CIV4 and quad core
- Thread starter mamimo
- Start date
YA not surprised. its same with L2 only a perctage will be applied.
Best you can do is overclock that one core. Check up on the net for how to. Most mobo make this very easy. I ran my Cedermill tp 4.6ghz and have seen 4.9. as a standard on teh overclockcedermill forum . Try biddin on a cedarmill penty and watch it go sky high , question is why?
Well The record clock speed is 8ghz done on a Pent 4 cedermill btw.Liquid Nitrogen was used as coolent lol Todays motherboard and yesterdays computer makes the pinnicle in playing mono based games.
A lot of those who just spent 1500 and have Intell marketing guys in their ears tellin of 40 more efficieny over netburst will disagree, but have ask for proof as far as civ is concerned and they have nothing for you to see. THose 40% estimates were on old faulty netburst mobo'sbtw
Heres something for you to see
Link
Article: Pentium 4 overclocked to 8GHz: let's see your fancy Core 2 try that
Best you can do is overclock that one core. Check up on the net for how to. Most mobo make this very easy. I ran my Cedermill tp 4.6ghz and have seen 4.9. as a standard on teh overclockcedermill forum . Try biddin on a cedarmill penty and watch it go sky high , question is why?
Well The record clock speed is 8ghz done on a Pent 4 cedermill btw.Liquid Nitrogen was used as coolent lol Todays motherboard and yesterdays computer makes the pinnicle in playing mono based games.
A lot of those who just spent 1500 and have Intell marketing guys in their ears tellin of 40 more efficieny over netburst will disagree, but have ask for proof as far as civ is concerned and they have nothing for you to see. THose 40% estimates were on old faulty netburst mobo'sbtw
Heres something for you to see
Link
Article: Pentium 4 overclocked to 8GHz: let's see your fancy Core 2 try that
Spoiler :
Unless the game/process is specifically multi-threaded coded for dual cores AND quad cores, simply possessing the cores isn't going to do anything and can sometimes even cause problems if the application wasn't designed with more than 1 core in mind.
Thats true that hoe INtels pinnicle in pentium perfection aka the Cedarmill, is able to outperform conroes with ease when backed with todays same luxuries Like ram for instance. Penty monocore cedarmillis is vista 64 bit supported which means 4 gig of ram.
Today's motherboards bring the top tier to the 64 nm cedarmill. Its common knowledge among overclockers that the biggest thing holding back heatseekers like the Pent4 Prescoot was ineffective mobos of the day and the contraints the had in distrubting full use of power provided thus heat backups were result (google)
Now add programs like corecell that make it smoother and easyier to run at peak speeds for monocore processors. ALl it up in to one package and you have a hell of machine. Like some small jap car smoking a ferrari off the line, . Having a high performing pnety tends to get people mad
One of the downsides to quad core cpu is that the software is simply not ready for them. I am sure there is a way to use more than 4 cores but probably not on civ 4. By the time the software is out there will be new CPU's using 4-8 cores like the new Intel CPU planned for Q4.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3326
This review seems rather glowing. Only problem is finding a cheap one before 2nd half of 2009.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3326
This review seems rather glowing. Only problem is finding a cheap one before 2nd half of 2009.
Seriously, Netburst is useless for modern computers.
A Core 2 Duo at 1.86 GHz beats a Pentium D at 3.6 GHz in the vast majority of benchmarks, gaming and non-gaming.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=1
A Core 2 Duo at 1.86 GHz beats a Pentium D at 3.6 GHz in the vast majority of benchmarks, gaming and non-gaming.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=1
Yes but vast majority is not Civ4 or civ3. Or show me a bench sayin otherwise.
alot of us guys here play civ only. I mean after that we use the net, Write some letters. Yep no need for a thousand doller spree if a Premium Pentium can match the core 2 in the only game we play
Ive seen the results of a groomed cedar against averge conroe. It scored faster turns on the mod with huge a task list. ALso the Pentium D was an embaressment in that same test.
I know this conroe had 2 gig of L2 for each core which joined for a single task making 4. THis is where I presumed civ3's derived benifit from a limit of 2048 L2 . AFter that clock speed would make improvements to what was churning already at remarkable speed on monster maps
This wouldn't be the only place civ3 tops out. The ram limit was 512. SO mybe its massively higher clock speed that pushes past the 'more work in one rotation but, still not faster' newr models
I mean 4.5 ghz in 64nm netburst is faster then core 2 at 2.4 ghz IM sorry but its true . Yes there must be a 1600 doller rig that beats a 4.7ghz cedarrig to Still the price dif for what I predict would be minimal improvemet is laughable to consider forkin out the extra cash for ...AND THIS IS WHY CEDAR CHIPS SHIP OUT THE DOOR AT HEAVY DEMAND
In a civ3 comparative bench test they both cap at 2048 L2 yet Core 2 has another 10gig of L2 not being applied cuz of the games early design limits, same way they designed civ3 to benifit from only 512mb. Whats left but clock speed to decide the winner?
