We tested StarCraft II by playing back a recording of an epic 30-minute, eight-player match that we found online and capturing frame rates with Fraps. Thanks to the relatively long time window involved, we decided not to repeat this test multiple times, like we usually do when testing games in this fashion.
Well, I'd say this is a pretty auspicious beginning, since the slowest Sandy Bridge is faster than the Core i7-875K.
We can show you the frame-by-frame performance results, if you'd like to see them. We actually took the average above starting from about 400 seconds in; the frame rates before that were a bit inflated because there weren't many units populating the map. Here's how the whole period looks plotted out.
That's frickin' cool looking, but it's also pretty difficult to read. If we zero in on the later portion of the game, where frame rates really started to slow down, and separate the CPUs by class, we get something much more readable.
There is a slight temporal shift in some cases because we started our recordings manually, but you get the picture. The Sandy Bridge processors are at the top of their respective classes, and the 2600K is at least the equal of the fastest six-core, the Core i7-980X Extreme.
|New Need for Speed looks like a lean, mean machine||75|
|Friday night topic: how dinosaurs probably looked||51|
|Thermaltake's Suppressor F51 mid-tower looks a tad familiar||9|
|Umbra action RPG uses Megascans tech to glorious effect||25|
|Deal of the week: 27'' AHVA monitor for $300, The Witcher 3 for $39||22|
|F1 2015 offers a new formula for racing fans||10|
|The Witcher 3 developer explains controversial graphics downgrade||84|
|Frostbite engine lead teases next-gen Radeon||40|