- Status
gm0n3y
Distinguished
- Mar 13, 2006
- 3,441
- 0
- 20,780
[citation][nom]MxM[/nom]TBS game that recommends Quad Core?!! I think it is non-optimized programming...[/citation]
I understand your thinking, but as mentioned by an above poster, Civ can really make your computer crawl. The maps can get pretty large and with a lot of players and units it gets pretty complex. I don't think its really attributable (at least not entirely) to shoddy programming.
I understand your thinking, but as mentioned by an above poster, Civ can really make your computer crawl. The maps can get pretty large and with a lot of players and units it gets pretty complex. I don't think its really attributable (at least not entirely) to shoddy programming.
Civ 5 developers said that they noticed that even on quad core CPUs that Civ 4 had serious slowdown when more than 100 units were on the screen at a time. Even if it was not rendering all those units. The solution they came up with was having each unit threaded individually, which is why Civ 5 will make use of all available cores. Supposedly, the more cores you are running, the more units the game will be able to render before performance begins to deteriorate.
[citation][nom]MxM[/nom]TBS game that recommends Quad Core?!! I think it is non-optimized programming...Also the recommended cards are not DX11 cards. Hell, NVIDIA 9800 card is not even DX10.1 (not sure about AMD), so why DX11?[/citation]
They're recommending a quad. Any quad, even a low clocked one. That says two things to me: that this game can use four threads well, and it's not bound by the performance of any single one of them enough to require a high clock rate. That is not what I'd call shoddy work. If Clivene is right it'll scale to effectively arbitrary cores.
What amuses me is the GPU requirements. As much as the i3 improved Intel's GMAs, they still aren't close to being in the same league as a HD2600XT or 7900 GS. I think they're either padding a bit on the discrete side for safety (assuming anyone who wants to play this and makes the CPU specs has a decent card), or the game is going to look like hell on an i3.
Nice to see devs using the hardware available to modern desktops though.
They're recommending a quad. Any quad, even a low clocked one. That says two things to me: that this game can use four threads well, and it's not bound by the performance of any single one of them enough to require a high clock rate. That is not what I'd call shoddy work. If Clivene is right it'll scale to effectively arbitrary cores.
What amuses me is the GPU requirements. As much as the i3 improved Intel's GMAs, they still aren't close to being in the same league as a HD2600XT or 7900 GS. I think they're either padding a bit on the discrete side for safety (assuming anyone who wants to play this and makes the CPU specs has a decent card), or the game is going to look like hell on an i3.
Nice to see devs using the hardware available to modern desktops though.
Relax folks, alot of games are recomedning this. I have a e7500 wolfdale w 2 5770's and i can run any game at any res. so im not worried
Steam? That sucks. I'm suddenly not so interested in getting this. I don't like using worthless middleware on my computer and other people should be allowed to play my game if they have the disc and not have to deal with BS like giving them my Steam info so they can sign in.
maestintaolius
Distinguished
- Jul 16, 2009
- 719
- 0
- 18,980
Oh great, the second this comes out I'm going to lose track of large blocks of time. No game has the ability Civilization has over me to suck me in for hours and hours. I can think of many a night where I sat down for a quick Civ game and the next thing I knew the sun was coming up.
maestintaolius
Distinguished
- Jul 16, 2009
- 719
- 0
- 18,980
[citation][nom]wotan31[/nom]Looks cool, I've always wanted to try the Civ series as it's been around a long time, they must be doing something right. But the "OS: Windows" part is a show stopper. Sorry, I cannot play the game, and therefore they won't get my money, until it comes to OSX or Linux.[/citation]
Yes, we get it, you don't like windows, like you say at every single opportunity you can. Hater gonna hate.
Yes, we get it, you don't like windows, like you say at every single opportunity you can. Hater gonna hate.
gm0n3y
Distinguished
- Mar 13, 2006
- 3,441
- 0
- 20,780
[citation][nom]maestintaolius[/nom]Oh great, the second this comes out I'm going to lose track of large blocks of time. No game has the ability Civilization has over me to suck me in for hours and hours. I can think of many a night where I sat down for a quick Civ game and the next thing I knew the sun was coming up.[/citation]
That has happened too many times. I hate the point when you decide that its just not worth going to bed for 2 hours and pull an all-nighter.
That has happened too many times. I hate the point when you decide that its just not worth going to bed for 2 hours and pull an all-nighter.
enzo matrix
Splendid
- Nov 10, 2009
- 4,289
- 0
- 23,160
Wow. First game I have seen where the recommended system setup is recommended at more than a radeon 3870. I always look at the "recommended" as the "minimum", It's always worked well for me.
eddieroolz
Splendid
- Sep 6, 2008
- 7,057
- 0
- 25,860
Damn. When I built my GTS250 and E7200 I thought it would last longer than just a year and half! The recommended specs for games are creeping up higher and higher each year!
quicksilver98
Distinguished
- Mar 16, 2010
- 53
- 0
- 18,630
[citation][nom]Maxor127[/nom]Steam? That sucks. I'm suddenly not so interested in getting this. I don't like using worthless middleware on my computer and other people should be allowed to play my game if they have the disc and not have to deal with BS like giving them my Steam info so they can sign in.[/citation]
It's people like you that make the computer world a frustrating place.. "Why can't I just let my buddies play it" Oh like back in the day with Diablo and Starcraft? Thats pirating. Get a job and buy the software... Or if your a kid which I suspect, ask your mommy for an advance on your allowance.
