Full Build advice for sc2 gaming rig AMD or INTEL

gr3e3n · Aug 28, 2013

Budget is 700 and I have a PSU and RAM already

The primary game is sc2 so its a cpu intensive game which i stream. we all play on low settings (most ppl play on low)

- FX6350
or
- I5

preciate it

blackaddy56 · Aug 28, 2013

My i5 romps up the games easily, and they use much less power. + mine is the i3570k..so the newer haswell processors are faster and more efficient. win win win

cmi86 · Aug 28, 2013

The i5 will be faster for that game. Don't get me wrong the 6350 will play it just fine, I have to turn on v-sync to limit my fps to 60 if that tells you anything. In the end the choice is yours as they will both perform fine.

gr3e3n · Aug 28, 2013

what i dont understand is that if they both run 60+ FPS then whats the dif?

cmi86 · Aug 28, 2013

gr3e3n :

Intel guys will give you all kinds of "reasons" like lower minimum FPS and less voltage but as far as I can tell it basically boils down to bragging rights. Id rather spend half as much on my CPU that will basically do the same job and invest the saved money into an SSD or better GPU that actually provide a noticeable difference.

cmi86 · Aug 28, 2013

hafijur :

Do I really need to make a video and send it to you ? I dont spout BS like some people on this forum and I'd be happy to prove it to you if you like.

"Starcraft 2
1024 x 768 - Medium Graphics, Ultra CPU Settings"

Are you serious ?

gr3e3n · Aug 28, 2013

sc2 uses 1 core im fairly sure

also it claims i have 250 fps with my current computer (i5 2500k) im making this computer for my brother

i dont think u get that FPS but is that on ultra settings? most good sc2 players use low

cmi86 · Aug 28, 2013

gr3e3n :

Idk I'm a graphics junkie so I crank everything. Im honestly not that great at starcraft but at least it looks good lol.

gr3e3n · Aug 28, 2013

cmi86 :

it wasnt a dig at you just pointing out a hardcore sc2 fan doesnt care about high level settings

jaguarskx · Aug 28, 2013

Since StarCraft 2 came out prior to the release of Bulldozer and Sandy Bridge those CPUs (and more recent generations as well) are not in the benchmarks. SC2 is very CPU dependent so the more powerful the CPU, the better the gaming performance. The game can use up to two cores, but according to the 2nd picture it does not fully use the 2nd core. Lastly, based on the comparison between the i5-750 and i7-920, it seems that Hyper Thread may give a little better performance.

http://www.techspot.com/review/305-starcraft2-performance/page13.html

jaguarskx · Aug 28, 2013

Here's something a little more recent... Generally speaking, the lower the resolution, the more appropriate the benchmark becomes when benchmarking the CPU. When the resolution is set too high like 1920x1200 the graphics card becomes the driving force behind the performance, thus negating the purpose of a CPU benchmark comparison.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/amd-fx-8350_6.html#sect0

cmi86 · Aug 28, 2013

jaguarskx :

Isn't the graphics card supposed to be the driving force behind a game ? Why would someone deliberately dock the settings of the game just to show that one cpu is better than the other at ugly low resolutions no one plays at anyhow ?? Seems kind of silly to me to do such a thing just to prove a moot point. Fact of the matter is most folks game at 720/1080 and higher now a days and at that point it is more about having a good GPU. This is why I said both are just fine, i5 is a proven winner and the 63XX pack a punch they often don't get enough credit for.

gr3e3n · Aug 28, 2013

hmm interesting but is that at a higher quality (again most of us play on low)

cmi86 · Aug 28, 2013

gr3e3n :

I don't understand why do you guys intentionally want your game to look bad, is it like a nostalgia thing ?

jaguarskx · Aug 28, 2013

cmi86 :

As stated, it is a CPU benchmark. The focus is on how the CPU itself can affects the games engine's performance. If the focus was on the GPU, then it would not be a CPU benchmark at all.

gr3e3n · Aug 28, 2013

cmi86 :

because high settings are distracting lol. if you are a hardcore sc2 player, you dont care about such things. most pros and high level players use low settings A, so they have better fps and B, the stuff is very very distracting like creep and what not being shiny and things looking wet

cmi86 · Aug 28, 2013

jaguarskx :

I guess, it's still kind of a moot point. It's like saying let's see how fast our race cars can go if we disable half of the cylinders.. I understand it's a performance measurement, it's just unpractical to link the results of a docked cpu bench to actual gameplay performance as the case will likely be different due to higher resolutions offloading work to the GPU. Just Sayin.

gr3e3n · Aug 28, 2013

cmi86 :

jaguarskx :

I guess, it's still kind of a moot point. It's like saying let's see how fast our race cars can go if we disable half of the cylinders.. I understand it's a performance measurement, it's just unpractical to link the results of a docked cpu bench to actual gameplay performance as the case will likely be different due to higher resolutions offloading work to the GPU. Just Sayin.

