Performance is terrible, I am frustrated!

[boxleitnerb]

The game is fun so far, but the performance is so so bad. I am not speaking of choppy graphics, but the loading times of savegames. I can easily run around the block while the game loads, it takes like at least 70 seconds. Then when alt-tabbing to the desktop, and back to the game, for example to check email, it takes forever, too, to rebuild itself. And I have 2 GB RAM, it should be smooth like a baby butt.
And what is it with tha tile grid not being enabled by default when I load a savegame where it WAS enabled. Ok, click on the appropriate button and guess what: It takes another 20 or 30 seconds to enable the grid.
Sluggish and lame are not even adequate terms to describe the performance.
I am honestly thinking of selling the game and play Quake 4 or something - it looks awesomely better and runs like butter.

 

[rob.derosa]

The game is fun so far, but the performance is so so bad. I am not speaking of choppy graphics, but the loading times of savegames. I can easily run around the block while the game loads, it takes like at least 70 seconds. Then when alt-tabbing to the desktop, and back to the game, for example to check email, it takes forever, too, to rebuild itself. And I have 2 GB RAM, it should be smooth like a baby butt.
And what is it with tha tile grid not being enabled by default when I load a savegame where it WAS enabled. Ok, click on the appropriate button and guess what: It takes another 20 or 30 seconds to enable the grid.
Sluggish and lame are not even adequate terms to describe the performance.
I am honestly thinking of selling the game and play Quake 4 or something - it looks awesomely better and runs like butter.

well what system specs you have

save games load after 5 sefonds on mine. andi have 1gb of ram
maybe you have spyware or something?

 

[boxleitnerb]

Athlon64 3500+
2GB PC3200 RAM
ATI X800XT PE

The odd thing is, that while the game loads, there is not even HDD activity only bery briefly in the beginning of the loading process. I dont have any spyware or viruses, my PC is configured perfectly.
With all the zillion bugs the game has, that is no surprise to me.
By the way, more often than not, the game looses focus between the map and the menus, that are superimposed on it. I mentioned it in another thread that when you move the cursor over a button, it sometimes displays not the button function but the tile information.
This has to be a bug, because I had some instances where the keyboard would not be working in the save-game-screen, because the game does not recognize that it actually is in the save-game-screen but thinks it is still in map mode.
You say your game loads in 5 seconds, that is impossible. Maybe you use the quicksave function. That could be faster, but I doubt it to be much.

 

[Romanichine]

Did you try reducing the graphic level and see if the performance would increase?

 

[boxleitnerb]

Please read my post carefully again. I have a high-end graphics card and my problem is not with choppy graphics but with the games loading times.

 

[screwtype]

Boxleiter, you have a considerably better spec than I do and the game runs fine on my machine. And yes, savegames load in a few seconds. I have an Athlon 3000+, 1 Gig RAM and a Radeon 9800 Pro.

So possibly you have some sort of hardware incompatibility that hasn't been identified yet. Or maybe as the other guy said you have some spyware. Or it may be a driver problem. There are several possibilities, but with your specs the game should run great.

 

[Runriot]

Athlon64 3500+
2GB PC3200 RAM
ATI X800XT PE

Fragmentation either in general, or of the swap file could easily cause the laggy results that you are experiencing. Have you used a defrag program above and beyound the crappy one that XP has loaded?

If you have multiple drives, have you tried off loading the swap file to the second drive to speed up pre-fetches?

 

[Romanichine]

Please read my post carefully again. I have a high-end graphics card and my problem is not with choppy graphics but with the games loading times.

Hmmm, as do I, but the game was unplayable for me until I reduced the graphic level.

If you haven't, you can try and see the result.
--
Roman

 

[boxleitnerb]

I have defragmented the drive where the game is installed. I have reduced resolution and put the swapfile on a different drive (I had it disabled before, because of the 2GB RAM). The loading times are a little faster, but still nothing to be happy about. What really annoys me is, that when the loading windows says "done" it is not actually done. The screen goes blank with only the coursor active and it takes at least another 30 seconds before I even see the map.
I let fraps run and it reported fps in the higher 30's but going down to mid
20's when there many units and city on the screen.
My point is: The game uses way to many resources for the graphics and in general. Maybe it is still a incompatibility of the game with my system, but loading times with Civ3 were not even a third of those in Civ4.

 

[EricJames]

I can easily run around the block while the game loads, it takes like at least 70 seconds.

Don't complain and actually take that time to run around the block. If nothing else, you'll be more physically fit AND you'll feel like your earned the right to play the game.

 

[Cerryl]

I have a far worse machine: P4 / 1.7 / 512MB with a decent video card (ti4600/128MB) and while it's not as fast as Civ 3, I don't find it to be that unacceptable. I just use standard maps, low graphic settings.

 

[Shakes]

I can easily run around the block while the game loads, it takes like at least 70 seconds.

