You have a GTX260... with 216 shader cores...
We're talking about laptops with 9600gts.
My 8800gt with 2.26 core 2 duo runs Starcraft at 1920x1200 on ultra no problems.
05-24-2010, 08:36 PM
#11
You have a GTX260... with 216 shader cores...
We're talking about laptops with 9600gts.
My 8800gt with 2.26 core 2 duo runs Starcraft at 1920x1200 on ultra no problems.
05-24-2010, 09:10 PM
#12
Huh, i am thinking it is mac os too. Apparently, Portal on mac gets literally half the frame rates of portal on windows on the exact same hardware. Curse you apple for ruining my awesome mac experience with lousy graphics drivers. I hope they update to OpenGL 3 soon. I also know blizz stated that they were working on performance fixes? I didn't get a chance to play on my laptop after patch 13 so im not sure if it did anything. Did you guys see any changes? Oh and the rain on steps of war lag my system very bad. Do you see that?
05-24-2010, 09:23 PM
#13
Portal for mac, that test was pretty stupid. They installed OS X on a hackintosh. Obviously OS X odesn't have the right drivers for the GTX285.
I dunno what problem is up with your mac but I have absolutely no issues with rain or whatever. 60+fps for me all the time. I can play with medium everything at 30-40 but I'd rather have it never lag.
Oh yeah, btw I'm also playing Starcraft 2 at 1920x1200 so I really don't know your problems.
Last edited by Wankey; 05-24-2010 at 09:25 PM.
05-24-2010, 09:25 PM
#14
Actually, the portal test was also on a late 2009 mbp just like mine as well. There were 2 tests. I also heard that the 9600s apple used were faulty? Though i have never had a BSOD on this card and I can play for hours with just lag. Could faulty graphics hardware cause a drop in performance?
05-24-2010, 09:41 PM
#15
Yeah I'm getting ridiculous frame rates. I'm on a 24inch dell monitor that means my 256mb 8600 is pushing 1440x900 + 1920x1200 worth of starcraft.
So seriously, I think your 9600gt may be faulty. No way am I out performing you.
05-24-2010, 09:45 PM
#16
so much for my $2,300 machine living up to its cost… i think i'll have to stick with my PC for SC2 then :P
05-24-2010, 09:50 PM
#17
The 216 shader core of my gtx260 run everything at ultra with 60fps. I think my cpu is the bottleneck here, AMD phenom dual core 2.8.
05-24-2010, 09:53 PM
#18
Sorta random thought, but whats an ATI equivalent of a GTX 260?
I have a gaming PC with a 4850 which i generally use because of NO LAG!!! Don't know how many frame rates but i have a quad core there and was curious to see if the quad core really makes a difference to a dual.
05-24-2010, 10:17 PM
#19
The HD 4870 is the direct competitor to the GTX 260 even though the GTX 260 is often more expensive and can sometimes be matched in performance by the HD 4850. There's also times when a GTX 260 will perform much better than a HD 4870.
@SYL: My 750$ dollar computer maxes StarCraft at max resolution with plenty of FPS to spare in even the most demanding scenes. But, yes, your CPU is a bit weak although it should run better than that. I think it's just unoptimization in the beta code. When the game is released it should be better. The Mac client is much newer than the Windows client.
Last edited by TheEconomist; 05-24-2010 at 10:19 PM.
05-24-2010, 10:59 PM
#20