Page 1:Our Second Round With StarCraft II
Page 2:Test Hardware: Graphics Cards And Platform
Page 3:Test Methodology
Page 4:Test System And Settings
Page 5:Benchmarks Results: Medium Quality
Page 6:Benchmarks Results: Ultra Quality
Page 7:Benchmarks Results: Ultra Quality, 4x AA
Page 8:Benchmark Results: CPU Performance
Page 9:Conclusion: StarCraft II Can Put Your PC To The Test
Benchmarks Results: Medium Quality
First, we’d like to note that StarCraft II’s Medium detail setting delivers slightly less consistent average frame rates than the Ultra detail setting. This is probably because the lighter graphical load creates a situation where the CPU becomes more of a bottleneck, and in this benchmark, the AI can end up with slightly different battles each time, resulting in a variance in CPU load. Regardless, the results are indicative of some solid trends:
We can see that the minimum frame rate doesn't crest more than 30 at any resolutions, indicating a strong CPU bottleneck. All of the cards are quite capable of low-resolution performance, but at 1680x1050 and higher, we can see the GeForce GT 240 and lower-end Radeons begin to lose ground, while the Radeon HD 5830 and GeForce GTX 460 are able to keep their average frame rates quite high, even at 2560x1600.
However, StarCraft II is not a twitch game like a first-person shooter, where success depends on precise, split-second aiming. Even the low-end graphics cards offer passable performance at 2560x1600 because the minimum frame rate is so consistent—assuming CPU power is sufficient.
Still, the GeForce GT 240 GDDR5 offers the absolute minimum number of frames per second you’d want to use at 2560x1600.
- Our Second Round With StarCraft II
- Test Hardware: Graphics Cards And Platform
- Test Methodology
- Test System And Settings
- Benchmarks Results: Medium Quality
- Benchmarks Results: Ultra Quality
- Benchmarks Results: Ultra Quality, 4x AA
- Benchmark Results: CPU Performance
- Conclusion: StarCraft II Can Put Your PC To The Test