Advice needed: Buying a CivIV Computer

[Willem]

You could also try an older driver. One time I had installed the latest ATI driver and I was experiencing alot of lag and slowdown in my game. Reverting to an older version cleared it up.

[Baldyr]

I'm spending this evening trying out some older drivers and tomorrow I'll try to install another graphics card, just for the hell of it. (I've got my eye on a pre-used PowerColor Radeon HD 3870.) I'll also see if my vendor can't change the card to something else. (Heck, I'll settle for anything as long as it plays .)

I haven't installed anything else than and graphics drivers/utilities on this machine as of yet. I don't plan on playing any other games either...

I've tried the last two Catalyst drivers and some Omega Drivers (they don't seem all too recent) but I really can't see any difference in gameplay. One minute its lightning fast and then it just bogs down and get unresponsive.


edit: It seems like the system/card runs out of memory or falls behind in its calculations. Typically everything works very nicely the first few seconds of every new turn, but then it just goes downhill – until the computer/game has managed to catch up after waiting 10-20 sec. for the AI. I really don't know if the problem gets worse in the long run or not, because by then I have already saved the game to try something else (after deleting the cache, of course).

[lord of the mark]

Hey. Im looking to buy Civ 4 now.

My PC has 1.5 gig of RAM (I use XP) Will that be a problem playing vanilla? I can wait for BTS.

Whats with "burning out a video card"? How does that work? Ive got IG, but not the worst (ATI 200 Radeon Express, or something) Its supposed to be enough for Civ4. Civ wont destroy my IG will it? Ive been hoping to defer a little buying a discrete card (Id like to spend under $80, or even under $70 = the cheaper 8600s are there already, and maybe if I wait the 8800s will held closer to that range)

[Solver]

Baldyr, I'd still try another game if you have one available. Or download a demo maybe - basically to check if the poor performance only happens with Civ4 or is a bigger problem.

[Baldyr]

lord of the mark: Its always a gamble with - it might work or it might not. If not, try fixing it (if you're a computer technician) or get another PC.

[Baldyr]

Cancer Man: I hear ya! I'll have my fiancée blast away some innocent bystanders in GTA or something...

[Baldyr]

This is an image from RivaTuner showing my GPU usage when I just closed down the game. Does that pattern look normal in any way?

[Baldyr]

Now I can't install older display drivers (Catalyst). It sure is fun to play .

[Targonis]

Originally posted by Baldyr
Now I can't install older display drivers (Catalyst). It sure is fun to play .

This type of error shows up from time to time on new computers. Unfortunately there are several reasons why you may be getting the problem:

1: Bad RAM(memory). If you have a bad memory module in there, the information will be corrupted, which will cause downloads to become corrupted. Many companies that sell computers use a standard hard drive image to save time(and expenses), so the machine is never really tested to see if it can even install Windows properly(errors tend to show up while installing from CD).

2: Bad motherboard. The chipset on the motherboard is what handles the connections between most components in the system. Since the hard drive controller is normally built into the chipset, a problem with the motherboard can cause problems that can make the CPU, RAM(memory), video card, or hard drive. Since you download to the hard drive, a chipset problem can cause things you download/save to become corrupted.

3: Bad drivers for the motherboard/chipset. The Nforce 4 chipset had some really really bad drivers, and I have seen cases where the drivers would break and problems similar to yours would show up. In general the drivers should NOT be a make or break for a motherboard, but in the case of some motherboards, I have seen the drivers make all the difference.

4: A virus can in theory cause the sort of problem you are seeing, though these days, spyware is a bigger concern. Still, there are a LOT of true viruses out there that could be attaching themselves to what you download, so it becomes corrupted.

[Targonis]

Since there are people besides the original poster who are reading this thread, I figured I would go back and answer the original question, since I like to think I have a pretty good grasp of things(even if my Civ 4 playing skills may not compare well to others).

There are three primary components in any computer. The CPU(Central Processing Unit or processor for short), the GPU(Graphics Processing Unit, which handles graphics), and the RAM(Random Access Memory, which is where the CPU gets it's information/instructions). In addition to these three components, the hard drive is where everything(including Windows, Linux, or whatever operating system you want to run) is kept. All of these things are connected to/through the motherboard(with a governing chipset which controls the connections between the components).

