don't saw the DVDs yet, maybe tomorrow i help to ask TBUN staff.

Come join us. Free play at tbun

We stop when the sun rises so as long as the sun has not rinses you can still see us there.   

what resolution and fps? fully 100% everything ultra?

fps?

also. graphic card ram only affects texture qualities. and gddr 5/6 are graphic card ram specifications, highlighting it doesnt make it any more faster than what it is. i suggest you look up what are the function of graphic card memory, 3D graphics texture, and GDDR specifications. wikipedia is a good start.

TLDR: no, giving tbun's GT240 additional 512MB GDDR5 RAMS wouldnt change anything aside from going ultra from high on their texture quality setting

---

Added on November 23, 2010, 12:36 am

he refers to gddr rams, 1mb is, a disaster in today's 3d gaming world

and yes, it should be 512 since sc2 suggests high, which is sub 1gb graphic card ram cards

Don't mean to offend anyone but just thought I'd share something, the higher quality you play on, the harder it is to see things.

http://www.legionhardware.com/articles_pag...formance,4.html

while its:
1) beta
2) 1920x1200 instead of 1920 x1080
3) 512MB ram over 1gb (see this though if it doesnt convince: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforc...0,2475-17.html)
i doubt the difference would be that huge (20+ fps is fairly marginal imo)

also, you are comparing 2 generations gap of GDDR, where by there will be significance in texture rending/retrieval/allocation etc. had you compare with GDDR4, i doubt you would be saying what you are saying now. that, and the memory architecture, and/or interface aside from the gddr spec/512vs1gb size would be the one providing the performance upgrade instead.

tldr: if you ask anyone thats versed in hardware, they will tell you what im telling you now: giving tbun 1gb GDDR5 GT240 over their 512MB GT240 would NOT provide the siginificant 60fps full ultra settings that you're claiming now.