Anyway to speed up time between turns?

A package system bought from Dell etc will certainly be chock full of bloatware, usually be running 60 or 70 or even more, unless you clean the thing up.
Amen to that. I was amazed at how much crap was on my computer. And, half of it didn't uninstall completely. Had to go in and do it by hand. The average person wouldn't be able to do that and would be stuck with it.

Next computer I guy is going to be custom made. I don't care if it costs more. Not worth it to have all that junk.

Wodan
 
Civ likes to use the page file's virtual memory, heavily, and the page file can never be bigger than 4 gigs, doesn't matter how powerful your machine is. It's a limitation of the OS. Also one must beware of the Mhz myth especially with Intel chips. .

I do agree the myth is true when comparing amd but not dualcore, faster ghz means thats how civ runs , faster, just like with a mono.

Cedermill is top tier civ machine Period.
ITs secret is ample engine memory(L1/L2) to store huge amounts of tasks combined with these tasks the obsence ghz powered engine processes them fast .
A large holding space (L2 cache) is no good unless a massive ghz speed or 'dicer' calculates the received tasks and shreds/ performs the task fast! A Large L2 cache build on a rig with slow clock speed is something like a conveyer belt feeding a 'processing machine' amounts it can't handle being fed!. (THIS MEANS VIR MEM gets called into to ACTION-THUS we wait for it to get there "SLOW DOWNS"!)

AO a hefty 2048mb L2 cache will still 'back up' so to speak, if eqpt with a insifficant 3.87 or lower ghz prosessor. Thats when we get SLOW DOWN as it calls in the Virtual mem/page file


Civ interturns are uniquely taxxing process for any rig. quadcores were never optimized to handle the Civ turn processs as efficently as the old ghz heat seekers coulped with adequate L2 supplies like the Cedermill, even weaker Prescoot (Extreme Edition))

INtel cedermill, uses 2048 L2 on its 64 bit supported 3.6ghz(base -8ghz max) '64'n, chipset. other pent4's were planted with the older clumsy 90nm

The inefficant power usage assumptions that go with record clocking of the 'Cedermill' compared to AMD or dualcore are BS

1. the Ceder goes to 4.6 without increasing the watts

2.. THe record amount of L2 for a mono is preventing more backlogs that heat up and dely the processes of interturn on massive data collection maps.

3. Corecell is a overclocker kit designed for Cedermill enhancment, powers performace effiency even more. THis peice of code lets high GHz get better performance and prevents heat caused malfunctions/deleys .

3. The smaller 64nm chip and new layout gives improves cooling as components are not situated as close

4. Overclocking preceident. That mean you can go higher then before try 6.0 to 7.ghz with a avg cooling system and corecell.

5. 64 bit supported mean unlike any other pentium4, you can plug in a few extra G sticks for 4 gigs of ram.


SO Heres how a Ceder will save Civ4: A G-card with a fast engine and fat ram supply working with the 2 gig ram eqpt to the rig, will hold back the graphic pig while the cedermill blazin 4-7ghz ) engine chops up data that the L2 processor memory lets in the doors and stores in unpredented amounts for a monocore. The newst quadcores have more L2 but less ghz speed,so its the perfect combo that makes the ceder truimph!. Again avoidin tedius vir mem call up

Last FACT civ3 or civ4 are mono application utilized games that need the best mono ever designed , that being the cede. I will prove all when the new patch releases and or when Im back from my next fly in work schedule, whichever.
 
Amen to that. I was amazed at how much crap was on my computer. And, half of it didn't uninstall completely. Had to go in and do it by hand. The average person wouldn't be able to do that and would be stuck with it.

Next computer I guy is going to be custom made. I don't care if it costs more. Not worth it to have all that junk.

Wodan

Except for the laptop, I've never bought a package deal ... if I need a new motherboard, I get a new motherboard and transfer the HDD and the rest over.

My uncle got a Dell once and I poked around it a bit and was thoroughly disgusted with all the bloatware crap they rammed into it, mostly trial software of every description and all of it set to run little annoyance programs at boot. Lodged in there real good; even the old msconfig wouldn't do the trick and some of it involved manual removal of registry entries, just like a really nasty virus. To make matters even more hairy, some of it had been integrated with the OS and couldn't be removed without a reinstallation of Windows - and of course, alot of these companies no longer provide a disk for the OS.

So, when my mom wanted to get a new computer, I went shopping with her, we went around to a few retailers and said that we would only buy a machine if they removed all the bloatware at no extra charge. This was ... unpleasant. They were uniformly hostile and defensive. But eventually we did find one smallish local chain that agreed.

As for my laptop, I had to pay $50 for the "Fresh Start" option, which is their term for the bloatware-free version. You'd think that's a joke, but it's not ... see here:

http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/21/sony-hates-you-offers-50-fresh-start-option-to-build-your-la/
 
It makes perfect that you had to pay extra. The computer manufacturer gets paid to include each trial version. To a great extent, all the junk enables Dell etc to really drive the price down so that they win more marketshare.