Move to a house on a bigger block.

 

[Mr.Spock]

My system is AMD 2200xp, 768 ram, radeon9000, and my game loads and saves in a few seconds...also..no problems when alt+tabbing.
But on the other hand, scrolling the screen around takes ages, and the whole interface is super laggy.
Basically, what im trying to say is most of the people have some kind of problem with CIV4, maybe they solved it, maybe they havent...but fact is, Fireaxis really screwed it up.

 

[Smidlee]

My system is AMD 2200xp, 768 ram, radeon9000, and my game loads and saves in a few seconds...also..no problems when alt+tabbing.
But on the other hand, scrolling the screen around takes ages, and the whole interface is super laggy.
Basically, what im trying to say is most of the people have some kind of problem with CIV4, maybe they solved it, maybe they havent...but fact is, Fireaxis really screwed it up.

I just got my a new pc and what a difference it makes. In my opinion this game is bad to reveal any bottlenecks in your pc (motherboard). On my old pc I had AMD 2400+, GF 5500 fx but my motherboard was slow. the graphics settings made no difference so I figure it wasn't my graphic card.

 

[Ravinhood]

Man you must have some viruses/spyware on your system if it's that slow with 2gigs ram. I only have a gig and everything loads and plays within seconds. Saves take all of 3 seconds maybe, loads as well. You better get a better anti virus program like Spyware Doctor like I gots. I never have any issues with slow play.


[I dont have any spyware or viruses, my PC is configured perfectly.]

Having spyware or viruses has nothing to do with how perfectly configured your system is. My system was configured perfectly also, but, when I got Spyware Doctor it found 142 viruses/spyware on my perfectly configured system. GET A VIRUS PROGRAM THAT WORKS!!!

 

[geoman47]

The whole interface is super laggy.

This is my experience also. I built a new computer earlier this year with the following basic specs:

AMD Athlon 64 3000+
1 GB Memory
ATI RADEON Xpress 200 Series Video Card with Shared Memory

As you can tell, I skimped on the graphics card. What I'm wondering is, should I get a new graphics card with on board memory or is the laggy interface going to be there regardless? If there is another thread on this, please direct me.

In general, I like the game, but having only played it for a few days now I'm not super excited about playing it because the laggy interface makes the game too slow for my liking. I'm actually found using the mouse to right click move is faster than using number keys.

 

[Venger]

I have the same exact experience as this user describes - the grid takes FOREVER to go on. And load times for save games are atrocious.

No, it doesn't need to be defragged... good grief that's the most common misconception about computer performance, and it kills me every time I run across it... most computers don't need defragging, ever - after 2000 it became almost pointless. Besides, my pagefile is continuous, and he reported that drive activity is not an issue.

No, it is not spyware - you see, spyware would make it slow ALL THE TIME. This user wouldn't come in here complaining about Civ4 if his computer was ALWAYS slow. He'd know better. And it would impact all of his games.

Nope, this guy is in the same boat I am. The Civ4 gremlins have got him.

Venger

 

[Phoenix_56721]

I have a low end machine and don't have those problems, 866mhz P3, 512 ram, Geforce fx 128 5700 le. When I load a game it might take 30-40 secs, saving only takes a few seconds and turning on the grid take a second or two. I play on medium graphic settings on standard map sizes, it only gets laggy at the end of the game but even then its not real bad. I think you must have a virus or something thats slowing down your computer.

 

[thasan]

well, my system is bad compared to others....

inspiron 510m
with pentium 1.6 gig, 1 gig ram, intel 82852/82855 card.
and the game is playable. no memory leaks. but it sucks!!!!
so slow that i am not even going to try playing it again...
it takes up 100% processor and 370 meg ram with 20/25 cities in the whole world (tiny map).
i agree i have a below minimum system. but i wonder what sid really wanted to achieve thru this civ iv. its really disappointing.


EDIT::
oh, in anarchy, each turn takes around 3/4 minutes ONLY...lol...so sad!

 

[Phoenix_56721]

well, my system is bad compared to others....

inspiron 510m
with pentium 1.6 gig, 1 gig ram, intel 82852/82855 card.
and the game is playable. no memory leaks. but it sucks!!!!
so slow that i am not even going to try playing it again...
it takes up 100% processor and 370 meg ram with 20/25 cities in the whole world (tiny map).
i agree i have a below minimum system. but i wonder what sid really wanted to achieve thru this civ iv. its really disappointing.


EDIT::
oh, in anarchy, each turn takes around 3/4 minutes ONLY...lol...so sad!

You cant hardly play any newer game with integrated graphics, you need to get at least a separate video card to play Civ4. Requirements of Civ4 are quit low compared with most new games out there, but there seems to be a problems with Civ4 on some machines that are above specs. But we have to remember that the first patch isn't even out yet (next week were told) all games have several patch's after a game is released and that hopefully help some people.