution: 1440x900 Windows Vista Home Premium Processor: Intel Core 2 Quad CPU 2.40GHz (4 CPUs) 2030 MB ram 32-bit, I think... Display: NVIDIA GeForce 8500 GT (1000 MB) I hope that is enough information. Thanks in advance! | ||
|
DoubleRainbow
Canada85 Posts
------------------ System Information ------------------ Time of this report: 7/27/2010, 15:04:43 Machine name: AWTSOMEMACHINE Operating System: Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit (6.1, Build 7600) (7600.win7_gdr.100226-1909) Language: English (Regional Setting: English) System Manufacturer: Gateway System Model: DX4300 BIOS: Default System BIOS Processor: AMD Phenom(tm) II X4 810 Processor (4 CPUs), ~2.6GHz Memory: 8192MB RAM Available OS Memory: 7936MB RAM Page File: 2205MB used, 13663MB available Windows Dir: C:\Windows DirectX Version: DirectX 11 DX Setup Parameters: Not found User DPI Setting: Using System DPI System DPI Setting: 96 DPI (100 percent) DWM DPI Scaling: Disabled DxDiag Version: 6.01.7600.16385 32bit Unicode ------------ DxDiag Notes --------------- Display Devices --------------- Card name: ATI Radeon HD 3200 Graphics Manufacturer: ATI Technologies Inc. Chip type: ATI display adapter (0x9610) DAC type: Internal DAC(400MHz) Device Key: Enum\PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_9610&SUBSYS_01551025&REV_00 Display Memory: 3065 MB Dedicated Memory: 253 MB Shared Memory: 2811 MB Current Mode: 1440 x 900 (32 bit) (60Hz) Monitor Name: Generic PnP Monitor Monitor Model: HP w1907 Monitor Id: HWP26A2 Native Mode: 1440 x 900(p) (59.887Hz) Output Type: HD15 Driver Name: atiumd64.dll,atidxx64.dll,atiumdag,atidxx32,atiumdva,atiumd6a.cap,atitmm64.dll Driver File Version: 8.14.0010.0678 (English) Driver Version: 8.632.0.0 | ||
|
mav451
United States1596 Posts
On July 01 2010 18:24 jisaeltl wrote: At best this post points out the cancer of TL. people that don't read beyond the first post, and people that post in threads just to troll and not provide any useful information pertaining to the topic. if you want to flame the "utter lack of knowledge & optimization capabilities of computers by people" make your own thread. As i've already stated this upgrade is not only for SC2 but for many upcoming games. obviously upgrading parts for a single game would be stupid. the point of the thread is also asking for help on why a decent system is having troubles getting higher fps. Meh ignore the trolls. Someone talking about optimization while running a Netburst in 2010 is all you need to know regarding his credibility. It speaks for itself :D | ||
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On July 01 2010 18:24 jisaeltl wrote: At best this post points out the cancer of TL. people that don't read beyond the first post, and people that post in threads just to troll and not provide any useful information pertaining to the topic. if you want to flame the "utter lack of knowledge & optimization capabilities of computers by people" make your own thread. As i've already stated this upgrade is not only for SC2 but for many upcoming games. obviously upgrading parts for a single game would be stupid. the point of the thread is also asking for help on why a decent system is having troubles getting higher fps. I am sorry, but you cannot talk about "the cancer of TL" when you're making a SC2 Computer Build thread. :/ Search is there. Please use it. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=113094 | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Bisu Dota 2 2376Sea  2203Mini 1067Larva  1061Light 781Soma 631Stork 452Snow 339firebathero 247Rush 189[ Show more ] Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games Grubby5992 B2W.Neo1039 crisheroes359 Fuzer  323Lowko312 hiko273 RotterdaM247 QueenE91 Mew2King81 nookyyy  58Trikslyr22 RushiSC15 |
|
Monday Night Weeklies
WardiTV Invitational
Replay Cast
WardiTV Invitational
ByuN vs Solar
Clem vs Classic
Cure vs herO
Reynor vs MaxPax
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
|
|
|
EPT
