EPTSVGA PCI Express,1GB, Asus ENGT220/DI, nVidia GT220, DVI/HDMI/ VGA, DDR3, LowProfile bracket
thanks in advance
[Guideline] SC2 Computers - Page 13
| Forum Index > Tech Support |
|
3D.TemujiN
Kazachstan95 Posts
SVGA PCI Express,1GB, Asus ENGT220/DI, nVidia GT220, DVI/HDMI/ VGA, DDR3, LowProfile bracket thanks in advance | ||
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
On February 26 2010 19:29 3D.TemujiN wrote: can someone tell me please if this video card will be unable to run sc2 at good settings ? SVGA PCI Express,1GB, Asus ENGT220/DI, nVidia GT220, DVI/HDMI/ VGA, DDR3, LowProfile bracket thanks in advance Probably low / middle settings depending on your screen resolution. | ||
|
flamez[666]
11 Posts
On February 21 2010 08:03 FragKrag wrote: The i7 has everything that the i5 and i3 lines except for the integrated graphics controller. They are also lower clocked than the i5 dual cores, but have much better performance. Clock speed isn't everything! LOL, i don't really think so. Core i5-750 (2,66 Ghz) > Core i7-920 (2,66 Ghz) in EVERY games, because of better Turbo boost. | ||
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
On February 26 2010 19:43 flamez[666] wrote: LOL, i don't really think so. Core i5-750 (2,66 Ghz) > Core i7-920 (2,66 Ghz) in EVERY games, because of better Turbo boost. No. Just no. Take a look at GTA4, Anno etc ... | ||
|
lightrise
United States1355 Posts
| ||
|
flamez[666]
11 Posts
On February 26 2010 20:24 Boblion wrote: No. Just no. Take a look at GTA4, Anno etc ... yea. im talking about : * Assassin's Creed * BioShock * Company of Heroes * Crysis * Far Cry 2 * Lost Planet: Colonies * Race Driver Grid * Sacred 2 * World in Conflict * ... btw, the different is like 1-3% and i5-750 is 60 € cheaper than i7-920 ( + X58 mobos are more expensive) | ||
|
amorphis
Turkey26 Posts
| ||
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
Take a look at the 870. | ||
|
goszar
Belarus119 Posts
CPU: AMD Athlon X2 4200+ RAM: 4 GB DDR2 OS: Win7 64 bit Resolution: 1680*1050 8600GTS runs it on medium at about 30-40 FPS, but drops lower than 20 if smoke, Zerg creep or big armies are involved. That's unplayable by my standards. GTS 250 squeezes 40 FPS on Ultra, 50-80 on High with some drops at times. I wounder how could these guys at LegionHardware get 61 FPS minimum and 70+ average with the same card on Ultra. My CPU is old, but the setting that are labeled "Depends on CPU" seem to have no effect on the FPS at all. Will it be a good idea to buy Athlon X2 6000+? (they are cheap and my motherboard cannot handle better processors). P.S. To the computer newbs - make sure that you check actual FPS by pressing Ctrl-Alt-F or using Fraps, don't rely on the "feel" only. Currently Starcraft 2 cannot handle packet loss in your Internet connection. If you have more than 5%, it will lag no matter what. To check, press Win-R, then type "ping us.battle.net -t", wait for a few minutes and press Ctrl-Break. Also I have noticed that replays run smoother than actual game, I was able to watch them just fine with 8600GTS. | ||
|
Biochemist
United States1008 Posts
On February 24 2010 10:57 Biochemist wrote: I can't play because I'm not in the beta, but I did watch a few replays. Core2 Duo 1.86 GHz 2 Gb DDR2 Radeon HD4670 1Gb DDR3 Resolution: 1440x900 I haven't downloaded fraps and don't know what FPS, but even at x3 it's hardly choppy at all with all settings on high. Runs perfectly smoothly at normal game speed, even during battle over creep! I just watched a new one after hearing about the ctrl+alt+F function. Settings on Ultra: Normal FPS: ~25 Battle over creep: ~15-20 Settings on High Normal FPS: ~35 Battle over creep: ~25 Maintains FPS at high fast-forward values, although no CPU AI is running. | ||
|
flamez[666]
11 Posts
On February 26 2010 21:03 Boblion wrote: So it isn't better in Every game. Also i wanted to point out that the 920 isn't the only version of the i7 and it is definitly not the best ( sup LGA-1156 ). Take a look at the 870. You're right, with EVERY i meant most of games  . Just wanted to prove that not every i7 are better than i5. The 920 ist also one of the worst choice nowadays. Btw, those i7 860 and 870 were supposed to be i5 (dual channel RAM and LGA-1156), but Intel named them i7 because of the performance. That's why 8xx and not 9xx.I would not build a PC now, just wait for the new Nvidia's card to come out (April maybe). We'll have more choices and cheaper price then. | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11565 Posts
