Your Civ Environment

Heh. The latest CPUs, be them Intel or AMD, are waaaay faster than anything I can throw my money at. So, I'll take an older generation one instead.

If only you could assign a separate core to each civ (and keep two for yourself) . . .

vincentz said:

Well, I usually prefer Intel, but looking at prices and benchmarks, AMD certainly started to sound interesting

A quick build :

• CPU : Socket AM3+ FX-8350 4.0 GHz
• MOBO : Socket AM3+ Gigabyte GA-970A-DS3P
• RAM : 2x4096MB DDR3 1600 MHz CL9 (Crucial)
• HD : 1 TB Seagate Barracuda ST1000DM003
• SSD : 250 GB Samsung 840 EVO
• PSU : 500 Watt Cooler Master G500
• CASE : Cooler Master Elite 344
• OS : Windows 7 x64 (Already have)
• GPU : AMD Radeon HD 7790 1 GB (Already have)

Click to expand...

Nice list, but I would get a larger PSU. Around 600 to 750W should do the trick. Those FX-8350's take a lot of power. I know because I have one.

AdamCrock said:

Yeah the /3GB switch really works wonders with Realism Invictus It works on my Win XP home 32 bit !! And yes it works with virtual memory wtih only 2GB RAM of physical - so the disk write/read speed really does makes a difference. I have "Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 ST3320613AS" and it has performed admirably imho. It works on somewhat outdated SATA II , has ~100MB/s average read/write speed (most benchmarks indicate). The origianl world map provided worked rather smoothly up until the industrial era with the whole world map and all of the civs discovered. The momory still can be overloaded. I ocasionaly got MAFs after 2-3 hours of playing that map. On a standard map however I didn't have any MAFs and finished via space ship so it really works I must confess however Im affraid to play world map after industrial because I fear I might damage my comp components - especially the graphics card - got some anomalies as well as monitor screen turning all black - not good , maybe the danger is that after running out of memory civ tries to adress the GPU memory o.O - that would be horrible :O

I still have my old 16" CRT too ! ^^ Nostalgia would not let me get rid of it and even still I don't have nearly enough space to put him on my desk, let alone as a second monitor

edit: Would it be any good if I bought additional RAM and upgrade to 64-bit system liek Win 7 ? I am asking because my motherboard is up to ddr2 and there are faster standards today than that . Come to think of it what is ddr standard these days ? ddr 3 ? ddr 4 !? :O I feel like I've been out of the loop for so long

Click to expand...

That's pretty nice that /3GB works with virtual memory, too. And that's pretty respectable for a 250 GB hard drive. Much better than the old 5400 RPM drive I was putting virtual memory on in 2005.

Thinking way back, I do recall one Civ4 game where I had an issue with the map being black, and only the overlays displaying. I think it was the first time I played, as the Romans, and a driver update fixed it. It wasn't the whole monitor turning black, though. And that computer had 128 MB VRAM and 512 MB total at the time, so it was well below what you have now. I've never heard of GPU memory accidentally being overwritten, but it's hard to say what's going on when artifacts are involved.

Additional RAM likely would help, particularly on the really big maps with virtual memory in use. Intel just launched their first consumer CPUs with DDR4 support last week, but DDR3 is still going to be 99% of new computer sales for awhile, likely until the start of next year. DDR3 is faster, but the main performance difference isn't the speed of the memory so much as having enough to avoid having virtual memory written to the hard drive (even low-end DDR2 is still an order of magnitude faster than an SSD). With a 32-bit OS, you'll only be able to use 3 to 3.5 GB of memory maximum, though. The exact amount varies by computer; my laptop with XP 32-bit can use 3.5 GB of the 4 GB of DDR2 I have installed. So switching to 64-bit could help, too, but it would only help if you upgraded your memory to beyond what your computer can use with XP 32-bit first.

It's also worth noting that 64-bit OS'es use more memory than 32-bit. So let's say you upgraded to 3.5 GB physical memory, and your computer could use 3.25 GB. It probably wouldn't make sense to upgrade to a 64-bit OS, because it would use most if not all of the 256 MB of memory you'd be gaining by itself. Going from XP 32-bit to Windows 7 64-bit, you're probably looking at 512 MB - 768 MB additional RAM use at idle. Add 256 MB on each end if going to Vista 64-bit, subtract 256 MB on each end for XP x64, and it's probably about the same as for 7 if you're going to 8.x.

