The SC2 Beta system specs (unofficial)

[MGCǂSpectre]

FINALLY Official Specs For Beta!

http://us.blizzard.com/support/arti...parentCategoryId&pageNumber=1&categoryId=3633

The minimum system requirements for the Starcraft II Beta are as follows:

PC Minimum Requirements:
• Windows XP SP3/Vista SP1/Windows 7
• 2.2 Ghz Pentium IV or equivalent AMD Athlon processor
• 1 GB system RAM/1.5 GB for Vista and Windows 7
• 128 MB NVidia GeForce 6600 GT/ATI Radeon 9800 PRO video card
• 1024x768 minimum display resolution
• 4 GB free hard space (Beta)
• Broadband connection

*Note* the final requirements for Starcraft II have not yet been determined. Due to ongoing development the minimum requirements listed above are subject to change at any time. During this phase a Mac version will NOT be available, please check back.

 

[Na_Dann_Ma_GoGo]

Dude, everyone knows that these are not the SC2 System Requirements.
Just read your own sources lol.

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

Beta requirements, and not final, but thats why im calling them unofficial. I guess - guessing is wrong, beta will be out next week, let's just wait and see, dont know why i bothered myself with tehse sources.

 

[syltman]

http://us.blizzard.com/support/arti...parentCategoryId&pageNumber=1&categoryId=3633


PC Minimum Requirements:
• Windows XP SP3/Vista SP1/Windows 7
• 2.2 Ghz Pentium IV or equivalent AMD Athlon processor
• 1 GB system RAM/1.5 GB for Vista and Windows 7
• 128 MB NVidia GeForce 6600 GT/ATI Radeon 9800 PRO video card
• 1024x768 minimum display resolution
• 4 GB free hard space (Beta)
• Broadband connection

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

You were 1 min faster that's what I was just posting. So will Intel® Core™ 2 Duo P8400 2.26GHz (3MB Cache 1066MHz FSB) work well here?

 

[syltman]

You were 1 min faster that's what I was just posting. So will Intel® Core™ 2 Duo P8400 2.26GHz (3MB Cache 1066MHz FSB) work well here?

I'm just that gooood

 

[De.Facto]

Hah! Great, just signed in .. and waiting. I want that Galaxy-Editor! ;X

 

[Darkt3mpl3r]

WE want the galaxy editor.

 

[Anachron]

Nope, I don't want. Its not OOP.

 

[Deathcom3s]

I can't wait to give it a test run on my new rig.

 

[Alfagar]

OH YEAH! This will run on my boy!

 

[Dr Super Good]

Im all set here, people with simlar specs as mine are reporting no FPS reduction below max what so ever. Even on my brothers PC they are reporting maxing without many hickups. Max does not include AA though, which will logically reduce performance when set to high levels (16*AA will probably cause noticable stuttering).

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

Graphics Quality: It is by default Medium, this means units won't move on their Portrait animation. On high, it enables that, textures become less brighter (maybe more colors). The texture quality - Low = 128 MB Video needed, Medium = 256 MB, High = 512 MB needed, Ultra = 1 GB Video Needed. You can adjust the performance of your PC based on this, a noticeable difference is - the zerg creep is less transparent and has no reflection at lower quality.

 

[Dr Super Good]

Ultra = 1 GB Video Needed

I seriously doubt that. Maybe at post HD resolutions but for 1680*1050 I think 700 MB will be more than enough.

 

[Dark.Revenant]

512mb is technically all you need. Blizzard is smart with their texture use, if anything.

 

[Dr Super Good]

Textures are 1024*1024. Which is 4 MB each unloaded.
Loaded they are 5 and 1/3 MB each due to mipmaps.

 

[Anachron]

Can anyone tell me which resolution is the highest?

 

[Dr Super Good]

Anachron, the highest resolution is the resolution with most pixels in total.

To get the total pixel number, multiply both dimensions together. Eg 1680*1050 has a pixel number of 1764000 pixels. 1280*1024 has a pixel number of 1310720.
1764000 > 1310720 thus 1680*1050 is higher resolution.

SC2 like WC3 has no defined max resolution as a guess. Infact most PC games do not have resolution caps. The cap generally is eithor your screen (buy a bigger one) or options (you will need to manually edit the options for the resolution to be used).

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

I seriously doubt that. Maybe at post HD resolutions but for 1680*1050 I think 700 MB will be more than enough.

*Ahem*

I saw this myself in the options menu. I havent tested though how long it will take the game to exit or crash due to out of video memory (Im 512 MB ATI Video but if I make it use 1 GB it will happen). You can select how much graphics and texture quality the game to use - war3 was the same, this allows the game to be played on strong or bad PCs.

 

[Vengeancekael]

Hmm then i guess i'll be able to run sc2 on the highest settings without any problems ;D

 

[Reaper2008]

What version of DirectX will it use? Or will it be OpenGL this time?

 

[Dr Super Good]

Luckilly it is still DX. It is mostly DX10 as far as I have heard but with support for DX9.