THis is on civ3 format. rather simple to compare CPU dif
With civ4 you need to facter raising the ram limit from 512mb to 4gigs and a 1000mhz video card for 3d scalin an all that . .. .. .. . bah its impossable to tell what the CPU is doing here
The Pentium D is EXACTLY the same as the Pentium 4 single core, except with an extra core. In single threaded apps, performance in IDENTICAL.
Comparing 4.5 GHz Pentium 4 chips to 2.4 Core 2 chips is irrelavent. For the same cooling a P4 takes to get to 4.5 GHz, you can easily get a Core 2 to 3.6 GHz, at which point, it will far exceed the speed of a Pentium 4 at 4.5 GHz.
I posted a source supporting my points. You can't do the same, because your misguided opinions about processors have no support.
you post generalized statements that don't hold water where we discuss turn time processing. Mybe take this to gen computer forum and see how many care. THis is old news man
They say unreal touney gets better perfromace from core 2 then pentium but nothin in regard to civ3/civ4 perforamce.?
How do you how the designer programmed the game back in 2005? I know they had a high end pentium in their mainframe when they did and had never heard of a core2
WHere is you benchmark with any civ game like I asked?. Civ is one of the biggest PC sellers of all time . SUrly you can find one becnh test thst uses it as example. ..UNless. Its result didn't provve what the overwhelming majorty of other games did. UNless civ was article exception to the truth in the same way it task process it unique to any game. Favouring a monocore that rips at high speeds
you say you can easily get a Core 2 to 3.6 GHz, at which point, it will far exceed the speed of a Pentium 4 at 4.5 GHz but wheres your proof of this on the civ4 platform?
ALl those theorys bases the ceder on old mobos and default out of the box. No corecell or any other packages made to enhance its performance
THe quotes you plug or the bench you refer dosn't have the cedar in a rig thats at its peak potential all around. Its an older set up yet you don't hesitate to match it agaist what brand new inside along with the core2
You expect the ceder to operate the same as the chips plugged into rigs of the past , using old mobo, v-cards, models that have been upgraded . Thats not reality You see realty when Cedar sell on Ebay for 120 plus ship cuz people are goin to suit them up with todays kits for a new max performacnew not the old results you wrote happened a some guys house
Its like quoting the old time of a runner before he hit his prime time and sayin 'see? this is the best you guy has' Go back and find a cedar properly suited up in one of those INtel endorsed runoffs
Nothing from 2005 was programmed specifically for the Core 2 architecture, and it still manages to be faster for everything.
Civ is not some kind of exception, if you think it is, post some benchmarks.
Pentium D from wiki:The relatively cheap 805 was found to be highly overclockable; 3.5 GHz was often possible with good air cooling. Running it at over 4 GHz was possible with water cooling,
Water cooling? A cedar water cooled its going over 4.7ghz! Just Google 'cedarmill' 'overclocking' 'forum' to see a few 100 post their results better then that The Ceder has its own movement with hundred of people giving advice how to maximize its output.
True some of the guys I talk to dont play civ so they have other favorite rigs to tinker wit nowadays but Ive seen result with this one I can only say it should bomb away the old lag I had on my prescott
Pent D also has 512mb of L2 for each core . Ceder has 2048mb for its sole core.
No 'exact same' speel please
Water cooling? A cedar water cooled its going over 4.7ghz! Just Google 'cedarmill' 'overclocking' 'forum' to see a few 100 post their results better then that The Ceder has its own movement with hundred of people giving advice how to maximize its output.
True some of the guys I talk to dont play civ so they have other favorite rigs to tinker wit nowadays but Ive seen result with this one I can only say it should bomb away the old lag I had on my prescott
Pent D also has 512mb of L2 for each core . Ceder has 2048mb for its sole core.
No 'exact same' speel please
Well it was you who said "faster then majority" now its " faster for everything" which is it?
Confronted with the strange realty the most popular PC franchise has never been chosen for a CPU bench test in its long time in existence has made me skeptical enough to do my own research
Confronted with the same truth (you have no proof) I bet you will you raise it to " I guarantee its faster for civ3? to win you point?
