Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

So how's the game with Dual core?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • So how's the game with Dual core?

    I'm hoping to get myself a new laptop in the coming months to update myself from an overweight underpowered overHEATED HP XP2400+. My current one can play cIV and the main issue is the useless integrated Vid card. With the next laptop I get this will not be an issue since I will ensure I have a graphics card that can at least do well enough with Doom 3, C&C3, UFO Afterlight and other such new and recentish graphics-heavy games.

    However, the main gaming use of this machine is for cIV (of course! ), and I have heard about some slowdown issues on large maps from people who claim to have recent PCs. So I am hoping to hear what people's experiences with cIV play are like using Dual Core systems, preferably laptops. Can cIV use the second processor core, and do you see much slow-down/jerkiness in the late game or with large maps?

    Cheers all.
    Consul.

    Back to the ROOTS of addiction. My first missed poll!

  • #2
    It won't benefit from the dual core CPU per se. In fact, few games can really use both cores. Obviously, it's going to run well anyway, because all dual-core CPUs are fairly powerful, but there won't be any significant multithreading going on.
    Solver, WePlayCiv Co-Administrator
    Contact: solver-at-weplayciv-dot-com
    I can kill you whenever I please... but not today. - The Cigarette Smoking Man

    Comment


    • #3
      So then I can expect a single 1.66 or 2.00 GHz core of the dual-core laptop to generally be considerably better than the XP2400+ CPU I have now? I know the 2400+ is not the strict clockspeed (and besides I am aware that #s of GHz doesn't count for all that much anymore), but after all the number WAS used for comparison with the straight speed of Intel CPUs.

      It just seems to me that, architecture design aside, a 1.66GHz dual core machine doesn't sound that hot compared to a single 2.4GHz approximate equivalent CPU like the one I currently have, with a game like cIV that can't use the power of two processors.

      Am I provoking howls of laughter and derision? It's been a few years since I had to be up-to-date with the computer component technology needed to be able to play a civ game playably well, and it not longer is as simple as higher clockspeed = faster.

      At least graphics cards and RAM still mean the same, more or less.
      Consul.

      Back to the ROOTS of addiction. My first missed poll!

      Comment


      • #4
        A 2400 is what, 2 GHz ?

        Core Duo processors are currently the fastest ones out there. Despite their "lower" frequency, they have very good performance even when only one core is used. So indeed, it's not higher clock == more performance anymore.
        Solver, WePlayCiv Co-Administrator
        Contact: solver-at-weplayciv-dot-com
        I can kill you whenever I please... but not today. - The Cigarette Smoking Man

        Comment


        • #5
          Core 2 Duo processors, to be precise

          I guess the game could benefit even if it doesn't use both cores, as long as many of your background processes do. FWIW the game screams on my E6600.
          THEY!!111 OMG WTF LOL LET DA NOMADS AND TEH S3D3NTARY PEOPLA BOTH MAEK BITER AXP3REINCES
          AND TEH GRAAT SINS OF THERE [DOCTRINAL] INOVATIONS BQU3ATH3D SMAL
          AND!!1!11!!! LOL JUST IN CAES A DISPUTANT CALS U 2 DISPUT3 ABOUT THEYRE CLAMES
          DO NOT THAN DISPUT3 ON THEM 3XCAPT BY WAY OF AN 3XTARNAL DISPUTA!!!!11!! WTF

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by LordShiva
            Core 2 Duo processors, to be precise

            I guess the game could benefit even if it doesn't use both cores, as long as many of your background processes do. FWIW the game screams on my E6600.
            Even into the late-game stage? On what sort of mapsize - even the large ones? I am mindful of late-game slowdowns in particular, especially with the next expansion focussing so heavily on this era.
            Consul.

            Back to the ROOTS of addiction. My first missed poll!

            Comment


            • #7
              Ultimately it all comes down to the question of how patient you are. Of course you won't get instantaneous turns in 1900 AD on the biggest maps. But I've never experienced any long waiting times, either.
              Solver, WePlayCiv Co-Administrator
              Contact: solver-at-weplayciv-dot-com
              I can kill you whenever I please... but not today. - The Cigarette Smoking Man

              Comment


              • #8
                That's good to know. Thanks for the assurances, guys.

                Hey! OMFG. You're looking at Poly's newest Deity.
                Consul.

                Back to the ROOTS of addiction. My first missed poll!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by MrWhereItsAt
                  That's good to know. Thanks for the assurances, guys.

                  Hey! OMFG. You're looking at Poly's newest Deity.
                  Cool!

                  See, I'm Emperor!
                  I have spent too much time with Con and picked up some bad spamming habits.
                  Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Congrats on your, uhm, enthusiastic membership .
                    Solver, WePlayCiv Co-Administrator
                    Contact: solver-at-weplayciv-dot-com
                    I can kill you whenever I please... but not today. - The Cigarette Smoking Man

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Civ runs very smoothly on my dual core. I don't know if one or two cores are being used though
                      Formerly known as "CyberShy"
                      Carpe Diem tamen Memento Mori

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I still don't know what system bottleneck is with Civ4. I upgraded to a dual core, 3.4 GHz processor, and while the game loads faster and executes AI moves faster (not that that it was especially slow, anyway), I still get crashes on huge maps. 256 Mb video card, 1 GB RAM...
                        "I'm a guy - I take everything seriously except other people's emotions"

                        "Never play cards with any man named 'Doc'. Never eat at any place called 'Mom's'. And never, ever...sleep with anyone whose troubles are worse than your own." - Nelson Algren
                        "A single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic." - Joseph Stalin (attr.)

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          What graphics card?
                          You just wasted six ... no, seven ... seconds of your life reading this sentence.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Though it is probably the RAM; 2 GB is preferable for huge maps.
                            You just wasted six ... no, seven ... seconds of your life reading this sentence.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I just upgraded my pc to a core 2 duo 4300 (stock 1.8 GHz, running @ 3.3 GHz) with 2 GB of ram. CIV runs great. I agree with Krill, though, I believe it's more about the ram than anything.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X