its also unfair to expect everyone to have the same GPU

the most honest review/bench has the least outside bias

cmi86 · Aug 28, 2013

gr3e3n :

If you can afford a $220 3570K I would expect you to have at least a semi respectable GPU. Attempting to bench a game while remove the GPU's effect as much as possible is just unrealistic as it goes to show the gameplay capability of the CPU alone. Nobody deliberately plays games this way, people use GPU's because that is what they are made to do is play games. Find me one person who intentionally disables their GPU when playing games and I'll consider the statements above to be of any validity.

gr3e3n · Aug 28, 2013

cmi86 :

gr3e3n :

If you can afford a $220 3570K I would expect you to have at least a semi respectable GPU. Attempting to bench a game while remove the GPU's effect as much as possible is just unrealistic as it goes to show the gameplay capability of the CPU alone. Nobody deliberately plays games this way, people use GPU's because that is what they are made to do is play games. Find me one person who intentionally disables their GPU when playing games and I'll consider the statements above to be of any validity.

but what happens when the game is cpu intensive like sc2? or other blizzard games (very popular titles)

cmi86 · Aug 28, 2013

gr3e3n :

cmi86 :

but what happens when the game is cpu intensive like sc2? or other blizzard games (very popular titles)

So what you are asking me is what happens when you buy a $220 CPU to play a game on low with no input from your GPU ? I guess you get better FPS in that very odd and probably not very common case. Now on the other hand you can take either that nice i5 or a less expensive but still capable CPU and pair it with a decent GPU and not have to care because both will get good FPS. I'm not trying to be rude or biased I just honestly am failing to see the logic in this.

gr3e3n · Aug 28, 2013

cmi86 :

gr3e3n :

So what you are asking me is what happens when you buy a $220 CPU to play a game on low with no input from your GPU ? I guess you get better FPS in that very odd and probably not very common case. Now on the other hand you can take either that nice i5 or a less expensive but still capable CPU and pair it with a decent GPU and not have to care because both will get good FPS. I'm not trying to be rude or biased I just honestly am failing to see the logic in this.

because i find video games boring and challenge free. sc2 however is a hard game if not the second hardest game ever created behind sc:bw and i dont care about other games? i want a rig for sc2 so what matters is sc2 and that "specific and uncommon" happening

thats like me asking you what 2+2 is and you say who cares what 2+2 is 4+4 is far better. no one cares and we agree so now answer MY question not your own or get off the topic. you turned my topic into some dumb standard internet E-Peen contest where your epeen is a build you like?

your posts are the least logical thing here and your posts always hit my nerves

cmi86 · Aug 29, 2013

gr3e3n :

cmi86 :

because i find video games boring and challenge free. sc2 however is a hard game if not the second hardest game ever created behind sc:bw and i dont care about other games? i want a rig for sc2 so what matters is sc2 and that "specific and uncommon" happening

thats like me asking you what 2+2 is and you say who cares what 2+2 is 4+4 is far better. no one cares and we agree so now answer MY question not your own or get off the topic. you turned my topic into some dumb standard internet E-Peen contest where your epeen is a build you like?

your posts are the least logical thing here and your posts always hit my nerves

I came in to this thread looking to answer your question and I did almost immediately. If you wan't to overpay for your hardware so you can intentionally make your games look like crap fine by me. I'll keep doing my thing and you do yours enjoy. Btw I really couldn't care less if my posts hit your nerves, If you don't like it avoid me.

BTW it has absolutely nothing to do with e peen or a build I like as the first thing I said was the i5 is better for SCII, All I was doing was trying to get my head around the least practical benchmarking system I have ever heard in my life. Your question has been answered.

jaguarskx · Aug 29, 2013

gr3e3n :

Actually, X-Com: UFO Defense which was published by MicroProse back in 1994 is considered the most brutally challenging strategy (turn based) game ever released according to many strategy game enthusiasts (never played it myself). It takes a lot of effort just to win in "normal" mode. XCom: Enemy Unknown (released by Fraxis) revives the old franchise to mostly overwhelming good reviews. But many do not consider it as challenging as the original when played on "Classic" level (above easy and normal), but "Impossible" level is definitely considered more difficult than the original game. I might buy this game....

CooLWoLF · Aug 29, 2013

Is SC2 the only game you will be playing? If yes, just get the i5. If no, and you forsee yourself playing other games as well, get the 6350 and put the extra $80 towards a better gpu. While SC2 is more cpu dependent and likes higher ipc single core use, other games are not and would fare much better on a higher end gpu. Answer that question and you will have your solution.

Full Build advice for sc2 gaming rig AMD or INTEL

Honorable

Honorable

Distinguished

Honorable

Distinguished

Distinguished

Honorable

Distinguished

Honorable

Titan

Titan

Distinguished

Honorable

Distinguished

Titan

Honorable

Distinguished

Honorable

Distinguished

Honorable

Distinguished

Honorable

Distinguished

Titan

Distinguished

Share this page