Those are the basic components you will see for any computer. For Civ, the most important is the CPU. Since the computer handles the running of AI civilizations, a faster CPU will reduce the time between turns. Sure, you can PLAY the game on a slower processor, and it will work fine, but you will find yourself waiting much longer between turns. For Civ 4, the fastest dual-core processor from Intel will be your best bet. I personally use an AMD processor in my system, but I try to be objective when giving advice.

For the graphics/GPU, the more GPU power you have, the more features you can turn on and the smoother the game will be as you zoom out. As others have said, you can play the game on a Geforce 5500, but I wouldn't suggest playing that way with all the graphics options set to the highest detail and then zooming out. As a result, it DOES make sense to go with something more powerful. NVIDIA with their Geforce series of cards has held the lead in overall performance, but the new Radeon HD 4000 series of cards, most notably the 4850 and 4870 have allowed ATI/AMD to catch up and possibly hold a slight lead depending on the application. If you have a video card with 512 megs or more of memory on it, you will find a definite benefit over cards with only 256 megs. No one who wants to play ANY computer game should go with Intel for the graphics. This means that Centrino based laptops should be avoided, since the Centrino name REQUIRES the bad Intel graphics. Desktop computers can also have integrated Intel graphics, and everyone complains about them when it comes to gameplaying ability.

For the amount of memory, for Windows XP, you will want a minimum of 2GB(2048MB) of RAM. For Vista, 3GB is your minimum. You will see faster or slower memory used in different computers, but the performance difference will not go above 10 percent(which may be enough for some people to go with better memory).

When it comes to Windows, there are some misconceptions about what can and can not be handled by different versions, and what works well or poorly. First, any 32 bit Operating System(OS) will be limited to giving any application 4GB of memory as a maximum. This means that Windows XP(except the 64 bit version), Vista, or even Linux will cap out at 4GB of RAM for any one program. Due to the design of Windows XP, and Vista, you have an effective limit of 2GB of RAM being used for any game, though this can be adjusted a bit. Still, this is a rather unpleasant limit that is imposed by the design of Windows.

In any 32 bit OS, all memory MUST be mapped(allocated) under the 4GB mark. Every component, including your video card memory must go under the 4GB mark. This is why people with 4GB of system memory only see 3.2GB or so of memory under Windows XP or 32 bit versions of Windows Vista. With 64 bit Windows, this problem goes away, so you will see all of your memory.

The issues people have with 64 bit Windows XP and 32 or 64 bit Windows Vista are all related to the quality of the drivers. The drivers are the component within the OS(Windows in this case) that let the OS know how to talk to any piece of equipment, from USB to graphics, to sound, and even your printer or USB flash drive. If the drivers have problems, it will seem like the equipment is having a problem. Since VERY few people run 64 bit Windows XP, very little effort was ever put in to make the drivers work well. This is why people saw so many problems with 64 bit XP. For Vista, many more people are running the 64bit version, so the driver quality is much better. Just keep in mind that some companies have really poor drivers(Creative Labs being one of them). NVIDIA driver quality has been fairly low for a while now when it comes to Vista as well. Still, it's an issue to consider when people say that something sucks.

Vista is really not that bad at this point, but driver quality isn't as good as the driver quality of Windows XP, just because XP has been around since 2001/2002. Think about it, it makes sense that after 6+ years we will have good drivers for Windows XP, but the quality may not be as good after only 1-2 years of Vista. I personally find that Vista runs fairly well as long as you don't have bad drivers. I've run into problems, but most of these are from things like SecuROM freaking out when I updated the firmware on my DVD-RW drive. My printer drivers may also be the source of some issues. Still, no matter what others may be saying, Vista isn't the nightmare that others make it out to be. AMD(they bought ATI) is still releasing new drivers every month, and the quality for Vista is pretty good. NVIDIA is still having some problems, but most of the big driver issues are resolved at this point. I wouldn't demonize Vista, though agree that Vista demands more resources than XP. As a result, you need more system memory under Vista, and a bit more CPU power as well. A new computer will have a lot more resources than the previous system, so you won't notice things being worse for the most part.

I'll shut up now, but Civ runs VERY well with Vista Home Premium 32 bit and a Radeon HD 2900XT, and Athlon 64 X2 5600+. Sure more CPU power would help, and would cost more money. The version upgrade is a big in Civ, so you will need to download the patch from a web site instead of doing it from inside the game.

