Stop buying expensive PCs to play SC2

Off Topic Dicussion
Too many posts in this forum can be summarized by the following:

"Hey guys, I have x budget, and I want to build a PC that can play SC2 at max settings."

Well, here's your answer: SC2 was RELEASED on July 27, 2-0-1-0. Decipher the meaning of what I'm trying to say to you.

...

I'm saying you could buy just about anything on the market today and play SC2 at max settings. Now the problem is are YOU asking the RIGHT question? Did you want to play SC2 at max settings AND that new game that's coming out this spring?

Well that's a whole different story. Yeah, that $200 video card might make a difference. The video card I have now (and truth be told, the ONLY thing that's gonna bottleneck SC2 is the video card) isn't even manufactured anymore and I can run SC2 at max settings doing a comp stomp FFA.

Anything you buy or build today that includes a standalone video card, will run SC2 at max settings. I'll bet that even most onboard video chips will SC2 with little to no issues.

So go ahead and buy that $1200 gaming rig, but don't do it SOLELY to play SC2, because if you are, you're wasting a ton of money.
Too many posts in this forum can be summarized by the following:

"Hey guys, I have x budget, and I want to build a PC that can play SC2 at max settings."

Well, here's your answer: SC2 was RELEASED on July 27, 2-0-1-0. Decipher the meaning of what I'm trying to say to you.

...

I'm saying you could buy just about anything on the market today and play SC2 at max settings. Now the problem is are YOU asking the RIGHT question? Did you want to play SC2 at max settings AND that new game that's coming out this spring?

Well that's a whole different story. Yeah, that $200 video card might make a difference. The video card I have now (and truth be told, the ONLY thing that's gonna bottleneck SC2 is the video card) isn't even manufactured anymore and I can run SC2 at max settings doing a comp stomp FFA.

Anything you buy or build today that includes a standalone video card, will run SC2 at max settings. I'll bet that even most onboard video chips will SC2 with little to no issues.

So go ahead and buy that $1200 gaming rig, but don't do it SOLELY to play SC2, because if you are, you're wasting a ton of money.


Just because you have to ask for your computer for x-mas or are a broke !@*@***@ and on an extremely tight budget does not mean everyone else is.

Next time you want to pass the poor buck onto everyone else make sure your not a tool of the poor mans perception.

P.S. Gets your facts straight before you spew nonsense on this forum. Resolution has more to with it than anything Playing @ 1680x1050 is not the same as playing at 2560x1600. the latter will require much much more horsepower.
Too many posts in this forum can be summarized by the following:

"Hey guys, I have x budget, and I want to build a PC that can play SC2 at max settings."

Well, here's your answer: SC2 was RELEASED on July 27, 2-0-1-0. Decipher the meaning of what I'm trying to say to you.

...

I'm saying you could buy just about anything on the market today and play SC2 at max settings. Now the problem is are YOU asking the RIGHT question? Did you want to play SC2 at max settings AND that new game that's coming out this spring?

Well that's a whole different story. Yeah, that $200 video card might make a difference. The video card I have now (and truth be told, the ONLY thing that's gonna bottleneck SC2 is the video card) isn't even manufactured anymore and I can run SC2 at max settings doing a comp stomp FFA.

Anything you buy or build today that includes a standalone video card, will run SC2 at max settings. I'll bet that even most onboard video chips will SC2 with little to no issues.

So go ahead and buy that $1200 gaming rig, but don't do it SOLELY to play SC2, because if you are, you're wasting a ton of money.

If what you said is true, than I must have the worst PC ever created.

How can you run SC2 at max settings with such a card? The PC I have was about 800 - 1000 dollars with a 1920 x 1080 screen and an ATI Radeon HD 4200 graphics card and 6 RAM.

...And I can hardly run SC2 on medium settings.

Bah... Where do you people get cheaper PC's with worse video cards that can run SC2 on max settings with no lag!?