 

[Deathcom3s]

Game runs without a hitch @ 1920x1080 with all settings on Ultra and 16x AA.

 

[Dr Super Good]

Yes but are 2 graphic cards a bit... well.. cheating as not many people will have them.

However its good to know that even with 16*aa it is maxable with present hardware.

 

[Anachron]

Omg guys, what computers do you have?

 

[Deathcom3s]

Yes but are 2 graphic cards a bit... well.. cheating as not many people will have them.

However its good to know that even with 16*aa it is maxable with present hardware.

I only have one GTX 285...

 

[Dr Super Good]

Really? I am sorry I could have sworn you had 2 in the one computer offtopic thread, my mistake.
In that case my single 275 will probably also max it.

 

[Hero_Lief]

I have a 9400GT, I'm guessing that will get probably medium/high with at least 20 FPS. However model quality and such I don't care too much about, I really just want max textures. But model quality would be nice. I have no care for much shading/lighting. So, all in all, I hope it isn't just LOW MEDIUM HIGH ULTRA, but each part have it's own setting.

 

[Deathcom3s]

I have a 9400GT, I'm guessing that will get probably medium/high with at least 20 FPS. However model quality and such I don't care too much about, I really just want max textures. But model quality would be nice. I have no care for much shading/lighting. So, all in all, I hope it isn't just LOW MEDIUM HIGH ULTRA, but each part have it's own setting.

Each aspect (Textures, models, terrain, etc.) have Low, Medium, High and Ultra settings.

 

[Hero_Lief]

Good, I can probably get a good 20-30 FPS then.

 

[Dr Super Good]

Hero_Lief, I would advise getting atleast 60 FPS in melee for custom maps as melee is not half as graphically demanding as the custom maps have the potential to be. With 30 FPS you run the risk of getting an unplayable 10 in custom maps.

 

[Reaper2008]

I have a Radeon HD4870 @1680x1050, so i think i'm good. Let's hope it doesn't use too much of this power though, as we'll be able to stress it more.

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

By default graphics&textures are set to Medium. When increasing them to High so as to get the animations on the portraits working, SC2 still runs smoothly on my 512 MB ATI Radeon HD 3870, 3 GB DDR3 and the problematic Inter Core 2 Duo 2.26 GHz

 

[Na_Dann_Ma_GoGo]

SC2 with high settings is indeed quite demanding.
Though I got no Beta Key it is possible to watch replays (just google it :d) and there I checked for my fps with fraps (pressing ctrl+alt+f shows an ingame fps counter as well btw.).
I got a HD4830 and when I play with everything on the highest settings it'll go down to 30-40 for most time. And that without much going on :X

So to fully enjoy everything and especially more demanding fun maps in the future I'll probably upgrade my PC once SC2 gets released.
By that time I'll get good stuff for little money x.x

 

[DoOs_101]

SC2 with high settings is indeed quite demanding.
Though I got no Beta Key it is possible to watch replays (just google it :d) and there I checked for my fps with fraps (pressing ctrl+alt+f shows an ingame fps counter as well btw.).
I got a HD4830 and when I play with everything on the highest settings it'll go down to 30-40 for most time. And that without much going on :X

So to fully enjoy everything and especially more demanding fun maps in the future I'll probably upgrade my PC once SC2 gets released.
By that time I'll get good stuff for little money x.x

More particles = more memory usage.

The graphics use alot more particles and polygons. And dynamic lightning effects, lol you need more than 6600 to get the gitz..

 

[Na_Dann_Ma_GoGo]

Here are some interesting Benchmarks: http://www.legionhardware.com/articles_pages/starcraft_ii_wings_of_liberty_beta_performance,1.html

 

[warman45]

i BARELY meet these requirements (i'll need to free up HDD space though. or..... *delets stuff from 8 GB flash chip* i'm good!)

 

[ACdestinydream]

lol, how do u check ur specs in wins 7... cant find where is my graphic card :/

 

[Dr Super Good]

Just to warn people, SC2 is extreemly processor demanding to ultra. If you are after ultra you should atleast have dual core processor in the post 2 GHz range. Quad cores do see some improvement by like 10%-20% over dual cores but the game will only really utalize 2 cores well (atleast for the beta) although that still does not mean it gains no benifit (the other 2 cores are loaded minimally).

For full FPS on demanding maps (4 player replay in this case) you are looking at Ultra needing atleast a 3 GHz dual core or 2.7 GHz quadcore. I7 processors have no problem maxing the game under normal conditions, comming out with only a 33-40% load while playing SC2 (the actual limiting factor is the speed of a single core meaning most of the cores are idle).

For people with slow CPUs, do not worry, most of the CPU load is the lightning and physics. On low the CPU load is greatly reduced and so is even playable on single cores.

To recap, to run SC2 on Ultra you need a fast multi core processor (atleast 2 cores) and with a high clock rate as a single core is the limiting factor.

