AetiusG
Chieftain
So...if I were to cram one of those "above recommended" cards into my dual-core 2.0ghz, 3gig ram machine, can i expect a smooth game or am i wasting money?
Civ5 really zips on my ancient machine
- Thread starter jjkrause84
- Start date
So...if I were to cram one of those "above recommended" cards into my dual-core 2.0ghz, 3gig ram machine, can i expect a smooth game or am i wasting money?
WuphonsReach
Prince
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2005
- Messages
- 426
Well, define smooth... even with my GTX 460 on 1600x900 in DX9 mode, I still get a lot of tile-redraw by 1500AD on a Large/Fractal map. It's definitely useable, but a bit distracting as you watch the land get drawn in in mono-colors, then low-res, then high-res whenever you pan to a new area.
(I'm not sure that low-res settings are really working - or else they went too conservative on how many textures they load in at a time.)
(I'm not sure that low-res settings are really working - or else they went too conservative on how many textures they load in at a time.)
I'm still stringing my old computer out as long as possible until an upgrade. I was pleasantly surprised to see it running respectably on a 1.6ghz pentium dual core (the neutered core2duo) and an 8600gt.
Granted I have every single setting set to minimum, but the game still is decent to look at and plays acceptably. Framerate is good, though can get sluggish on standard or larger maps toward mid to late game. Though when a few civs inevitably die, its right back to smooth, fast play. If you prefer smaller maps with half a dozen or so players a minimum specs pc does respectably.
Granted I have every single setting set to minimum, but the game still is decent to look at and plays acceptably. Framerate is good, though can get sluggish on standard or larger maps toward mid to late game. Though when a few civs inevitably die, its right back to smooth, fast play. If you prefer smaller maps with half a dozen or so players a minimum specs pc does respectably.
AetiusG
Chieftain
Hmmm....I usually play with medium sized maps in Civ 4 (mainly because I'm a noob to the series lol).
As for graphics, I guess I could play with setting turned down, but dayum, it looks so fantastic in the review videos with everything on max, I'd hate to miss out on that!
As for graphics, I guess I could play with setting turned down, but dayum, it looks so fantastic in the review videos with everything on max, I'd hate to miss out on that!
WuphonsReach
Prince
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2005
- Messages
- 426
"Low" across the board really doesn't look all that different from "High".
Which makes me wonder if choosing "low res" textures in the video options really does anything at all. In most games, I would expect that to use 1/2 resolution textures that are less sharp and use 1/4 the memory.
I need to sit down and do some real testing of what things look like...
Which makes me wonder if choosing "low res" textures in the video options really does anything at all. In most games, I would expect that to use 1/2 resolution textures that are less sharp and use 1/4 the memory.
I need to sit down and do some real testing of what things look like...
you shouldn't need anything more than a GTX260 to be honest.
That GTX460 will be incredible for your system. It is quite cheap price. I paid more for my GTX260 a year ago and the 460 is ob better.
I'm about to upgrade my PC (currently four years old), and am fortunate enough to have quite a high budget. I had assumed with a top CPU and top gfx card, Civ V would be effortless and turns would take no more than a second or two - or is this another FSX, where it'll take 6 years for a top machine to run the game smoothly?...
