Question for spec

My questions I would prefer someone who knows computer more than me and give me some useful information.
Throughout the forums I see some asking as they give theirs and ask what is best whilst members give them the requirement URL however it does not help them much as they can't tell if 460GT is better than Ati HD 5450. (not insulting and do not insult me over this but it is kind of annoying as some will assume there GPU is better than the recommended)

So I basically would like to know what CPU do you guys recommend to give fast turn times in civilization V gameplay. Like on a huge map or something.

I am going to build my own computer soon but I would like some recommendations for civ 5, civ 4 Beyond recommended specs. I know it will limit me from playing some older games like simcity 4 (I played it with 460GT and it was very choppy)

Give me a list of some stuff you recommend or personal experience.
Thank you for reading/responding and cooperating

Happy Waging War Day

A quad core CPU with over 3Ghz will give the best performance.

Intel:
Core i5 760 (Quad Core 2.80Ghz)
Core i7 950 (Quad Core 3.06Ghz with hyperthreading - runs as eight cores increasing power)
Core i7 960 (Quad Core 3.20Ghz with hyperthreading - runs as eight cores increasing power)

Hyperthreading isn't used very much by Civ V meaning that for Civ V it will make only a little difference to have those extra four cores, but other programs can run on them while you play Civ V and games in the future will probably use this feature more.

Getting an i7 will also require you to get triple channel RAM (meaning at least 6GB DDR3 in three separate RAM sticks).

I have a GTX 460 1GB (factory overclocked) which runs Civ V in the DX10/11 client on highest settings with only a little lag late game on big maps (also have a 2.3Ghz Core2 Quad and 4GB DDR. The recommended specs say a 9800, but the game killed my 9800 when I got my 1920x1080 monitor. RAM)

Thanks your answer i7 is expensive! I'll probably stick with the I5 4 cores processor.

I'm sorry about the game murdering your GpU who was innocent (r.i.p). The GTX 460 is amazing no doubt as I played BFBC2 in 1080 pixels it was beautiful! As I plan, I plan to get GTX 460 again then 9600Gt so I can play Simcity 4 and older games with out graphic problems.

Thanks again!

P.S
I never played your scenarios but I find the second one interesting I like it

No, you will not get any benefit from more than two cores for the turn times
Where Civ5 does make some use of more than that is for the graphics, which is extremely CPU dependent. See the benchmarks referenced here.

On the other hand if you do some stuff besides Civ with your computer, it will be a good idea to go for a quad core, or at least a dual core with hyperthreading. Most definately a i7 is not worth the price premium for the average user (more expensive boards+CPU), so a i5 is indeed a good idea.

If you can postpone the new computer for a few weeks, the bug-fixed Sandy Bridge mainboards will be available, so you could get a system with a i5-2500 which will be quite a bit faster than the i5-760 for the same price.

I guess that is true.

Which reminds although I know it's not related to civ except the patient part.

Will the i5 2500 and nvidia 460GT give me 60+ fps on flight simulator X maxed out without AA,DX 10 enabled?

Strange story I have.

Before my place burned down in December 26, 2010 (right after Christmas! )
My desktop wasn't the best but it was the best I had.

Amd Athlon ii 650 quad core 2.8 ghz
4 gig ram
Hd 5450 512 mb testing in FSX
= avg fps Is 15 - 26

Gt9800 512mb = 12 - 24 (FSX)
20 - 40 ( civ 5 )

GTX 460 1Gb
5- 12 (FSX)
50+ ( CIV 5 DX 11)
60+ ( CIV 5 DX 9 )

Good cards I must say but GTX 460 failed FSX I hear it needs a great CPU like 3.0 ghz and 8 cores but still how did GTX 460 test was successful with a 2010 game but not 2006? I'm not saying FSX is better ( I prefer FSX and CIV 3,5).

FSX as a 5 year old game will most likely not profit from a multicore CPU, like civ5 it will react more to CPU clockspeed and cache size/speed. Your fps results for FSX and the different video cards are inconsistent with the relative speed of the cards, sure that you used the same settings each time? GTX 460 >> 9800GT >> HD5450

60 fps maxed out? Unlikely.

Not same setting because the HD 5450 would run on lower fps.

Anyway thanks for the answer I find it sad that FSX is a horrible CPU eater .
But FS9 I ran maxed out literally on 100+ with GTX460. I am currently waiting for FS flight to come out it is said it will not be like FSX with it's fps problem anyway thanks again