i want to buy a rig but i have not much money, do i need to buy a quad core or a core2duo+4gb ram+nice gc is sufficient to play at max setting?

At the moment, Starcraft 2 only supports 2 cores, means a 3ghz dual core actually performs better than a 2.5ghz quad. There's no mention whether a future patch will increase the core count or not.

however due to high processor ultilization, quad core would benefit as the core load would be distributed throughout the 4 cores resulting in overall performance increase in the event that sc2 ultilizes more load. i am running on quad core now and its on constant 50-60+% load, which spikes to 70-80% time to time

me too, i'm using quad processor that bought in 3 years ago, running SC2 in ultra and CPU utilization seems to be below 50%

core2duo would be enuff..
U can overclock the cpu if u want..
value for money!
And for graphics, just get a GTS250.

http://www.techspot.com/review/305-starcra...nce/page13.html

Lazy Blizzard!

gee.. thanks for the info!

Let me suggest to you something. Go and ask someone to build a custom desktop for you.

You only need RM1500 for a desktop with these specs. Exclude LCD monitor, keyboard, mouse, speaker la..

Core i3-540, Corsair 2GB DDR3-1333MHz, Samsung F3 500GB HArd Disk, Nvidia Geforce GT240 1GB GDDR5

From the review, looks like more on chip cache seems to outperform the other chips.

this spec really can play ultra?

dude.. what mobo?

My friend's Nvidia 8600 GT can play SC2 with all settings on Ultra at 1024x768 resolution with at least 40-60 fps. So, this is much better. I THINK.

what mobo? what you mean?

You sure this spec can play without lag even when there are mass of units around?
What mobo = what type of motherboard is using for the spec you have mentioned.

You mean this spec --->>>Core i3-540, Corsair 2GB DDR3-1333MHz, Samsung F3 500GB HArd Disk, Nvidia Geforce GT240 1GB GDDR5

motherboard could be ASRock H55 MLE ATX


Btw, im currently using core2duo 2.1GHz and nvidia g105m laptop (which isnt for gaming), and I get 42fps during the last mission. The mission with lots of zergs and terrans. So, im guessing GT240 or higher or even 8600GT could manage it.

I would prefer the AMD X2 555 over Core i3-540, better value for money Around RM50 cheaper, cheaper motherboard, roughly same performance in SC2, and better overclocking potential. The money saved adds up to a higher bump in GFX card model number.

Just my humble view

i dont knw why but people keep telling me AMD processor and ATI card are cheaper compared to intel and nvidia....why ah???


and which one actually perform better?

lurk more kid.

Yes, that is the spec i was asking.
Hmm.....ultra setting and still can get 42fps, that is consider good.
Mind to tell which software u use to measure the fps in game?

The zerg rush is really nothing to test out this game. I was playing the mission where i was constantly ambush by zerg to defence the relic last night and was all good, no lag at all on my dual core.

But when i play a 4 vs 4 match midgame when rushing with teammate the slug was so terrible i spend the whole morning today checking preocessor upgrade.

me thinks X3 / X4 models are better. I'm using X3 425 and it works great.

because it is the truth.

amd and ati is more cheaper than intel and nvidia



processors:
intel = expensive, over priced, faster than amd
amd = reasonably priced, value for money, fast enough for gaming


graphic card:
nvidia = expensive, over priced
ati = reasonably priced, value for money

---

Added on August 18, 2010, 1:14 pmi am using


amd phenom ii x4 945 3.0ghz
sapphire ati hd5830 1gb ddr5

This post has been edited by Deimos Tel`Arin: Aug 18 2010, 01:14 PM

yup. get a cheap cheap AMD board + X3 processor + 4GB RAM + HD5750 and you see what it can do.

based on kentang emas's recommendation, here i choose these specs for those who need a new rig to play starcraft 2.

prices from jayacom (go buy from their imbi branch, much less people, much faster access. lowyat plaza too crowded)
http://images.lowyat.net/pricelist/jayacom.pdf

RM275 - MSI 770-G45 - mother board
RM138 - 2GB Kingston DDR1333 (CL9.0) - ram
RM138 - 2GB Kingston DDR1333 (CL9.0) - ram
RM305 - Phenom II x3 710 2.60Ghz 1.5MB L2 / 6MB L3 - processor
RM435 - Sapphire ATI HD5750 1GB DDR5 128 Bit

total almost 1.3k but can play starcraft 2 nicely

Anyone tried 4 vs 4 full game with a Core i3-540 before? i want to upgrade this processor as my current one is cannot handle 4 vs 4

No, I'm not using ultra for all my settings. But my friend who uses 8600 GT does. I use G105M (laptop dedicated card) and I only put Terrain and Texture Quality to Ultra, others I put low and medium. And I get 42 fps during the last mission. Quite constant.


I use Fraps to see the fps in game. Most of the time, I feel lazy so I just use ctrl+alt+F in game and it will show the fps.


I'm getting new desktop next year. so lonngggggggggggggggggggg

Processors (these are more of generalizations)



* Athlon processors do not meet the system requirements. They're the old Thunderbird models and go up to 1.2 GHz.


* Athlon XP processors with a rating of 2200+ and above will meet the system requirements.


* Athlon 64 processors tend to meet the system requirements. The very low-end Athlon 64 may not. Check your clock speeds. Anything at or higher than 2.0GHz is a safe bet.


* For Sempron types, you'll want a higher clock speed to make up for it lacking in other areas. Sempron processors fall across their Socket 478-more current types so you may want to see what type you have using CPU-Z (http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php).


* First generation AMD Phenom processors (ending in 00) will work, but you need to be aware of the TLB fix. It has a pretty substantial performance drop, so you might see choppiness.


* Phenom processors ending in 50 do not have this problem. All but the slowest models will meet the system requirements.


* Athlon II and Phenom II should all be faster than the minimum requirements.


* Pentium III processors do not meet the requirements.


* Pentium IV/D processors at 2.2GHz and above meet the requirements.


* Intel Core 2 around 1.8GHz is a rough area, but should be able to play it. 2.0GHz is probably closer to what the system requirements demand.


* Intel Celeron processors fall under a lot of different families of chips. There are those based off of the Pentium 4 of different types and those based off of Core 2. You may want to check what type you have using CPU-Z (http://www.cpuid.com/cpuz.php).


* Intel i3/i5/i7 exceed the minimum requirements.


source : http://sea.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/13611370

Why i3 540 cannot handle 4v4? what gfx and setting u using?

no la, maybe my grammar made my sentence confusing. I mean i want to upgrade my dual core to i3 540 cause my dual core dont have the brain power to process 4 vs 4 end game scene which i experienced last night.

So i just wonder if there is anyone who currently using i3 and have already experience 4 vs 4. would love to hear the performance on this.
If i3 still slow then i need to find better solution else i rather save the money for a bigger monitor

what almost? use X3 425 + GT220 only still can play nicely leh.

i cant ultra all with my rig as stated in my signature.. Have to set texture to high.. and my loading is always the slowest.. I thought raiding HDD helps in ur loading.. My OS is newly installed too

i can ultra with my rig (X3 425 3.5ghz + GTX470 + 4GB) but i find that it's laggy. so end up i reduce details to HIGH and it's ok already.

How about slow loading? it's getting annoying.. change to a better harddisk?