warcraft 3: cpu or gpu intensive

Shimmishim

Elite Member
Feb 19, 2001
7,504
0
76
just like the topic says...

which is it?

because if it's gpu intensive i was thinking of getting the albatron ti4200 turbo 128 megs for 185 dollars

but if its cpu intensive i was going to upgrade cpu, motherboard, and ram

i currently have a geforce2 gts 32 meg

thanks!
 

Cat

Golden Member
Oct 10, 1999
1,059
0
0
Seems to be both. CPU for the pathfinding, animation, (I think it's skeletal, not positive)
GPU on the higher quality settings.
 

kt

Diamond Member
Apr 1, 2000
6,031
1,346
136
What's CPU speed? I have an Athlon 1.2ghz @ 1.5ghz and moving from a GF2 to a GF3 helped a lot.
 

cnhoff

Senior member
Feb 6, 2001
724
0
0
Neither, there is no difference playing at 640*480 or at 1280*960 w 4*Aniso + 4*AA on my system :cool:
 

MustangSVT

Lifer
Oct 7, 2000
11,554
12
81
it should run ok on your computer.

I tried it on Celeron 950 with VooDoo3 16mb and it was choppy when there was a battle, after I upgrade it to Geforce2 MX 32mb AGP it is smooth. I belive it needs at least 32mb of video memory to run all those textures smoothly..

but your system should be able it handle it without problem.
 

ant80

Senior member
Dec 4, 2001
411
0
0
Blizzard did a lousy job of defining the minimum parameters for the game. At lower end computers, it is both cpu and gpu intensive. However, it reaches a saturation on cpu intensivity at high end apps. After that, it was pretty much only gpu intensive. I upgraded my processor from duron 700 to athlon 1200 and graphics card from gf2 gts to ti4200 at the same time. Previously, I could not run it at more than 1280. The cpu util. during the game was close to 100% with periodic jumps to 90%. Now, the cpu util is approx. 70%. So, that is what led to my conclusion. Check this thread out if you wish.
 

Maleficus

Diamond Member
May 2, 2001
7,682
0
0
both

my move from a GF2 Ultra to a GF 4 Ti4400 didnt help in big battles like i wanted it to
 

Cat

Golden Member
Oct 10, 1999
1,059
0
0
Turn off positional sounds. Went from the occasional 1 FPS in 4on4 battles, back to constant 100? (estimating) Have 1.7 P4, Audigy, GeForce4 Ti4200
 

mzewski

Junior Member
Apr 4, 2002
3
0
0
I was running it fine on a Pentium 3 950 with a GeForce 2 GTS. My friend runs it on a Pentium 3 800 using a GeForce 256. I'd say the CPU would be the priority.
 

Shimmishim

Elite Member
Feb 19, 2001
7,504
0
76
aww... thanks everyone for you help!!!

but man, i'm still tempted to buy that video card... grrr...

 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,795
84
91
tually 1.48ghz with a radeon 1 ddr:p 1024x768 32bit color all settings maxed. no slow down during online battles.

when i had an 850mhz it would severely choke.
 

LoverBoyJ

Senior member
Mar 22, 2001
992
0
0
Originally posted by: 0roo0roo
tually 1.48ghz with a radeon 1 ddr:p 1024x768 32bit color all settings maxed. no slow down during online battles.

when i had an 850mhz it would severely choke.

PC's < 800Mhz (Celeron) and 32Mb Vram will greatly be affected when a lot of items (i.e. warriors, objects...etc) are on the screen. Initial game play will be smooth but when armies collide, it be very choppy due to extensive graphics and AI.