Mec AntiKythera said:

If only you could assign a separate core to each civ (and keep two for yourself) . . .

Click to expand...

Yeah, that's the thing... an octo-core FX would likely be great for my work environment, where the CPU bottlenecks tend to be multithreaded. But Civ4 (and even Civ5) can only use one thread for the AI. Although... Lemon Merchant may be a good person to ask if some of the AI mods have solved that and allowed the AI to be at least somewhat multi-threaded.

Lemon Merchant said:

Nice list, but I would get a larger PSU. Around 600 to 750W should do the trick. Those FX-8350's take a lot of power. I know because I have one.

Click to expand...

I was kinda hoping someone would write this. I put the build into http://pcpartpicker.com/ and it said 314 watt, which I thought was very low (???). The graphic card I have (AMD 7790) have a very low power consumption though (400 Watt PSU required) which is why I picked it in the first place. I have a Intel Core2 Duo E7300 CPU (65 Watt) and the FX-8350 is 125 watt.
The 500 Watt PSU I used in the build is Bronze 80+ though (mine is a nonamer 400 watt), so I thought it might be enough (though leaving no room for a gpu upgrade later), but you are probably right.

Quintillus said:

.... Intel just launched their first consumer CPUs with DDR4 support last week, but DDR3 is still going to be 99% of new computer sales for awhile, likely until the start of next year.....

Click to expand...

I was actually going to answer AdamCrock that it was still DDR3, but wanted to make sure, when I found out that DDR4 is available. Though its pretty expensive.
Turns out that DDR3 RAM was introduced back in 2007! Same year Steve Jobs introduced the first iPhone.
New DDR4 is twice (2.1) times as fast as DDR3, and uses less voltage. What I dont understand though is why the CAS Latency is so much higher than DDR3, as iirc CAS should be as low as possible?

Thanks for all the info Quintillus ! ^^ I think that going for 4 GB RAM and win XP x64 or win 7 x64 would solve all of my civ problems GPU upgrade would probably be sensible too but than I would probably need new mobo. I need to think about it, maybe it's time to save some money and buy a new rig.

@Vincentz : How is Your AMD Radeon HD 7790 1 GB performing ? Is it expensive these days ?

I've also checked Sapphire R9 280X Lemon suggested and I must say wow ! Indeed very delicious piece of hardwere mmmm.... ^^ ! If only I had the cash I would definitely buy it ! ... for now prices vary between 1/4 (on auction portals) to 1/2 (in shops) of my month's wage ! No to say I would definitely need a completely new mobo and CPU to match it ..... ;O

Yes, low latency means quicker response, for equal cycle speed that is. I'm not an expert but just did some reading on the subject and if I understand it, please correct me if I'm wrong, the latency is per cycle not per second. That means if you are doing twice as many cycles in a second and you keep the latency the same (in absolute terms) it would be twice as high per cycle. At least that is what I can make of it, I'm sure other folks here know this stuff better than I do.

You guys are really making me want to build that desktop I've been thinking about.

Mec AntiKythera said:

Yes, low latency means quicker response, for equal cycle speed that is. I'm not an expert but just did some reading on the subject and if I understand it, please correct me if I'm wrong, the latency is per cycle not per second. That means if you are doing twice as many cycles in a second and you keep the latency the same (in absolute terms) it would be twice as high per cycle. At least that is what I can make of it, I'm sure other folks here know this stuff better than I do.

You guys are really making me want to build that desktop I've been thinking about.

Click to expand...

Yeah, that makes absolutely sense. Just cleaning up old drawers to make space for new baby clothing, and I find 2 x 512 MB DDR(1) RAM. Sticker says 400 MHz and CL3 (CAS Latency). Makes sense todays (or rather last weeks ) RAM is about 1600 MHz and 7-11 CAS. Maybe I should send them to AdamCrock for upgrading his PC