[Baldyr]

Just a little report no my progress, or lack thereof:

I upgraded my Sapphire Radeon HD3850 to a Albatron GF 8800GT (at some additional expence), installed the latest nVidia drivers, created a new user in XP and re-installed . It's not a huge improvement but the graphics adapter is somewhat better, as one might expect. I've tried all sorts of settings for graphics and audio but they don't really effect the core problem. Which still is that the game plays in a jerky fashion and often fails to respond to commands without some delay. The interface is just a pain in the ass and detracts from the game-play.

I'd say the game is "playable" now but it's not at all the performance I was hoping to achieve. Our other computer (last years model) with a GF7600GS and a somewhat slower duo-core AMD processor is like a friggin' super computer in comparison, at least when it comes to . I loaded an old save of mine (same mod/scenario/Civ) on that machine and it all just looks and works like a charm – at the highest graphics settings and with all the bells'n'whistles might I add.

I suppose I could try out some different drivers for this new card, but the question is if that just isn't bad use of what's left of my free time this summer. Maybe I should just try to complete a game and shelf the entire game until I can get yet another computer – and some free time to boot. (My fiancée can have the CPU and the graphics adapter later, since they're newer than the ones she has now.) I really should try to play on the other computer, when available, and only switch to my own (lesser) machine when it's not available. This sucks!

I could also get some other graphics cards just to try them out, but that would involve spending even more money and investing yet more time. At this point I don't even think it's an issue with the GPU, but with the system in general. And I did try another game (GTA:SA) and it worked without any cliches with both graphics adapters. just doesn't seem to like my new computer, go figure. (I really don't need a computer that doesn't play , so I guess I could sell it or something. Anyone here need a computer that doesn't do ? I didn't think so...)

edit: No, the game isn't very playable at all. I've tried to play and the whole thing just gets bogged down periodically (see graph in earlier post). The GPU works for some 10 sec. and then it shuts down for 10 sec. and repeats the cycle enlessly. Or untill I turn the game off to try some other setting or configuration. Nothing seems to make it better, even though some tinkering makes it even worse...

[Willem]

Originally posted by Baldyr
At this point I don't even think it's an issue with the GPU, but with the system in general.

I'd tend to agree with you. If you've tried two different graphics cards from two different manufacturers, then your problem must lie somewhere else. Someone mentioned a bad RAM card, have to looked into that yet?

[Baldyr]

Now I've officially given up trying to get this computer to work with . The vendor can have it back and try and fix the problem or refund me or what ever. I don't think it can run the game anyway. Or I don't think wants to be run on it, same difference.

That's why I'm returning to you, good folk, with my original request – see the thread header! The plan is now to either go back to work prematurely – or to buy another computer right away, like tomorrow. This time I'm not gonna wait for delivery that may or may not happen, so I'm looking for a cheap pre-used fix. What about this machine, for example:

- Intel P4 3.2Ghz 1MB L2 S775
- 2GB DDR2 PC2-5300
- GF 8500GT 512MB

I'm only interested in playing the RFC mod (which is what I've always tried to emulate in my games anyway) at this point, so I'm guessing I'd have to learn some patience for the endgame... I'm willing to create a custom profile/user especially for though and turn off anything that I can in XP to save me some resources. Bare-bones, baby!

Would anyone discourage me from buying this unknown quantity for 64% of the cost of the dual core AMD machine (see specs above) I'm getting rid off? (I would off course try to get it a bit cheaper, but anyways.)

[Baldyr]

And here's another one:

- AMD Atholon x2 DualCore 5000+ 2,6Ghz
- 2GB DDR 800Mhz PC2-6400
- nVidia GF 8500GT 512MB

This one is about the same price (about $50 more) so I guess it would be my first choice. Thoughts?

edit: I just realized both machines are from the same guy, so I called him up and it turns out he assembles and sells computers. He's on holiday though, but he would probably be able to hook me up at a later date if I still need a machine.

[Baldyr]

Here's one (not from the same guy) in the same price range than the other two above (no HD included though):

- AMD Athlon x2 6000+ 3.0Ghz
- Gigabyte GA-M57SLI-S4 nForce 570 ATX
- LeadTek GF 8600GTS 256MB PCIe
- 3GB DDR2 800Mhz

This one can't be very dated, can it?