It's people like you that make the computer world a frustrating place.. "Why can't I just let my buddies play it" Oh like back in the day with Diablo and Starcraft? Thats pirating. Get a job and buy the software... Or if your a kid which I suspect, ask your mommy for an advance on your allowance.
[citation][nom]quicksilver98[/nom]It's people like you that make the computer world a frustrating place.. "Why can't I just let my buddies play it" Oh like back in the day with Diablo and Starcraft? Thats pirating. Get a job and buy the software... Or if your a kid which I suspect, ask your mommy for an advance on your allowance.[/citation]
While I am not him, I do share his feeling with "middle ware". It has nothing to do with "lending the game", it is just Steam is intrusive. Any other distributor installer that I know of (Impulse, direct2drive, GamersGate) is not required to run each time when game is run. Only Steam. I would rather the game be on Impulse.
While I am not him, I do share his feeling with "middle ware". It has nothing to do with "lending the game", it is just Steam is intrusive. Any other distributor installer that I know of (Impulse, direct2drive, GamersGate) is not required to run each time when game is run. Only Steam. I would rather the game be on Impulse.
Feel free to peg me down as another user for whom Steam is a no-go. I'd rather have a disc check and I really, really dislike disc checks.
It's great that the Steam requirement seems to be clearly evident in the system requirements though, all too often we're left in the dark around third party software or DRM measures when making a purchase.
It's great that the Steam requirement seems to be clearly evident in the system requirements though, all too often we're left in the dark around third party software or DRM measures when making a purchase.
I haven't found GPU to be particularly critical, played on a laptop with ATI FireGL V5700.
What is critical is that the code is definitely sloppy and wasteful to the point of insanity.
The size of the game save file grows exponentially and as soon as it reaches 32 MB you can kiss your gameplay goodbye unless you are going to buy 2 solid state drives and waste them in a RAID. 30 MB out of these 32 MB are literally filled with string "FINAL_RELEASE201080". A high school kid would do much better. Saving an loading is also the point where you have the highest chance of hitting on of their zillion bugs.
Don't forget that Civ 5 is for all practical purposes severely crippled compared to civ 4 (like 90% of variations are gone). It looks like the actual gameplay/simulation engine got zero attention and optimization wasn't even on the checklist. So even if you'd turn off all graphics if would still be equally slow, sluggish and buggy.
BTW they are recommending Quad because they paid for Intel's concurrency lib which is wastes a lot of CPU with less than 8 cores (16 hardware threads), but all of that is still rather small compared to ridiculously lousy code Firaxis wrote.
Chances are that the most hurtful gameplay change (making every piece blocking - akka "no stacks") is also causing the most of the perf degradation since that forces route planning into exponential running times all the time i.e. the worst case became the standard and no number of cores can handle that.
Bottom line - when it slows down to the screeching crawl, don't blame your GPU - it's load is not very hard and it's code is pretty efficient just by virtue of having DirectX and shaders.
What is critical is that the code is definitely sloppy and wasteful to the point of insanity.
The size of the game save file grows exponentially and as soon as it reaches 32 MB you can kiss your gameplay goodbye unless you are going to buy 2 solid state drives and waste them in a RAID. 30 MB out of these 32 MB are literally filled with string "FINAL_RELEASE201080". A high school kid would do much better. Saving an loading is also the point where you have the highest chance of hitting on of their zillion bugs.
Don't forget that Civ 5 is for all practical purposes severely crippled compared to civ 4 (like 90% of variations are gone). It looks like the actual gameplay/simulation engine got zero attention and optimization wasn't even on the checklist. So even if you'd turn off all graphics if would still be equally slow, sluggish and buggy.
BTW they are recommending Quad because they paid for Intel's concurrency lib which is wastes a lot of CPU with less than 8 cores (16 hardware threads), but all of that is still rather small compared to ridiculously lousy code Firaxis wrote.
Chances are that the most hurtful gameplay change (making every piece blocking - akka "no stacks") is also causing the most of the perf degradation since that forces route planning into exponential running times all the time i.e. the worst case became the standard and no number of cores can handle that.
Bottom line - when it slows down to the screeching crawl, don't blame your GPU - it's load is not very hard and it's code is pretty efficient just by virtue of having DirectX and shaders.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
News First credible report of RTX 5090 FE with melted connector appears — third-party cable likely cause- Started by Admin
- Replies: 41
-
-
Discussion What's your favourite video game you've been playing?- Started by amdfangirl
- Replies: 4K
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram