Ripped from Video ... it *belongs HERE*
Topic Title: Supreme commander Quad core ready ? CPU whore
SC *needs* more than 2 cores to run really well
and SC is the "first"
http://au.gamespot.com/features/6166198/p-6.html
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/660-3/supreme-commander-benchmark.html
in English: http://www.behardware.com/articles/660-1/supreme-commander-benchmark.html
HardOCP:
Topic Title: Supreme commander Quad core ready ? CPU whore
SC *needs* more than 2 cores to run really well
and SC is the "first"
http://au.gamespot.com/features/6166198/p-6.html
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/660-3/supreme-commander-benchmark.html
in English: http://www.behardware.com/articles/660-1/supreme-commander-benchmark.html
HardOCP:
Looking back it is very clear that scaling the cores of our Intel Core 2 Duo in Supreme Commander provides positive results. Under Windows Vista we found that Supreme Commander was not playable with a single-core CPU. We ranSupCom at the lowest possible settings, 1024x768 NoAA/NoAF with all options turned off, and the average framerate was only 10 FPS. When we enabled a second core we received a large performance improvement which provided a better gameplay experience. With dual-core we found 1280x1024 NoAA/16X AF playable with ?medium? fidelity settings. The gameplay experience was even more improved by enabling the remaining two cores giving us a quad-core processor. We were able to run the game at 1600x1200 with NoAA/16X AF and maximum in-game settings. Intel?s quad-core by far allowed the best experience in Supreme Commander with all graphical effects possible enabled and at their highest detail levels.