supreme commander 1 vs supreme commander 2 performance

I was reading a few reviews about the new supreme commander and they said it was less demanding than the first one. I've never played either one and decided to try supreme commander 2 while on my 9600m gt laptop and was surprised how well it ran the frame rater was averaged well above 30fps and seems rather good. Is the first supreme commander more demanding or less demanding?

Also if you have played both already which do you prefer?

 

It's definitely more demanding than Supreme Commander 2, and it's little more CPU demanding than GPU, and it utilizes quad-core processor which yields better performance, here's a Gamespot hardware guide on supreme commander if you are interested:

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6166198/index.html

 

SupCom 2 only uses one CPU core. What a joke.

 

Haha wat? I hope not, I was going to get it just for the pure sake of trying to kill my i7.

 

According to this:
http://www.legionhardware.com/articles_pages/supreme_commander_2_performance,12.html

Supreme Commander 2 is more dual-core optimized, only two cores take majority of the load, making a quad-core processor useless.

 

Curses! Oh well still may pick it up.

 

Download the demo from Steam, then run it windowed with Task Manager running next to it.

Either something is wrong with my comp, or it uses just one core. I'd take a screenshot, but I've uninstalled it.

 

The 2nd game is supposed to be way dumbed down from the first one in many ways.

Graphics, Gameplay, Strategy, System Demand.

Most anybody faithful to the first game is dissapointed greatly with the 2nd one. Looks like they went more "casual" on the 2nd game hoping to pick up a new player base.

Oh well, all the more reason to look forward to Starcraft 2

 

might just pick up the first one then, although the second one reminds me a lot of starcraft.

 

Then I guess that's why everyone's releasing their RTS game before StarCraft 2, cos' they know when StarCraft 2 is released, all hell breaks loose... LOL

 

Only the standard Quad Core will be ''useless'', not the mobile i7 though.

 

i just got my copy today but couldn't play it yet sense even tho you have the cd you still have too download 2 more gbs of the game off steam... even tho the whole thing is on the cd which got me confused..


but ya after playing the demo i went and preorder it 5min before release day lol


just playing the demo i liked it alot and the graphics is really nice i say it looks better than the first which i have they just used more colors on this one or something.

i couldn't tell if it took more than the first sense my amd 965@ 4.1ghzs and a ati 4890 plays both of them smooth lol.


i still have too beat the first one.


im pretty much not a rts gamer but after playing the demo supreme commander 2 it really got me into it.

 

Having played both SupCom (+ FA) and SupCom 2 (been playing since yesterday as I had it preloaded), I can tell you it is definitely less demanding on the hardware.
Settings: 1920x1200, Shadows on Low, all else maxed, 2x AA
Hovering above my fully built base, shields on, considerable activity on screen:
SC: FA - between 15 and 20 fps
SC2: ~30 fps
At the very start of a skirmish match (staring at my ACU; initial camera position):
SC: FA ~25 fps
SC2: ~40 fps

Other impressions: The maps feel smaller than those in the original. This coupled with the unit cap being 500 on the largest maps would likely cause in increase in framerate by itself, but the units seem to have a lower poly count as well (less detailed). They still like very impressive (at least, the experimentals; some of the normal units including the ACU seem rather dull and uninspired by comparison), despite the downgrade in graphics.

Another thing to keep in mind is I usually had my GPU OC'd to 651/737 in FA while SC2 doesn't seem to require it (running stock at 575/600).

My $0.02

 

I decided to try the sc1 demo and it definitely was more demanding and just wasn't to my liking. I will definitely be going with sc2.

 

I don't like the new Fatboys. I felt awesome with those gigantic mobile factories with a few dozen guns all blasting away whatever was in range. The... whatever the Fatboy 2 is shaped like just doesn't do it for me.

I am happy that the Atlantis is still around.

Yes, major UED user here.

 

Totally forgot that this was being released, will definitely have to pick it up.

Fatboys are .... annoying.

 

Well wasn't SupCom2 at least at one point planned to be released on consoles including the Xbox? That would pretty much make smaller scale and lower requirements guaranteed, since SupCom1 was a PC exclusive from the start. (Edit: had to change SC to SupCom. SC=StarCraft. )

 

On which settings did you play Supreme Commander 2?

I'm asking, because I'm looking for a new laptop and I would like to run this game (and the first + FA) smoothly.

I've also read it's not as demanding as the first. But I guess it's still mostly CPU bound, since the recommended system requirements mention a Core2Duo E6850.

 

ran at 1280x800 2x aa 16x af with everything but shadows on high. The first one couldn't handle aa and af without dropping below 30fps .

 

The demo is not representative of the full game... The complete game runs a bit better.

 

I played Sup Com 1 start to finish... and I only played the demo for Sup Com 2..

Bleh. The units in 2 look cartoony, and they immensely dumbed the economy down to a point where its no different from any other RTS. I loved the economy in the first game with its continuous income mechanic. It made a lot more sense within the context of the game, how you can have perpetually running factories.

With 2, each unit built subtracts the full amount from your resources, and if you run out, the whole factory just freezes, until you manually unfreeze it. What a pain.

They could have made Sup Com 2 accessible to a larger without removing this (necessary) feature... now there's no way I'm buying 2.


Rant aside, I think the game looks worse, and it seems to perform better than Sup Com 1. Which makes sense

 

I played both supcom 1 and 2. I find 2 to be good in performance and 1 was buggy. Supcom 1 would hang in skirmish after 1 hour.

Gameplay Supcom 1 wins by war. Gameplay was more complex which made it much more fun. Supcom 2 is too basic and looks the same.