There's a reason Dell gives really good/powerful hardware for the lowest prices.

Wodan
 
I do agree the myth is true when comparing amd but not dualcore, faster ghz means thats how civ runs , faster, just like with a mono.

Cedermill is top tier civ machine Period.
ITs secret is ample engine memory(L1/L2) to store huge amounts of tasks combined with these tasks the obsence ghz powered engine processes them fast .

<snipped some drivel>

Last FACT civ3 or civ4 are mono application utilized games that need the best mono ever designed , that being the cede. I will prove all when the new patch releases and or when Im back from my next fly in work schedule, whichever.

T.A. Jones: I won't even begin to try to correct the vast amount of ignorance and misinformation present in your post. You are a dilettante, and that's being charitably kind. Stop giving people bad advice, please. Not that I can quite imagine anybody taking you seriously . . .

To everybody else, the NetBurst (P4) micro-architecture isn't where you want to be. Per Hz, P4 and its derivatives (which includes Cedar Mill) are about one-third to half as powerful, ballpark. That's why a 2GHz Core 2 Duo processor, when using just one of its two cores, is faster than a 3.6GHz P4 or derivative, at pretty much everything. Think of Hz as how often a wheel turns around, think of performance as the speed of your car, and imagine the P4 having itty bitty wheels. At highway speeds, those wheels will sure be turning quickly. Core 2 Duo and its AMD cousin have much bigger wheels that cover a much greater distance per revolution. About two to three times the circumference. Newer processors from Intel also have huge L2 caches . . . on the order of 6MB (per two cores). Because of the shared nature of the Intel's L2 cache design, if you're running only one very CPU intensive task, e.g. Civ 4, it's pretty much getting that L2 cache to itself, all 6MB of it.

NetBurst is dead. Don't go there. Not a justifiable investment by any metric, e.g. my Core 2 Quad 3.2GHz system generates "Huge" continent maps at least twice as fast as my 3.73GHz Pentium 4 based system.
 
JohnMK,

i sure hope your ready for the wrath of the infamous TA. beware of the man behind the rant. he's got a chip on his shoulder the size of the Rock of Gibraltar. i'm surprised he can even type under all that weight. eventually you will put him on ignore like the rest of us.
 
Heck, a lot of the AMD-Athlon series could handily put P4 in its place. I'm not a fan-boi by any stretch of the imagination. It is disappointing to see competition so hampered since AMD's glory days though. The Core duo's performance is hard to deny.
 
Certainly but there are other factors. A Clydesdale horse with a 1 ton handicap in lead weights will not be able to pull the wagon as well as the mule who has no burden at all. If you see 60 or 70 processes running in task manager when you're not doing anything at all, then you've got a whole bunch of unnecessary software going at startup and running in the background which WILL kill your speed, regardless of how powerful your machine is.

Civ likes to use the page file's virtual memory, heavily, and the page file can never be bigger than 4 gigs, doesn't matter how powerful your machine is. It's a limitation of the OS. Also one must beware of the Mhz myth especially with Intel chips.

The specific OS is also important. Win2k can be pared down to about 12 or 13 processes, WinXP needs 20 usually, and Vista will usually run about 25. This is pared down to minimums. A package system bought from Dell etc will certainly be chock full of bloatware, usually be running 60 or 70 or even more, unless you clean the thing up.

First thing I did when I got the laptop as a gift was reinstall windows XP with the CD. Clean install. But man what a difference without all that crap that came with it.

Quick question- So even with just one core running from a core 2 duo it would outperform the fastest monocore in civ IV correct?
 
It is disappointing to see competition so hampered since AMD's glory days though. The Core duo's performance is hard to deny.

Ah well ... it goes back and forth ... it's been less than a decade since AMD was the budget processor, the poor cousin of Intel ... I'm sure the pendulum will swing again. In the meantime, it is good for competition that they trade places back and forth.
 
T.A. Jones: I won't even begin to try to correct the vast amount of ignorance and misinformation present in your post. You are a dilettante, and that's being charitably kind. Stop giving people bad advice, please. Not that I can quite imagine anybody taking you seriously . . .
Ive already discussed at length this topic with other 'all talk in 'what should happen' theory, no 'practical evidence' guys like yourself. ( you think I didn't know Id stirr the shiny toy crowd!lol)

Other engineers like you with their same presumed results . don't seem to want to take the time to see what I have. You'd think I wouldn't come on here and say a 4 year old computer is better then a 1 year old,(a particular task) if I lacked evidence?

NetBurst is dead. Don't go there. Not a justifiable investment by any metric, e.g. my Core 2 Quad 3.2GHz system generates "Huge" continent maps at least twice as fast as my 3.73GHz Pentium 4 based system.