 

[MGCǂSpectre]

Ok Doctor, what do you think about memory and video. I have 512 MB video, 3 GB DDR 3 I set graphics to High, so that I can get pictures. But textures quality High = 512MB, Ultra = 1 GB, won't just the game quit 'out of memory'? SC2 is made so that even a 1GB video system may start lagging if you set all graphics and qualities to high.

You are right that Processor is very important. My problem is the processor - 2.26 Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo - yes and not. Some PCs can run it at 1.8 GHz.

I personally have no intention to set all graphics to max, coz Graphics set to High (default = medium), Textures = medium (default) makes the game very high quality and for me the LOADING TIME is - the 1st time you run a replay is a little like DOTA loading -like 20 seconds, the next times it loads as fast as war3 - imemduiately. If my processor was higher that would load even faster, right now it's fast but happens to say delay the 1st time you load it.

-----Can any1 tell me what is the difference between Grahpics set to High, Textures - Medium and maxing all? Is maxing all a noticeable difference? If you only change Graphics from Medium to High - notice - the Medium probably use less colors and a COmmand Center is brighter colors, if High Grahpics - colors become paler.

 

[Deathcom3s]

Oh my...

High Textures take up 512MB of HDD space, not memory. Honestly, if they took up 1Gb of memory on Ultra, none of us would be able to run it on ultra.

You're going to be fine as far as processor speed and memory go. What video card do you have?

 

[Dr Super Good]

TheTerran, your processor is too slow to max physics and lighting. It is perfectly able to play the game however with those settings reduced.

The whole 1 GB of video is a lie. The game is totally maxable at full FPS on an nvidia 275 GTX which has 700 MB odd of GRAM.

Textures above low make little visual difference unless you have lighting turned on to a decent level. No real visible difference was noted in comparision screenshots between high and ultra textures unless lighting was turned on to a decent level.

Basically I think high and ultra add extra texture layers for lighting and such but as I am not in the beta I can not know for sure.

 

[RoughneckLeader]

How would a Radeon HD 5670 HD 1gig, Quad core 2.4 GHz, and 4gigs of ram do in Starcraft 2? I'm looking at a 1680x1050 resolution.

 

[Deathcom3s]

How would a Radeon HD 5670 HD 1gig, Quad core 2.4 GHz, and 4gigs of ram do in Starcraft 2? I'm looking at a 1680x1050 resolution.

You should be fine with a mix of High/Medium settings, but i'm really not sure how an HD 5670 will perform, so that's just a guess.

 

[noob134]

I just want to know if I am able to run this game
it is a Dell inspiron 530s (slim tower)
I have plenty if hard drive space free about 250 GB
I have an intel core duo @ 2.66 GHz
3 GB of RAM
My graphics card is a Radeon x1300 256MB
My OS is Windows Vista 32 bit

 

[Deathcom3s]

I just want to know if I am able to run this game
it is a Dell inspiron 530s (slim tower)
I have plenty if hard drive space free about 250 GB
I have an intel core duo @ 2.66 GHz
3 GB of RAM
My graphics card is a Radeon x1300 256MB
My OS is Windows Vista 32 bit

You should be able to run it fine on Medium/low settings.

 

[santalguy]

u should lose the vista, and u`ll run it perfectly

 

[Deolrin]

Okay, so, I'm a noob with all these stuff so I don't even know where to check, but from what I found, here are my specs:

Intel(R) Pentium(R) Dual CPU
E2140 @ 1.60GHz
1.60 GGz(I don't know, it's in Russian, that's how it translates, possible Ram?), 1gb OZU(Maybe ram? Dunno. :S)
NVIDIA GeForce 7300 SE/7200 GS(Video Card, I guess)
1280*1024 screen, Windows XP, 32 bits(highest).

I got those from "My Computer ---> Settings", and the last two lines from the place where you chose your resolution(right click on desktop, "Settings", "Properties" if I translated it right).

So, my guess it'll run... On the lowest settings, if at all. Well, is SC2 more demanding than Oblivion? 'Cause Oblivion barely runs with a 800*600 resolution on my comp with moderate settings, and lowest on anything higher but it lags a lot.

 

[Dr Super Good]

Your processor is far too slow to run the game with physics and particles above the lowest settings (which needs single threads running at the post 2 GHz mark). Possibility of lagging in demanding custom maps or when pushing melee play to its limits. Next to that it should run the game.

As SC2 looks just like WC3 when set to the lowest settings (WC3 at high that is), if your graphic card can run WC3 on high it will run SC2 although it may be a bit laggy if you are viewing 100 zerglings (which is possible).

You will probably need more memory, although it might be enough for most small maps which do not use a lot of models.
Also with hardware that old / slow there is a risk of total game incompatibility causing crashes or random unexplained glitches. This however can not be predicted and generally should not happen.

 

[Deolrin]

Oh, okay, thanks. So, processor, it's the "Intel(R) Pentium(R) Dual CPU" thing or is it the "E2140 @ 1.60GHz" thing? Or something else? Anyways, so I need a(much) better processors and more RAM, right? I'll try and get something when SC2 is released. And what about my video card? Is it fine?
Thanks again.