P.S My PC is a Dell and was bought at the offical Dell website. I listed what I knew about the PC using information from the website, but the PC was given to me last Christmas.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that my PC also has 2GB Ram (out of the 6GB Ram) that is dedicated only to my video card.
You must be new...

Unlike other games, cpu is actually the bigger bottleneck. Graphics help only to a point. Most people here(contrary to what you believe) play other games also. Many people ask about starcraft on the starcraft forum cause they believe(and are right to believe) that people on this forum may have more experience about config and performance for sc2. Although they may not mention another game, it does not mean they will not play another.

11/27/2012 09:08 PMPosted by xsv
Anything you buy or build today that includes a standalone video card, will run SC2 at max settings. I'll bet that even most onboard video chips will SC2 with little to no issues.

On a 800x600 monitor? Sure.

EDIT: Fixed quotation.
If we're just going by release date...

Crysis was released in 2007.

Clearly, a $300 PC should own it since it's such an old game!
^Lol +1
obvious nub is obvious.

Look, SC2 is not a graphic-intensive game. SC2 is nowhere close, and quite the opposite of Crysis, which was a horrible comparison.

And yes, if you're computer can't play SC2 at max settings at 1920x1080, then yeah, it's pretty old or sub-par, depending on how you look at it.

And then to the nub who tried calling me out about my own computer, with absolutely nothing to go on, no internet points for you. From my unedited post, I clearly stated I can run max settings beautifully, and my resolution is 1920x1080, which I didn't mention.

At the end of the day, my whole argument was and still is this: If you're building/buying a computer TODAY or IN THE NEAR FUTURE, then rest assured that you'll be able to play SC2 at max settings or damn near close.

This isn't even debatable. My whole argument with the graphics card is that MY graphics isn't even for sale anymore (because it's obsolete) and it handles SC2 (and most other games) flawlessly.

So stop flooding forums with "Can this play SC2 at max settings".
You realize these people want proper guidance so they don't end up buying a junker with total POS graphics card?

One thing you do not seem to comprehend at all is that graphics cards have firm performance hierarchy that holds true no matter what generation you are on.

Here is an obvious example for you:

GeForce GTX 280 is a really old graphics card. Not made anymore.

vs.

GeForce GTX 610. New, being sold, and made.

Obviously, GTX 280 will obliterate the GTX 610 in gaming, and GTX 610 won't provide playable FPS in most games short of running things in all low settings + low monitor resolution.

Therefore, people want to know if what they are getting is a good deal - because if you don't know what you are buying, you can end up with a PC today that can barely game at all.
You must be new...

Unlike other games, cpu is actually the bigger bottleneck. Graphics help only to a point. Most people here(contrary to what you believe) play other games also. Many people ask about starcraft on the starcraft forum cause they believe(and are right to believe) that people on this forum may have more experience about config and performance for sc2. Although they may not mention another game, it does not mean they will not play another.

Anything you buy or build today that includes a standalone video card, will run SC2 at max settings. I'll bet that even most onboard video chips will SC2 with little to no issues.

On a 800x600 monitor? Sure.

I didn't write that quote....

Either way though, my monitor is 1920 x 1080 and I'm still having lag issues... I listed my other specs above...

While I'm at it, might as well ask: anyone got any tips to make my sc2 look better and run better? And no, don't just go and say to buy a new PC. I'll pay for PC upgrades not not a brand new PC when I just got this one a year ago.
You have Radeon HD 4200 series?

Your only option is to get a new graphics card.
11/29/2012 08:22 AMPosted by EvilCreature
I didn't write that quote....

Uh oh... xsv wrote that quote. I must've copied the quote in your post.