On February 26 2010 19:43 flamez[666] wrote: LOL, i don't really think so. Core i5-750 (2,66 Ghz) > Core i7-920 (2,66 Ghz) in EVERY games, because of better Turbo boost. performance isn't limited to games, and the i7 920 with its x58 base supports more extra features than the i5 with its p55/h55 base. The i7 920 also overclocks better on stock volts. In the end, the i7 920 will perform better in every multithreaded application lightrise: I would wait for the real specs to come out to be honest. goszar: Think about upgrading to an AM2+ slot and getting a Phenom II! Nothing will have to change except your motherboard and processor. | ||
|
Triggerdog
United States4 Posts
On February 26 2010 15:33 FragKrag wrote: Sounds like you have a laptop. 1st, are your drivers up to date and are you running Windows Vista? What resolution are you running the game at? It seems like your graphics card is the only component capable of holding you back. A weaker machine is running SC2 at ultra (I actually doubt it, but whatever) with weaker specs at 1366x768 + Show Spoiler [specs] + PC Laptop CPU: Intel Mobile Core2Duo P7350 @ 2.1ghz (2 core) GPU: 9600MGT 512MB DDR3 RAM: 4GB DDR3 Setting: Ultra Your computer should definitely be able to run the game solidly, but I'm not sure why it isn't working. There should be people out there with the same GPU though. I recommend posting your problem here as well: http://forums.battle.net/board.html?forumId=25352527&sid=5000 I am running vista, but my resolution is like 1280-800, so that should be plenty low enough. I'll check my driver updates, but i doubt they are out of date. This computer is still pretty new and i've had no trouble at all with any other game to this point. EDIT: Sadly im also not allowed to post on Bnets SC boards because i have no key. Well hopefully someone here can help me because the other boards i've posted it on dont know, maybe it'll get better as time goes on and the game advances or something... | ||
|
Boblion
France8043 Posts
Could have been a great card for Sc2 but 5770 / 5850 / 4890 will be more competitive for at least two months after its release.  It isn't even better than the 4890 performance wise but way more expensive... | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11565 Posts
Just gonna have to wait it for the deflate a bit!! | ||
|
KOFgokuon
United States14911 Posts
On February 26 2010 20:31 lightrise wrote: FragKing if we don't have the beta to play at the moment, should we just wait until we get a beta key or for sc2 to come out to purchase and build a new computer? Just curious as i have a laptop that can run it on the low settings, and a roomates who could run it on high while i build a computer. Just curious if i should just buy the computer now or not. why buy when you can afford wait? MB cpu prices video card prices will all go down, HD prices go down etc. just watch for good ram prices as you go along, that'd be the only thing that i'd buy early cause those prices really aren't dropping any time soon, so if you find a good deal then just buy in advance (assuming u know what kind of cpu u want to get so you can buy the right right [aka triple channel for 1366 or dual channel for 1156 intel processors) | ||
|
FragKrag
United States11565 Posts
RAM misconceptions are more annoying than I thought they could be | ||
|
PizzaHash
Netherlands76 Posts
| ||
|
Shauni
4077 Posts
AMD Athlon 64 3700+ 2048 MB DDR SDRAM Windows XP NVIDIA GeForce 9800GTX++ All Low settings @ 1680x1050x32: 130fps idle, 100 fps in big battles/creep All Medium settings @ 1680x1050x32: 60fps idle, 40 fps in big battles/creep All High settings @ 1680x1050x32: 60fps idle, 30 fps in big battles/creep All Ultra settings @ 1680x1050x32: 55fps idle, 20 fps in big battles/creep But I'm not sure if the recompiling shaders and stuff is skewing the test. Idle = when nothing moves Big battles/creep is when the zerg attacks with more than a few units, I haven't tested really huge battles but I guess the fps would be even lower then. I think there was one particular setting that made it jump from 60 to 130 fps on low... But now I can't find it again. | ||
|
whamm
67 Posts
CPU Type QuadCore Intel Core i7 920, 3800 MHz (21 x 181) Motherboard Name MSI X58M SLI (MS-7593) System Memory 6135 MB (DDR3-1333 DDR3 SDRAM) Video Adapter ATI Radeon HD 5700 Series (1024 MB) Video Adapter ATI Radeon HD 5700 Series (1024 MB) running crossfirex but no eyefinity yet since im waiting for my displayports to arrive | ||
| ||