@ AdamCrock
Hope u took the above joke well (unless u are actually using DDR1 RAM and have 2 slots open, in which case I'll send them to you for free )
Iirc I bought the Gigabyte HD 7790 1GB on sale for around 100$, though the dollar was higher atm. A quick check now (in Denmark) I cant find it, prolly because the XXX series have taken over the XXXX series, but a similar Club3D 7790 is around 130$. (then take away the 25% VAT we have in Denmark and prolly some import TAX as well).
I have been really happy with it. Its not a monster card, but what suprised me the most was that it can run a 3d-shooter game like ARMA II, which is an openworld mil-sim, with pretty decent framerates at 5040x1050 resolution on 3 monitor Eyefinity setup with Normal to High Graphic settings. (It also runs Skyrim same settings pretty well, but never really got caught up with Skyrim. Too freezing cold I guess).
I had a lot of crashes from it, and thought it was either too small PSU (I have an old noname 400 Watt), or even a defective card, but it turned out that it was a NVIDIA driver I installed (or system installed) while I still had the Nvidia GT9800 card. Removing the driver and I havent had a single crash since. Funny thing was, the crash would NEVER come when doing graphic intensive work/gaming, which in the end made me think it was a driver or setting.

Edit : A quick compare shows the R7 260x as the closest to the HD 7790, though it uses a lot more power (115 vs 85 watt). And the prices of 7790 is still pretty high internationally. Makes me appreciate my purchase at the time even more

@Vincentz : I don't mind the joke Not at all I have currently ddr2 installed so sadly this stickers You've found wont match If they would be ddr2 however I would take You up on Your offer ! ^^ Thanks for the info on Your Radeon I think that Gigabyte GPU's work better with games than Nvidia ones and it is my personal opinion that they run on more efficient drivers it's no wonder Your comp crashed with two sets of drivers installed hehe ( unfortunately I have Nvidia now :O ) Ah Skyrim how I wish I could play thee ! xD Right now Im squeezing the s** out of my GPU with Oblivion varouis modifications like ENB's and various graphical enchancements and hi-res textures goodies etc. Oblivion imho with all of the enchantments istalled can eaisly match the quality of the games nowadays - it also somewhat matches the requirements either so sometimes I need to restrain myself with upgrades xD Thx again for all the info ! ^^

vincentz said:

Yeah, that makes absolutely sense. Just cleaning up old drawers to make space for new baby clothing, and I find 2 x 512 MB DDR(1) RAM. Sticker says 400 MHz and CL3 (CAS Latency). Makes sense todays (or rather last weeks ) RAM is about 1600 MHz and 7-11 CAS.

Click to expand...

That is it exactly. Each new generation appears to be a big step backwards in latency. Just takes some getting used to is all. Funny that you just came across those old sticks to illustrate the point.

I'm still waiting for the day when my I7 980 cant run games maxed out with a GPU upgrade.

I also have old elipda ram that runs at 1866 Mhz 7-8-7-18 timings.

Quintillus said:

But Civ4 (and even Civ5) can only use one thread for the AI. Although... Lemon Merchant may be a good person to ask if some of the AI mods have solved that and allowed the AI to be at least somewhat multi-threaded.

Click to expand...

AFAIK, C2C claims to have made the DLL more multi-threaded, but I don't know how that's possible. Civ's game engine is only single threaded and that can't be changed.

vincentz said:

New DDR4 is twice (2.1) times as fast as DDR3, and uses less voltage. What I dont understand though is why the CAS Latency is so much higher than DDR3, as iirc CAS should be as low as possible?

Click to expand...

DDR4 is relatively expensive now. I wouldn't really recommend a DDR4 build to anyone currently unless they absolutely have to have the top performance (such as if they're making their income that way and performance is money, even well after the point of diminishing returns for most people).

Whether it's twice as fast (even leaving latency aside) depends on the case. While some manufacturers have demoed DDR4 3200 MHz, most of what's available now is 2133 MHz or 2400 MHz, and high-end DDR3 reaches that as well. Kind of like how when DDR3 came out, you had DDR3 at 800 MHz and 1066 MHz, but high-end DDR2 could reach that as well. Doubtless DDR4 will hit considerably higher speeds with time, but it's not going to make a big performance difference today, even in use cases where memory bandwidth is important.

So if you compare mainstream DDR3 (1600 MHz) to what will likely become mainstream DDR4 (3200 MHz), it will be twice as fast. But for what's available now at similar prices, it might not be any faster. The DDR4 price premium will also buy you high-end DDR3.

Mec AntiKythera is correct about CAS latency. Kind of one of the dirty secrets of the memory industry is that over the past 10-15 years, the actual latency (once you factor in the number of cycles increasing as the frequency increases) has remained more or less constant, not improving very much with each generation. It's not a huge deal, but it is an area where the potential for it being a bottleneck has increased considerably by 10-15 years of being basically the same. It turns out it's been pretty difficult to get it much below 10 ns. High-end kits will be a bit below that, perhaps 7 ns, but mainstream has not changed much from the 10-12.5 ns range for years.

