Checking to see if I can run Starcraft 2 with these specs...

[Sevion]

Which is why I disagree with the people saying he can run it. He's got a pitiful integrated GPU.

 

[tom_mai78101]

Which is why I disagree with the people saying he can run it. He's got a pitiful integrated GPU.

Oh, geez...That really hurts!

The only thing we, including everyone who doesn't know, can do is to wait for the game to come out and run it.

 

[Sevion]

Lol.

We shall find out.

 

[tom_mai78101]

Lol.

We shall find out.

I'm marking your words. And please...just bear with me: Integrated cards is the only thing essential for laptops only.

 

[SerraAvenger]

The problem is very often VGA that occupies Ram.

I reckon VGA has a higher access priority than CPU, which means your CPU will fucking idle the hell out of you while you run at 2 FPS.

 

[Cookiemaster]

Are these okay enough to run?

I know some of you wanted me to go buy the latest, newest computer specs, but, considering my allowances, it's practically impossible for me to buy a new laptop within 5 years.

It should be good enough to run, but you will probably have to lower graphical settings quite a bit, and you might still experience a drop in framerate if there's a lot of things happening on the screen.


The main thing that will drag SC2 down will probably be your video-card, because, bluntly put, laptop integrated video-cards... suck.

 

[Im_On_56k]

From the blizzard store, StarCraft I recommends:

• Windows 2000/XP/Vista
• Pentium 90 or higher
• 16 MB RAM
• DirectX-Compatible SVGA Video Card
• Microsoft-Compatible Mouse
• 2X CD-ROM Drive for Game Play (4X for Cinematics)

StarCraft II increases some of them, but not much, considering that the original poster's computer will run fine with StarCraft II.

...wtf?

Are these okay enough to run?

I know some of you wanted me to go buy the latest, newest computer specs, but, considering my allowances, it's practically impossible for me to buy a new laptop within 5 years.

No it will not run. Why do you ask? Assuming this website I found with a simple google search is at least somewhat accurate.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Graphics-Media-Accelerator-X3100.2176.0.html
With their sample of games your graphics card will utterly fail, especially on something like SC2.

Even if that website is completely wrong. 1.6 dual core processor and 2gb ram would crash and burn in the case your graphics card doesn't.

What is the chance my assumptions are also wrong? Slim to none in this case. Don't hold your breath.

 

[tom_mai78101]

Hm...Blizzard had announced that SC2 runs on pixel shader 2.0 (Mine is 3.0), and it needs 1 GB of RAM (I have 2).

I still have high hopes.

 

[Ghan]

Blizzard is generally good about making games able to run on systems that aren't that powerful. But they are also good about still being able to take advantage of the really powerful systems.
What's in it for them if half the people who would buy the game can't play it on their machines? I think they will try to make it as easy as possible to play it, even if it may not look that good on older machines.

 

[SerraAvenger]

Hm...Blizzard had announced that SC2 runs on pixel shader 2.0 (Mine is 3.0), and it needs 1 GB of RAM (I have 2).

I still have high hopes.

Like I said, your CPU will run at 10% speed. This cannot be improved.

 

[Hildagarn]

From the blizzard store, StarCraft I recommends:

• Windows 2000/XP/Vista
• Pentium 90 or higher
• 16 MB RAM
• DirectX-Compatible SVGA Video Card
• Microsoft-Compatible Mouse
• 2X CD-ROM Drive for Game Play (4X for Cinematics)

StarCraft II increases some of them, but not much, considering that the original poster's computer will run fine with StarCraft II.

This is a very sad comment. your going to need a lot more than 16 MB or RAM >.> like A LOT more.

 

[Sevion]

With SCII, for high performance, I'm looking at around 3 to 4 GB ram :-/ Seriously.

 

[tom_mai78101]

With SCII, for high performance, I'm looking at around 3 to 4 GB ram :-/ Seriously.

2 GB is enough...There is a max threshold for all games to be played with high performances using lower system requirements.

Like Starcraft, the max threshold is actually 64 RAM.

 

[Sevion]

Weren't you also the one who thought an integrated video card could run SCII? But, as I said, we shall see.

 

[tom_mai78101]

Weren't you also the one who thought an integrated video card could run SCII? But, as I said, we shall see.

Yes, let's see. :thup:

 

[Beetlebomb]

Blizzard is generally good about making games able to run on systems that aren't that powerful. But they are also good about still being able to take advantage of the really powerful systems.
What's in it for them if half the people who would buy the game can't play it on their machines? I think they will try to make it as easy as possible to play it, even if it may not look that good on older machines.

That's 100% correct. They actually take pride in being able to please both the low-end and high-end computers at the same time.

They just recently posted on twitter explaining that they're putting effort into refining the artwork for the 'High' detail settings.

"The #StarCraft2 programming team is optimizing the interactive story mode for all graphic settings, especially "High".

Here's the twitter link

--Beetle