Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Rig for SC2

Last response: in Video Games
Share
April 26, 2012 10:56:58 PM

Hello. I'm new to the whole world of PC gaming, and I have a few questions. I'm currently looking into a build specifically to play starcraft 2. The build is AMD FX 4100 (The 3.6 ghz processor) Radeon 5570 and 4GB DDR3. I'm only looking to play the game in medium, and I am asking if I would get playable fps, preferably nothing below 25. Thank you.

More about : rig sc2

April 26, 2012 11:59:34 PM

Instead of the 5570 try getting a 6850 , that card is a very good card, and for starcraft the 85 euro FX 4100 is the best chip.
You can get a i3 but that would cost a 100 euro but then you will not get a quad core.
I play SC2 on a dual core with a 5650 GPU and I have 60 FPS in 1v1 and 2v2 , if there are more than 4 people then I start dropping frames, and my friend who has a 6850 plays everything on high settings and he even uses 2 1080 p monitors.
The RAM 4 GB is more than enough. Try getting the 4GB in a single stick so u can upgrade later.
m
0
l
April 27, 2012 12:22:41 AM

Wow thank you. I would just like to point out that I am only going for medium graphics, so would the CPU + GPU be sufficient? And I will get the 4gb in one stick, thanks.
m
0
l
Related resources
April 27, 2012 1:40:25 AM

Hey even a 6770 or even a 6670 if the 6850 is to high. You could check amazon.com/UK for the best deals on those cards. You can compair all the cards and the bench for the 6850. Hope this helps and good luck to you.

6770
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4296/amds-radeon-hd-6770-...

6670
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4278/amds-radeon-hd-6670-...

5570
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2935

6850
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/539

6850
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3987/amds-radeon-6870-685...
m
0
l
April 27, 2012 4:00:03 AM

6670 is the last get 5770, which proved itself as a very reliable card for entry level gaming. FX chip is good but look for tom's hardware benchmark for CPUs for SC2. (it's an old article maybe over a year old but it has good info in it)

I understand that today $15 might seem like a better choice, but down the road you'll be stuck with that socket, and the future of the processors coming on that socket is questionable still. If you were to go with i3, then you have an option to drop an ivy bridge processor into your board no problem when you feel the need for extra cores.

Really think about this hard, because $15 savings today might send you for $80 spending down the road when you have to get a new mobo to upgrade to a different socket.
m
0
l
April 27, 2012 4:24:02 AM

I think I'll stay away from an FX chip. You might as well go for a Phenom II X 4 955/965 BE, if your budget allows for it. Upgrading later on will not be an option however.
SC2 is CPU dependent to an extend, so having a good quad core is necessary.
Either that, or get a Core i3 2100 or 2120. Won't be much good for SC2, but you'll notice some improvements in other games.

If you're only going to play SC2, the HD 5570 should quite be enough. You can get a better card, if you want to.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/blizzard-entertainm...

m
0
l
April 27, 2012 10:06:53 AM

Gman450 said:
I think I'll stay away from an FX chip. You might as well go for a Phenom II X 4 955/965 BE, if your budget allows for it. Upgrading later on will not be an option however.
SC2 is CPU dependent to an extend, so having a good quad core is necessary.
Either that, or get a Core i3 2100 or 2120. Won't be much good for SC2, but you'll notice some improvements in other games.

If you're only going to play SC2, the HD 5570 should quite be enough. You can get a better card, if you want to.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/blizzard-entertainm...

http://media.bestofmicro.com/0/M/244966/original/Sc2%20Medium%201920.png

The thing about SC2 is that i get a 30 FPS in 1v1 and 2v2 in my 5650, but when i go more than 4 players my FPS drops, so ya if your budget allows go for a better card than the 5770 , If you can find a quad core phenom 2 for the price of the FX4100 go for the phenom, but since the FX 4100 has had a price drop, i think that is the best chip for the price.
m
0
l
April 27, 2012 10:44:22 AM

its had a price drop because its pretty poor for gaming in general. the i3 is a better buy because as said earlier it will save you money in the long term (electic bills) and you get the opportunity to upgrade to much much stronger cpu's down the line...
with the amd you will swap like for like pretty much 1s you start overclocking.
m
0
l
April 27, 2012 11:04:40 AM

Quite frankly I play SC2 on an i3-530 with integrated graphics and it runs perfectly. It is a very forgiving game.

Generally speaking SC2 prefers Intel and Nvidia hardware:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4955/the-bulldozer-review...

I'm thinking of upgrading to Ivy Bridge which will easily handle medium settings without a discrete GPU.
m
0
l
April 27, 2012 11:23:34 AM

I would seriously go for a Core i5-3570K, it should cost around £160 which is only a tiny amount more than a FX-4100 + GPU. The CPU is far far more powerful and the inbuilt HD 4000 graphics is perfectly good at running SC2 in medium at around 50 fps.

This way you will have a much better overall experience, windows will run much faster and if you ever want to upgrade in the future then add a GPU when you see fit. The CPU will be futureproof for a long long time compared to the FX-4100.
m
0
l
April 27, 2012 12:54:28 PM

willzzz said:
I would seriously go for a Core i5-3570K, it should cost around £160 which is only a tiny amount more than a FX-4100 + GPU. The CPU is far far more powerful and the inbuilt HD 4000 graphics is perfectly good at running SC2 in medium at around 50 fps.

This way you will have a much better overall experience, windows will run much faster and if you ever want to upgrade in the future then add a GPU when you see fit. The CPU will be futureproof for a long long time compared to the FX-4100.

The Core i 5 has a HD 4000 chip which doesnot even beat the AMD A8 in graphics.
The processor is 15 % better than the FX4100 but it costs 2 times more, so if you want 15% increase and 2 times the price than go for the i5, and i 3 is a dual core and it is not a future proof build, I think the FX4100 and a 6770 or a 6850 would be the best bet.
m
0
l
April 29, 2012 5:42:46 PM

Thank you for all of your feedback. I will take it all into consideration.
m
0
l
April 29, 2012 10:45:01 PM

Yeah everybody has something good to bring to the table and you can count on eveything to be spot on so good luck on your quest.
m
0
l
April 30, 2012 8:38:02 AM

mitunchidamparam said:
The Core i 5 has a HD 4000 chip which doesnot even beat the AMD A8 in graphics.
The processor is 15 % better than the FX4100 but it costs 2 times more, so if you want 15% increase and 2 times the price than go for the i5, and i 3 is a dual core and it is not a future proof build, I think the FX4100 and a 6770 or a 6850 would be the best bet.


No it doesn't beat the A8 in graphics, but you don't need much if you are mainly playing SC2.

The FX-4100 may be almost half the price, but the graphics card isn't free you know, a 6770 would bring the total up to the same £160. If he doesn't need the graphics performance then he will benefit from a much improved experience in windows, browsing the internet, watching videos, and using other applications on the i5.

If he was playing different games I would agree, but Starcraft is a very unusual title as far as hardware is concerned. It is very often CPU-bound rather than GPU-bound. It is the opposite of most other games out there. The GPU is most needed when scrolling around, and you shouldn't even be doing that if you are playing the game efficiently (you should use the map to move the screen).
m
0
l
April 30, 2012 8:50:10 AM

If you buy an FX-4100 it will struggle in very large battles and there will be no easy upgrade path.
If you buy an i5 it will run SC2 just fine and if you ever want to play a more demanding title like BF3 then just slot in an appropriate graphics card.
m
0
l
!