DO you have a copy. How bout we just run them off
None of that matters It under performed in civ3 feild reports thats where the basis lies NOt general theory . SAve those veiws for the OT tech forums where I will agree with you
Here we discuss what rig makes a peice of code designed in 2005 that has a unique end turn calculation process run the fastest.
I believe Cedarmill on todays mobo with Corecell aswell makes civ3 run faster then core2 thats under 3.2. You can deny this all day. Ive seen it on conroe models and Pent D . The older model beat the newer thats a point to highlight G lol
ANd SUre The new core2 at 1500$ a total rig, may top it by a margin but one thatsnot big. So here my point stands . AT 1/3 the price the Cedar looks awful nice. (this was the heat saving model to remember lol)
This bring me to the E-Bay auctions and Cedarmills strong selling price and amounts of bidders. Why so popular and going for premium considering the online comments all over from 'need to own shiney new toy' crowds chanting "its day is done " " its garbage" etc
Intel Marketing dept has done one hell a job reseting the upgrade clock but I think with the dualcore mock many lost their way from what really scorched in the following days , aka, cedarmill on newer mobo
JBConquests
Prince
It can take years for software to be rearchitected to go from single/few threads to many threads. Of course, how long depends upon the software architecture/design. In most cases, software has to be rewritten from the ground up.
Games/applications don't often do that due to the extreme cost in man years. After a code base gets old enough, a rewrite is usually a necessity for a variety of reasons, but they won't do that every single release.
I have seen for myself that Civ doesn't really make good use multiple threads. I have a quad core and I see how 1 core is maxed out, but I do see that the other cores do get a little usage. (Beyond what the O/S would cause but still not much...) So perhaps, in the driver layer/directX layers there is some threading going on.
The answer to the original posters question is that it might be technically possible to make Civ 4/BTS support threading such that the game would make good use of multiple cores. However, it is likely not feasible due to the great cost of rewriting the software.
Now Civ 5 might make more/better use of threads such that it is more friendly to multiple cores. We can only hope.
Games/applications don't often do that due to the extreme cost in man years. After a code base gets old enough, a rewrite is usually a necessity for a variety of reasons, but they won't do that every single release.
I have seen for myself that Civ doesn't really make good use multiple threads. I have a quad core and I see how 1 core is maxed out, but I do see that the other cores do get a little usage. (Beyond what the O/S would cause but still not much...) So perhaps, in the driver layer/directX layers there is some threading going on.
The answer to the original posters question is that it might be technically possible to make Civ 4/BTS support threading such that the game would make good use of multiple cores. However, it is likely not feasible due to the great cost of rewriting the software.
Now Civ 5 might make more/better use of threads such that it is more friendly to multiple cores. We can only hope.
The Pentium D chips are EXACTLY the SAME as the Pentium 4 chips, except with an extra core. How many times do I have to say this?
The cedarmill is not 1/3 the price of a competing processor, the Pentium dual core E2220 is faster, and only $100.
Civilization is not the most popular PC franchise, it ranks somewhere around #10 in sales.
The cedarmill has a strong selling price because it's the best processor for certain old motherboards. The same thing is true for any obsolute socket.
Seriously, post some benchmarks if you want anyone to believe you. You're basing your assumptions off of nothing.
JBConquests
Prince
Zelig, T.A. Jones, you guys are assuming that Civ 4 is CPU bound. (meaning that more CPU will give you better performance) Has anyone proven that? I haven't.
It could be that Civ 4, when running some of the biggest maps, is memory bound. If it is memory bound, then overclock your CPU all you want, it may not help much.
It could be that Civ 4, when running some of the biggest maps, is memory bound. If it is memory bound, then overclock your CPU all you want, it may not help much.
T.A. Jones is talking about Civ3, which should be CPU bound most of the time.
Civ4 should also be cpu bound most of the time on high-end rigs. 4GB of ram is only about $70 now, and since Civ4 is limited to 2GB in any scenario, on any video card currently worth more than $100, it's going to be cpu bound as well.
Although it's worth pointing out that because civ is turned based, "cpu-bound" and "gpu-bound" take different meanings than real-time games. Time to process turns will never be gpu-bound, while frame rates during the turn are almost entirely gpu-bound.
I think one of the issues here is proving that one processor over an another gives better performance. Each turn on civ 4 is undefined and different due to the game being turn based.
You would need to compare 2 pcs with similar hardware such as graphics and memory but with a different cpu. If you overclock one cpu you overclock the other too. Even so you need the conditions to be realistic to run the games for several hours. How many people have liquid nitrogen at hand?