I don't know what you're playing xsv but on my overclocked 2500k, 560ti, and 1680x1050 monitor I still reach 0fps sometimes on 3v3 or 4v4 games in the final battle.
I also reach low 10s on my 1024*768 touch monitor
11/29/2012 08:22 AMPosted by EvilCreature
While I'm at it, might as well ask: anyone got any tips to make my sc2 look better and run better? And no, don't just go and say to buy a new PC. I'll pay for PC upgrades not not a brand new PC when I just got this one a year ago.


For looking better- There are mods for starcraft but I don't think they're allowed but I believe no one has been banned for using them. The mod highlights team colors of units so you can distinguish them better especially for banelings. Some people like the glowiness of the mod. Here's the link.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=216725

For running better-Don't think there is anything real other than manually changing settings(like turning done stuff in the txtedit) which is better done in-game but I think its ineffective.
obvious nub is obvious.

Look, SC2 is not a graphic-intensive game. SC2 is nowhere close, and quite the opposite of Crysis, which was a horrible comparison.

And yes, if you're computer can't play SC2 at max settings at 1920x1080, then yeah, it's pretty old or sub-par, depending on how you look at it.

And then to the nub who tried calling me out about my own computer, with absolutely nothing to go on, no internet points for you. From my unedited post, I clearly stated I can run max settings beautifully, and my resolution is 1920x1080, which I didn't mention.

At the end of the day, my whole argument was and still is this: If you're building/buying a computer TODAY or IN THE NEAR FUTURE, then rest assured that you'll be able to play SC2 at max settings or damn near close.

This isn't even debatable. My whole argument with the graphics card is that MY graphics isn't even for sale anymore (because it's obsolete) and it handles SC2 (and most other games) flawlessly.

So stop flooding forums with "Can this play SC2 at max settings".


Your ignorance is undeniable and baffling.
xsv. I kind of understand what you're trying to get at but you're coming out as arrogant with your little experience but big confidence. Its fine to criticize but you could have been more passive.
I do understand what he is saying.What many people probably don't know is this games works just fine with a dual core processors. I have been trying to figure which setting will work for my computer. I have been reading articles and they will tell you having a quad core won't make a huge difference. Having a newer dual core processor will actually perform better than an old quad core computer. This game is suppose to rely more on having a good CPU and I think having a good video card is also important.

I got a new computer with an I5-3300 Processor and I don't have a video card yet. I'm suppose to be getting a HD 7750 which should be able to play this game turned up to at least High Settings. Without the video card I'm currently averaging around 20 fps which isn't very good. I can play the game but things are a little choppy.

I used to have a E7300 dual core computer with a GT240 ddr3 video card. I could play this game just fine except I couldn't play the game on High or Ultra. I had to set things to medium and set the resolution to 1680x1050. The good thing was I didn't have to play the game at low settings. I could easily average 70-80 FPS but sometimes I would have games where I went down to 10 FPS. If I wanted to play a game like Metro 2033 then I wouldn't even be able to play it. There are some games like Metro 2033 that force you into having a real good computer. If you have a midrange PC with that game you still could have problems.
Good post. Although the release date doesn't mean all that much, since SC2 had outdated graphics for the time it launched. Blizzard's never really made games with cutting edge graphics, the required specs are supposed to be low so as many people as possible can play. Despite this, for some reason, people still treat SC2 or WoW as some kind of benchmark. It makes me angry when I'm online looking at expensive gaming rigs and parts that I can't afford, and there's always some guy who posts in the review section "this is a great PC, it runs WoW at 60 fps." :/
Hi :D
What are you guys talking about!? I'm running 2 old rigs. The gateway FX series laptops. dual-core processors 4 gigs of ram 1 gig on video card. Starcraft 2 still to this day is the only thing that bogs down my machines. FF14 and D3 don't phase them at all.
I haven't yet seen a PC capable of running sc2 on ultra settings in a 4v4 with 8 200/200 armies clashing in the middle of the map on HD or bigger resolution.

Yes, pretty much any hardware can run the campaign or 1v1 on low settings. Anything bigger than that is going to start taxing your video card. A LOT.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum