|
On February 23 2010 12:34 dozko wrote:
People who have claimed they play the game maxed with a 9600m are simply retarded. There is no way that 32 steam processor 128bit card will run anything on more than 1024x768 medium if you dont want to watch a slideshow.
Here are my results from watching reps:
Game runs flawlessly on my laptop at all times/all bases on 1920x1200, Ultra. Might do an FPS check if I can be bothered to download fraps.
Windows 7 x64
CPU: QX9300 @ 2.93ghz
GPU: GTX280M @ 585/1500/1020
SSD: Intel x25m-G1
RAM: 4GB @ 1066, 6-6-6-16
Hopefully performance will stay that way when I get to actually play the game instead of just watching it ^^
Define slideshow.
My HD3450 (an acknowledged wimp) will run between 20 fps (low) and 30 fps (high) at 1360x800 with medium detail (and you don't need FRAPS: Use Ctrl+ Alt + F while viewing a replay in the client).
Dropping down to 1024x768 lets me push things to medium-high (and fps rates climb a little bit, with 30 fps as the floor, and 40 fps as the ceiling).
Lastly, an observation - I don't find medium detail unviewable in the least. Even at medium detail, it blows BW into the nosebleed section; in fact, it looks better at medium detail than any other RTS I have seen (or played, for that matter) at *high* detail. (While 1360x800, 1680x1050, and 1920x1080 are all available WS options, 1280x720 is conspicuously missing. when you don't have enough GPU to push 1920x1080 or 1680x1050, 1280x720 is usually quite an acceptable compromise for LCDs, even TN LCDs like mine, as opposed to the El Bastardo 1360x800.)
|
CPU: Intel(R) Pentium(R) D CPU 2.8 GHz
GPU: Intel(R) G965 Express Chipset Family (although it has GMA 3000, not GMA X3000 >.>)
Resolution: 1024 x 768 x 32 bit
RAM: 504 MB, LULZ. I'll be getting a new RAM chip (hopefully) soon.
Setting: Low, low, low. My RAM is really what's killing me; otherwise, I might be able to run it on Medium (although not competetively)
I'll check my FPS now.
|
CPU: Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4~3.00ghz
GPU: GMA 950
Resolution: 1024 x 768 x 32 bit
RAM : 1gb
OS: Windows xp
I dont hav the beta ,so i wonder if i can run SC2??
|
|
|
Judging by what others have run SC2 off of, you could be fine at low, but I would suggest a new video card before anything else.
|
CPU : AMD Athlon x2 7750 @ 2.7 Ghz
GPU: nvidia 8600 GT ddr3 version ( OC @ 550/1500 shader clock/ 1500 memory clock )
RES : 1280 x 1024 x 32 bit
RAM : 2 GB 667 mhz
OS: Win7 32 bit
Details: Everything on medium except texture,portrait on high i get arround 60+ fps early game, 40+ fps during fights and late game with OC settings. With stock i get -10 fps.
BTW: -Shaders ( with this set on high i get 45+ fps early game and 30 at fights)
-Textures ( i get +2,3 fps if i change them on medium )
|
On February 21 2010 08:16 Jerebread wrote:
Wow, thanks a lot for compiling this for us that know nothing about comps =)
You really don't need to know anything about computers to know that starcraft 2 can be run by XXXXXXX computer. If you really want to check your system specs to see how they match up to these (I'm assuming you have a windows operating system - I don't know how to do this on MACs very efficiently) right click on the "My Computer" Icon and hit properties. It gives you your computer specs right there in black and white.
Know this little tid bit of information. The processing power number (the number in GHz) changes depending on what kind of processor you have. 1.5 GB of RAM is NOTHING compared to some of the other games out there. Graphics cards are a little harder to explain, so I won't go into that because they vary depending on if you're talking laptop or desktop.