AdamCrock said:

Thanks for all the info Quintillus ! ^^ I think that going for 4 GB RAM and win XP x64 or win 7 x64 would solve all of my civ problems GPU upgrade would probably be sensible too but than I would probably need new mobo. I need to think about it, maybe it's time to save some money and buy a new rig.

Click to expand...

If your graphics card uses a PCI Express connection, then it should be possible to upgrade it without upgrading the motherboard. It's the CPU that very often requires a new mobo. If it's old enough to be using AGP, you would need a new mobo for a substantial improvement, but if I had to guess based on your specs, I'd say it probably is new enough to be using PCI Express.

Lemon Merchant said:

AFAIK, C2C claims to have made the DLL more multi-threaded, but I don't know how that's possible. Civ's game engine is only single threaded and that can't be changed.

Click to expand...

Interesting; too bad it wasn't the answer I was hoping to hear (although it is the one I expected). C2C has done some interesting things, although I haven't looked into it a whole lot in the recent past.

Seven cores sitting around watching the eighth play Civ for hours could lead to a serious case of core-envy and a possible mutiny. It could get ugly.

Lemon Merchant said:

AFAIK, C2C claims to have made the DLL more multi-threaded, but I don't know how that's possible. Civ's game engine is only single threaded and that can't be changed.

Click to expand...

Well... theoretically, it's still possible if the AI is encoded in a .dll (wasn't that how it was implemented in mods?). So, when the game engine transfers execution to the AI .dll, the .dll can spin separate threads. And do scatter/gather processing.

Theoretically, of course.

Mec AntiKythera said:

Seven cores sitting around watching the eighth play Civ for hours could lead to a serious case of core-envy and a possible mutiny. It could get ugly.

Click to expand...

You really should build a Theater + Colliseum for them

Mec AntiKythera said:

Seven cores sitting around watching the eighth play Civ for hours could lead to a serious case of core-envy and a possible mutiny. It could get ugly.

Click to expand...

They don't really sit around. They do all of the Windows housekeeping, leaving the Civ core all to itself. At at 4 GHz turn times are minimal.

pepoluan said:

Well... theoretically, it's still possible if the AI is encoded in a .dll (wasn't that how it was implemented in mods?). So, when the game engine transfers execution to the AI .dll, the .dll can spin separate threads. And do scatter/gather processing.

Theoretically, of course.

Click to expand...

In that case, BULL, The BAT Mod, and Better BAT AI are all multi-threaded by that definition. They are all compiled with the multi-thread compiler and linker switches on.

I don't think it's really multi-threaded, but I do see a lot of parallel CPU activity when I play and monitor my cores in the other screen. One core does dominate, though.

Why do I have a vision of you in a mansion with eight servants, one providing entertainment and seven washing windows? That's a lot of Windows btw.

Mec AntiKythera said:

Why do I have a vision of you in a mansion with eight servants, one providing entertainment and seven washing windows? That's a lot of Windows btw.

Click to expand...

You forgot the one organizing, cateloging, and planning her shoes for various days, events and mood swings .

Mec AntiKythera said:

Why do I have a vision of you in a mansion with eight servants, one providing entertainment and seven washing windows? That's a lot of Windows btw.

Click to expand...

I guess that if You have 2 monitors (now I see why people have more than 1) and enough RAM You can play another game on the second monitor like FPS, racing, maybe even something online just waiting for the AI's in Civ make their turns !!!!

btw. Is it possible to open 8 different instances of CIV for each core ? or play CIV 1,2,3 and 4 simultaneously on 4 monitors !

Lemon Merchant said:

In that case, BULL, The BAT Mod, and Better BAT AI are all multi-threaded by that definition. They are all compiled with the multi-thread compiler and linker switches on.

I don't think it's really multi-threaded, but I do see a lot of parallel CPU activity when I play and monitor my cores in the other screen. One core does dominate, though.

Click to expand...

I hope it's that simple...

Turning on multithread flag only 'enables' multithread API to be called. The binary must still 'build' a 'task' to be executed in parallel via the multithread API.

But it's an interesting mind experiment anyways. Hmm... let me see if I can make K-mod run in multithreaded (already forked karadoc's github).