Civ5 using DX11 Graphics: The way it's meant to be played!

^Just note that by default DX10/11 mode has 4xAA, while DX9 mode has none. When comparing performance, both need to be turned off. I mean, it is expected for DX10/11 mode to run slower with AA on, compared to DX9 with AA off.


P.S.
Anyone tried benchmarking difference between DX10/11 mode with AA at 4x, and DX9 mode with 4xAA added through drivers?
 
This is completely incorrect, DX10 does NOT have tessellation. This was implemented into DX11 cards, and even if DX10 manage to support it, it would not be able to run it as none of the DX10 cards have dedicated tessellation processing like the HD 5000 and GTX 400 range does.

Do your homework on DX11, DX10 CANNOT even run this:



Its funny that DX11 and Tessellation are working so great in Civ V, but as usual, tech noobs on the forums are quick to write it off as something that is meaningless and would work on older hardware when it absolutely wouldnt.

Well the Tessellation setting in the game makes a difference for me, on High the mountains and hills are incredibly crisp and detailed (super high polycount), while at medium and low the reduction is easily visible.
I'm running a 250GTS, a dx10 card, so..

I'm talking about the ingame settings, what else would we be talking about?
I know that tessellation on the fly (reducing and increasing by zoom level) is only in dx11, but the tessellation setting in the game definetly works and has an effect in dx10 as well.
Maybe they should just rename that setting to "Terrain polycount" to avoid confusion amongst the tech-nazis ^_^
 
My freaking God... A mod should do something about all the c**p going on here. Have you even played the game you dummie?! In the launcher, you have two options: DX9 and DX10/11. And if there were three options, why wouldn't you be able to select DX10 with a DX11 card anyway you basher? Gosh...

If you'd read my original reply properly, you would have understood, so I'll try to make it simple for you.

Someone wanted to do a DX10 vs DX11 comparison.

If you have a DX9/10 card you can't do the comparison because you can't take advantage of DX11.

If you have a DX11 card you can't do the comparison because you can only select DX10/11 or DX9.

The only way to do a DX10 vs DX11 comparison with a DX11 GPU would be if they'd added DX10 as a separate option.
 
^Not really. As mentioned before in thread, you can manually disable 5.0 codepath in the ini files.

So essentially, DX11 card can run with just DX10 features enabled, if you wanted so.

Thus, with DX11 card, you can do DX11 vs DX10 comparison.
 
The HD 4870 and HD 4890 (and 4850?) have a tessellation unit. From what I can tell from my own tests, tessellation DOES work on these cards, even though they are DX10. This may or may not be related to the fact that they have a tessellation unit, because geometry tessellation is possible in DX9, DX10, and DX11 through various means, though DX11 is vastly more efficient at it. I just know that with all of the settings on High with my HD 4870, the framerate takes a pounding when I scroll, but it's a solid 60fps when the camera does not move very much. This may be because I have a dual core CPU, though. It may also be because of the tessellation.

I concur on the tessellation unit on the 4870 & 4890 (as stated in the specifications on AMD's site) and while I'm sure it's not nearly as efficient as something that's native DX11, on my 4870 crossfire setup, I don't notice any performance hit on any setting of tessallation, but I do see a noticeable visual quality improvement on higher tessallation settings, so it's definitely doing something and the lack of performance hit seems to indicate that I am seeing some hardware accelleration at work there.

I also get the scrolling issue and that's really the only time anywhere in the game (aside from end of turn when I'm sure I'm CPU throttled) that I get any choppiness at all and as soon as you stop scrolling, it goes back to full speed and there's no visual quality hit while scrolling, so I don't think it's altering visual quality during a scroll or anything. Hoping this is something patchable.
 
I hope you guys are getting a little kickback for this... you just sold me.
 
Scrolling choppiness is CPU limiting factor.

If you, for example, reduce number of cores that game process uses (from taskbar), scrolling choppiness will be much higher, while when not moving anything frame rate will stay the same, regardless of number of cores used.
 
Scrolling choppiness is CPU limiting factor.

If you, for example, reduce number of cores that game process uses (from taskbar), scrolling choppiness will be much higher, while when not moving anything frame rate will stay the same, regardless of number of cores used.

Does using more than 2 cores actually reduce the scrolling choppiness? And if it does, how well does it scale with more cores?
 
Im looking to buy a new laptop, and wanted it to be the best possible for CIV V. Can someone post a link to a laptop that would play CIV V at its highest settings? I have about a $2,000 budget.
 
If you'd read my original reply properly, you would have understood, so I'll try to make it simple for you.

Someone wanted to do a DX10 vs DX11 comparison.

If you have a DX9/10 card you can't do the comparison because you can't take advantage of DX11.

If you have a DX11 card you can't do the comparison because you can only select DX10/11 or DX9.

The only way to do a DX10 vs DX11 comparison with a DX11 GPU would be if they'd added DX10 as a separate option.

That makes much more sense. My anger continues because of your attitude towards DX10 that is totally unjustified.

Peace.

PS: Also, I notice huge difference between DX10/11 and DX9 on my Radeon HD4890, particularly in textures that are much more detailed in DX10. But DX10 runs around 40% slower. So that is a heads up for all of you that want to know if there's a difference.
 
You should charge fair market value for advertisements on your website rather than having moderators post advertorials.

I thought Civfanatics was better than being someone's viral marketing pawn. This is simply very bad editorial judgement in my opinion. You guys are getting used hardcore.

The OP even used "the way it's meant to be played" Nvidia slogan.
 
After installing and running the game, I encountered no problems with it DX10/DX11 mode.

All settings on high and 1920x1200 resolution.

Core i7 920, 6 Gb RAM, ATI 4870 512 MB Oc'd. Win 7 x64
 
Someone tell me why a sales pitch for an unnecessary graphics card is stickied here. Civ used to be about game play, not shiny :):):):).
 
After installing and running the game, I encountered no problems with it DX10/DX11 mode.

All settings on high and 1920x1200 resolution.

Core i7 920, 6 Gb RAM, ATI 4870 512 MB Oc'd. Win 7 x64

Strange... What do you mean by "no problems"? What is the framerate? I have a similar PC (6GB RAM, Phenom II 955 @ 3.6GHz + HD4890 1GB @ 910/1010Mhz, Win7 x64) and I have a pretty rubbish framerate (sometimes drops to around 30). I run it on 1680x1050.
 
Strange... What do you mean by "no problems"? What is the framerate? I have a similar PC (6GB RAM, Phenom II 955 @ 3.6GHz + HD4890 1GB @ 910/1010Mhz, Win7 x64) and I have a pretty rubbish framerate (sometimes drops to around 30). I run it on 1680x1050.
It plays really smoothly, which is all that counts.

How do I check the frame-rate ?
 
I have a similar system I built myself and I play the game in DX11 mode with all settings on high:

i7 920 @ 3.8GHz
XFX 5870 (ATI CCC settings at maximum quality)
6GB RAM
26" monitor @ 1920x1200
Windows 7 64bit

Starting a new game running Fraps the FPS seem to be capped at 60 because it doesn't go any lower and doesn't go any higher.

I then loaded my current game where I'm on turn 235 and things are pretty busy and playing at my usual zoom level I get between 45-50 fps, but if I zoom all the way out it drops down to around 35.

Changing my settings from "quality" to "performance" would probably speed things up, but it plays OK for me.
 
Top Bottom