• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Real world requirements for Starcraft2?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Bateluer said:
Will it run on Atom with Ion?
Click to expand...

Considering people have Fallout 3 and GTA 4 running smooth on a dual core Atom (overclocked of course) with Ion, then I would suggest SC2 could run on one too.

Far from being a gaming CPU, Atoms can surprise us with what they can do when pushed.
 
LOL, first off, this is an RTS. Any FPS at or above 24 FPS is acceptable. You do NOT need 60 FPS to play this game at all. This is not a first person shooter where the higher frame rates make the game smooth enough that you don't have problems lining up shots in fast combat.

This game does not require much to play.

C2D
2GB of ram
4650 video card (or equivalent) is all you really need


Now, if you want to max out a few things you need to upgrade. The game is more CPU intensive than GPU right now since it lacks AA/AF. If you want better graphics and smoother game play then up the CPU to a quad and overclocking will do wonders. If you want to do AA/AF when (and if) it is introduced then you will need a better GPU.
 
Elcs said:
Considering people have Fallout 3 and GTA 4 running smooth on a dual core Atom (overclocked of course) with Ion, then I would suggest SC2 could run on one too.

Far from being a gaming CPU, Atoms can surprise us with what they can do when pushed.
Click to expand...

Really? Where? Link? I was under the impression GTA IV was a massive system hog and needed quad core.
 
Anubis said:
ObviousTroll.jpg
Click to expand...

Look up the f-in benchmarks, i7 at 3ghz often dips below 60.. you f-in tard.
 
tp4tissue said:
Look up the f-in benchmarks, i7 at 3ghz often dips below 60.. you f-in tard.
Click to expand...


oh noes less then 60 FPS, its an RTS it does not need to be run at +60 FPS hell most FPS games don't either. your post was nothing but a troll post. it was worse then mine in that crysis thread. 1) getting an I7 to 4.5 is a pretty impressive feat 2) the game is 100% playable in old/shitty hardware

my 1.8 GHz DC opteron with a 8800GT runs the game just fine at 1600*1200. I also play it on a I7 @ 4ghz running an GTX 285 OC and other then playing it at 1920x1200 there is no difference in the game
 
Anubis said:
oh noes less then 60 FPS, its an RTS it does not need to be run at +60 FPS hell most FPS games don't either. your post was nothing but a troll post. it was worse then mine in that crysis thread. 1) getting an I7 to 4.5 is a pretty impressive feat 2) the game is 100% playable in old/shitty hardware

my 1.8 GHz DC opteron with a 8800GT runs the game just fine at 1600*1200. I also play it on a I7 @ 4ghz running an GTX 285 OC and other then playing it at 1920x1200 there is no difference in the game
Click to expand...


I run opty 165 2.7ghz, 4870, IT IS not playable when shit happens. yea you can GET through it.. that isn't what playable is.
 
tp4tissue said:
I run opty 165 2.7ghz, 4870, IT IS not playable when shit happens. yea you can GET through it.. that isn't what playable is.
Click to expand...
Sounds like your processor isn't beefy enough or you've got your graphics settings too high. As I said above, I run at 30-35fps consistently with a Radeon 4550 and I've never had a slowdown in a big battle but I only play the game on medium quality at 1680x1050.
 
BornStar said:
Sounds like your processor isn't beefy enough or you've got your graphics settings too high. As I said above, I run at 30-35fps consistently with a Radeon 4550 and I've never had a slowdown in a big battle but I only play the game on medium quality at 1680x1050.
Click to expand...

try building more than 10 units next time.
😉
 
HumblePie said:
LOL, first off, this is an RTS. Any FPS at or above 24 FPS is acceptable. You do NOT need 60 FPS to play this game at all. This is not a first person shooter where the higher frame rates make the game smooth enough that you don't have problems lining up shots in fast combat.

This game does not require much to play.

C2D
2GB of ram
4650 video card (or equivalent) is all you really need


Now, if you want to max out a few things you need to upgrade. The game is more CPU intensive than GPU right now since it lacks AA/AF. If you want better graphics and smoother game play then up the CPU to a quad and overclocking will do wonders. If you want to do AA/AF when (and if) it is introduced then you will need a better GPU.
Click to expand...

You also do not need any settings above the minimum to play the game. All settings at minimum are acceptable. Anything above 640x480 is unnecessary, it plays fine at that resolution.

24 FPS may be enough to play the game but it looks terrible. 60 FPS looks much nicer and smoother than 30 FPS. 60 FPS is what I would expect for a game as graphically unimpressive as SC2, and solid 60 FPS is what I would define as "perfectly smooth," so that is why the goal is 60 FPS.
 
Maximilian said:
Wow, GTA IV looks like GTA III and crysis looks like farcry but that aint half bad for a netbook :thumbsup: good stuff.
Click to expand...

Fallout 3, Crysis and AC2 are all on a miniITX form factor board (1.6 Ghz Dual Core Atom with HT overclocked to 2.0ghz, ION, up to 4 Gb DDR2 think he used 3 Gb)

GTA IV was on a netbook (don't know the specs of that one)

They may not have all been perfectly smooth but they looked and played acceptably in my opinion. Not bad for a near silent mini system.

I have the board shown in the FO3/Crysis/AC2 videos but use my system at stock speeds and for internet/office/email work (most of the time) and have my more powerful system for games 🙂

The Atom with ION is more powerful than most people think here. Mainly because it's completely pants compared to what we all game on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top