Notice he says the tech that civ4 was created on,tested on, utilized to be optimized on, is dead? Does that mean civ4 is dead to :goodjob:

So Let me guess your 3.73 ghz Northwood(weakest pent4-lowest L2) made maps smaller then your core 2 which had 2 -4 gigs of ram while your northwood had half that. Sound right? SO your basis is the end result was the better engine?

ANyway thanks we;ll be in touch im sure. Finnaly the patch is out and I can grab this bTs game for the reason I explained (on link)
If you want we can compare Youtube vids(times). WIth the same mega map save. Im off for a bit


..OH and looks like you'll even have a priddy lil cheerleader by your side :p*winks at garrmit* Thats right I know you see me lol can't wait to see ya there to.
 
Oh n hey @ Johnny MK, Some partin words to peice out the go ahead plan if we can?

First off, IM a nice guy. I can take my share of humble pie :) Thats If IM shown the error in my ways. As well as you to I imagine. Sadly Thats more then can be said bout a few here. My fanclub, You see em showin some weird hatred to civ3 in debate, get pwned you know? Then won't leave you alone? :lol:
Ive got more these klingon's clingin to me then beer has beerhounds, Ya see? :lol:

Ya its sad, Its only a game that we agree but with others you couldn't tell by the type of desprate flamer they be

Anyway Ive never been publically told Ive been 'pretend ignored' by anyone who wasn't called a 'fanboy' or 'flamer' by your average decent guy.(need links? Nah don't blame ya not wantn to see more vommit live)


Ya so you know THIS will be a good clean show! And me im excited to get started as much as you im sure. Just don't think IM delyin with intent. we all have lives/wives, work at the hive. Ive got to pick up the game and some more ram to before we start. 2 weeks?
K? alright Thanks. with me or not.
 
The 3.73GHz is a Prescott core, by the way. The fastest Northwood Intel made was at 3.4GHz, 3.46GHz if you consider Gallatin as a Northwood derivative, which it was. I'd be delighted to run comparative Civ 4 benchmarks.
 
I am looking at getting a Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650 CPU "rig" with 3 Ghz and 4 GB of RAM to replace my Athlon XP 1800 / 3GB. Will I notice a significant improvement, i.e. can I play Huge instead of Standard.
 
Sheesh ... why did I wait so long. :(
 
I am looking at getting a Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650 CPU "rig" with 3 Ghz and 4 GB of RAM to replace my Athlon XP 1800 / 3GB. Will I notice a significant improvement, i.e. can I play Huge instead of Standard.

Man, I thought I was the only one still peddling around an AMD 1800+:lol:
 
Heh, I have a 3 year old machine, AMD Athlon 64 2800 (1.8Ghz, Socket 754), run in 32bit under win2K. 2Gigs of RAM and a (AGP) GPU updated last year from a Radeon 9800Pro to Nvidia 7600GT...
I run Huge maps, I recently started playing 18 Civs. The only issue thats cropped up since I last played 11Civ/Huge maps - was I can't seem to reload saves in-game w/o MAF crashes. ( I haven't tried yet with the new patch ).

Suffice to say, you'd be able to play Huge w/o the QUad processor. My upgrade this year will either be the AMD TriCore or one of the Intel Dual Cores... Price/Performance is usually my key consideration.
 
I am looking at getting a Intel Core 2 Quad Q9650 CPU "rig" with 3 Ghz and 4 GB of RAM to replace my Athlon XP 1800 / 3GB. Will I notice a significant improvement, i.e. can I play Huge instead of Standard.

Good Lord yes. An Athlon XP 1800 is slow, slow, slow compared to today's processors. I'm using the AMD X2 6000+ and the game runs very well on larger than Huge maps with 12 civs. (Sorry to disappoint you T.A.)Though I don't really see any advantage in a Quad Core myself. Programs are barely even making use of Dual-Core technology, at least games, so Quad-Core to me is way overkill. Even Civ 4 isn't optimized for Dual-Core but at least that allows Windows and other background processes to use the other processor.
 
Agreed, quad core isn't going to improve game performance. Most games out there, and certainly Civ 4, aren't multi-threaded, so they're using only one of your cores. A single Core 2 core however is a mighty beast easily twice as fast as an old Pentium 4 at equal GHz. You can't really just buy one, however. They don't sell it that way, so get the Core 2 Duo or its AMD equivalents if price/performance in Civ4 is your thing.

I've got the quad core for video encoding, and my applications are heavily multi-threaded so I frequently notice them using three or four of my cores, full-tilt. Nothing quite as satisfying as work and play occurring simultaneously, my encode flying at warp speed while I simultaneously play Civ4 or another game. An altogether richer experience on a quad core but still palpable on a dual.
 
Back
Top Bottom