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Intel-Core-2-Duo-X6800-Overclocking-Record-5-3GHz-51236.shtml
(okay it didnt reach 8ghz but nice effort
)
I think the best method is to load a huge map around 2000ad on a huge map and see how long it takes to load the game and time between turns.
The trouble is comparing like for like and removing any bottlenecks such as memory or graphics.
Sticking in 4 gigs of ram and improving the graphics solved most of my game issues. A dying laptop may have also influenced these figures.
Thing with benchmarks is there is always one benchmark where the improvement of a new CPU doesnt always add over 3-5% difference. Where others you gain 30-40% at times.
You would need to compare 2 pcs with similar hardware such as graphics and memory but with a different cpu. If you overclock one cpu you overclock the other too. Even so you need the conditions to be realistic to run the games for several hours. How many people have liquid nitrogen at hand?
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Intel-Core-2-Duo-X6800-Overclocking-Record-5-3GHz-51236.shtml
(okay it didnt reach 8ghz but nice effort
)I think the best method is to load a huge map around 2000ad on a huge map and see how long it takes to load the game and time between turns.
The trouble is comparing like for like and removing any bottlenecks such as memory or graphics.
Sticking in 4 gigs of ram and improving the graphics solved most of my game issues. A dying laptop may have also influenced these figures.
Thing with benchmarks is there is always one benchmark where the improvement of a new CPU doesnt always add over 3-5% difference. Where others you gain 30-40% at times.
I think one of the issues here is proving that one processor over an another gives better performance. Each turn on civ 4 is undefined and different due to the game being turn based.
You would need to compare 2 pcs with similar hardware such as graphics and memory but with a different cpu. If you overclock one cpu you overclock the other too. Even so you need the conditions to be realistic to run the games for several hours. How many people have liquid nitrogen at hand?
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Intel-Core-2-Duo-X6800-Overclocking-Record-5-3GHz-51236.shtml
(okay it didnt reach 8ghz but nice effort
I think the best method is to load a huge map around 2000ad on a huge map and see how long it takes to load the game and time between turns.
The trouble is comparing like for like and removing any bottlenecks such as memory or graphics.
Sticking in 4 gigs of ram and improving the graphics solved most of my game issues. A dying laptop may have also influenced these figures.
Thing with benchmarks is there is always one benchmark where the improvement of a new CPU doesnt always add over 3-5% difference. Where others you gain 30-40% at times.
ThuG OC Team Italy sets Overclock World Record Cedarmill 8.1 ghz
Now USE is tryin to get in back by goin even higher. This is faster then core2 when you do the 40% subtraction (btw very generous est. given today. Consider those org. estimates where taken from P4's running bottleneck on inefficient mobos and you can see here what happens when the core2 is made to share its mobo with the cedarmill 64mn lol )
quote from this link
IN case you don't know, the 'P4 631' they are tryin to break the record with is another cedarmill but with a better mobo and like you said, liquid nitro.
ALl ya have to do is check Ebay to see the number of bids and going prices for these pinnacle pent4's CPU's to understand a increasing amount of monocore players who believe including a 631 is part of winning performance plan (hella lot cheaper and fun to clock to!)
Part of it is OC is getting as acceptable to gen audiences as modding is to Civ4 fans . WIth new mobos and software like corecell, its gettin as easy as moddin civ3
YA I agree with all those complications using civ4 to compare cpu's.
Ive made the easy arguement (no counter arguement cept: " Im making the rules to cheat" from some Campbell loop kid lol " ) to use civ3, at least as prilimary to take to the next level
IN fact this is what is going on when real lives sit down to get it on CPU vs CPU, for sure with a conroe. The last one never heard back from for some reason but mine still up on youtube
ANyway civ3 Is designed to rack up ever more tasks as in more of a stress test for the CPU (not ram or G-card BS)
I don't know about you but with my cedarmill playin 31 civs where each has 400 units fight all out ontop of massive (220x220) maps with 500 cities all full of calculations. Then you facter all that trading going on , oh did i say this was a mod with over double the varibles in categories at play (even twice the music lol) more luxuries goin round the same time , blah and blah.
You get the picture I presume. Civ World revolves round a cedarmill sun and simple, no dual or quadcore will outdo..I didn't say 'do' I said 'out do'
Thats the theory anyway, and with enough evidence to keep my money where my mouth is. It sure gets a lot of people fuming but in the ned they can't do anything there word < agaist mine and more numbers of equally unknowing Core 2 civfans don't make it any less true. Only a civ bench mark will do
Similar threads