Screen resolution - yeah if you don't know what this is, you need to go and find out.
|
|
|
Do you guys think the new GMA HD in the Core i series will be able to play this?
|
Blizzard said it could. Seeing as how some of the older GMA HD adapters can even play the game, I don't see why it can't play SC2.
|
im running an hd5850 (with 4 gigs of ram, and a q9300 so i doubt its getting bottlenecked) and in big battles it really starts to chug all maxed at 1900x1200
theres one replay floating around of david kim attacking with 200/200 banelings and fps drops as low as 15-20 id guess. Obviously thats an extreme example, but even in 2v2s where theres a relatively large amount of units it gets noticably slower.
just thought id post this incase anyone expected godlike constantly 60+ fps with a setup like this
|
Hm, that is actually fairly surprising from the 5850 which has actually did fairly well in the benchmark (though of course I could not actually say for sure how well those benchmarks are done). Is your power supply possibly bottlenecking your performance?
|
On February 24 2010 09:15 Tropics wrote:
im running an hd5850 (with 4 gigs of ram, and a q9300 so i doubt its getting bottlenecked) and in big battles it really starts to chug all maxed at 1900x1200
theres one replay floating around of david kim attacking with 200/200 banelings and fps drops as low as 15-20 id guess. Obviously thats an extreme example, but even in 2v2s where theres a relatively large amount of units it gets noticably slower.
just thought id post this incase anyone expected godlike constantly 60+ fps with a setup like this
Hmm maybe there's a problem with drivers?
|
FragKrag do you have a source for the GMA HD being able to play? Trying to decide between getting an AMD IGP or Intel one.
|
|
|
Operating system:WINDOWS 2.6.0.6002 (SP 2)
Cpu Type:Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo Cpu T6400 @ 2.00GHZ
Cpu Speed (GHZ):2.02
System memory (GB):2.99
Graphics card model:Mobile Intel(R) 965 Express Chipset Family
Desktop Resolution:1280X800
System Type: 32-bit
Hehe... think I could run SC2?  I doubt it just looking at CPU speed alone... then the graphics card seems really cheap too, lol...
|
1 PC Laptop
CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo T5250 @ 1.50 GHz (2 core)
GPU: Mobile Intel 965 Express Chipset
RAM: 3GB DDR2
Setting: Low/Medium (some mouse lag)
is able to run it at low/medium at 1280x800.
You can try it I guess. Setting it down to 1024x768 would provide better performance imo.
|
On February 24 2010 09:21 FragKrag wrote:
Hm, that is actually fairly surprising from the 5850 which has actually did fairly well in the benchmark (though of course I could not actually say for sure how well those benchmarks are done). Is your power supply possibly bottlenecking your performance?
Definitely not my power supply, its 750w. It runs fantastically for the majority of 1v1s, its only the larger 2v2s and stuff like 200 banelings exploding in unison that really make it slowdown. I haven't actually used any programs to measure framerates but I'd probably turn down settings if I was actually playing the game and not just watching reps.
I guess it COULD be a driver issue, I only got the card at the start of this month and I've only tried it with 10.1 cat and the leak of 10.3 catalyst drivers. I might try rolling them back but right now its only in really isolated situations it approaches unplayable. L4D2 and MW2 are the only real stressful games I've run on it apart from this but they've both stayed constant 60+ apart from in a few situations where it might dip a little to low 50s/high 40s.
Also, I feel the need to point out that I have ridiculously high standards when it comes to framerates for most games so 40-50 fps some people might find completely fine I always get a nagging feeling and want to turn settings down.
edit: something else which I highly, highly doubt is relevant but the game doesnt recognize my card and recommends I set everything to medium. I thought it was a tad strange but not exactly unusual, the 5000 series is pretty new and people are reporting some bugs with them so I guess they're not quite assimilated into the current build. You guys seem to think I have a problem though and if there's anything I can do to get more FPS I'm going to give you all the information available haha
|
Eh? L4D2 and MW2 are notorious for NOT being GPU intensive.
Nevermind dropping below 60FPS in L4D2, the 5850 should never drop below 70-80 at 1900x1200...
Download new drivers imo, that is probably what is really hurting your performance.
|
yeah if you're getting only 60fps in l4d2 it's definitely your cpu and not your 5850 unless you're playing at 2560x or something.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
