mazzz
Emperor
How much faster (turn waiting time) would civ3 run (huge map) with a 3.2 ghz computer vs a 1.5 ghz computer
How much faster....
- Thread starter mazzz
- Start date
I take it that both of those computers have Intel Pentium IV processors? You'll probably have to also define how much memory each of those computers have (256MB or 512MB or more?). Additionally, computer speeds are dependent on many other factors as well as you can see in speed tests made by magazines where computers with same specs may have very different preformance data.
I don't know if anyone has made comparisons on this, but, still, I think you'll be looking at a nice acceleration when you make that long a leap in processing power.
I don't know if anyone has made comparisons on this, but, still, I think you'll be looking at a nice acceleration when you make that long a leap in processing power.
citizen001
Banned
Are you getting an upgrade just for civ3? if you are it's not worth it trust me (unless you have cash to burn of course). Right now is not the the time to upgrade with all the new technologies coming out.
BasketCase
Username sez it all
My friend's 1-gig CPU with 256 meg can crash on a huge map with 16 civs.
My 2 gig CPU and 1 gig of RAM never has problems. Smooth as modern armor rolling across grassland.
My 2 gig CPU and 1 gig of RAM never has problems. Smooth as modern armor rolling across grassland.
GR8Madmax
King of Undefended Cities
It's going to make a big diferrence, especially if you've got 512mb or more of fast ram.
While it will definitely make a difference, it may not make a big enough difference to justify the upgrade. 
I remember a couple years ago, some people in this forum were complaining about doubling their processor speed, and getting negligable improvement in speed. (SOmetimes a reduction in apparant speed!
)
I remember a couple years ago, some people in this forum were complaining about doubling their processor speed, and getting negligable improvement in speed. (SOmetimes a reduction in apparant speed!
)
Doc Tsiolkovski
Deity
Don't expect too much. The loading/interturn time for standard maps goes way down, large maps are also pretty fast, but huge World Maps with 31 Civs still take ages.
Had a 700MHz P3, now I have a state-of-the-art notebook, and the loading time for WM games is only reduced to 5 instead of 10 minutes...
Had a 700MHz P3, now I have a state-of-the-art notebook, and the loading time for WM games is only reduced to 5 instead of 10 minutes...
BasketCase
Username sez it all
My new computer's got the clocks, it rocks
But it was obsolete before I opened the box!
You say you've had your desktop for over a week??
Throw that junk away, man, it's an antique!
Your laptop is a month old? Well that great--
--if you could use a nice heavy paperweight!
--Wierd Al
But it was obsolete before I opened the box!
You say you've had your desktop for over a week??
Throw that junk away, man, it's an antique!
Your laptop is a month old? Well that great--
--if you could use a nice heavy paperweight!
--Wierd Al
mazzz
Emperor
right now i have a 1.47 ghz, 512 mb ram, and 80 gb hard drive
i see 3.4 ghz in stores is anything high coming soon?
i see 3.4 ghz in stores is anything high coming soon?
The rate that technology is going these days, 3.40 ghz will improve soon **gets out computer magazine.** Yes, I don't see anything higher than 3.40, but it's going to definitely rise, I'm pretty sure there. **gets out last month's magazine** Now I see 3.60 ghz there.
I run mine on a 300 mhz Pentium II processor, with 256 RAM I think. I wait a considerable amount of time loading scenarios or saves on big maps (I can't even say considerable, maybe a minute), but even then it's not bad. I have a friend with a fairly recent one, I forget the specifics, 3.0 ghz or something, and it's definitely much better than mine is, but it's not x10 better, so remember that 3 ghz won't be twice as fast as 1.5 ghz. My thought with computers is that whatever is expensive today will be cheap tomorrow (I don't mean that literally, but you get the point.)
However, you might want to upgrade the RAM. RAM is quite cheap and will improve the speed.
I run mine on a 300 mhz Pentium II processor, with 256 RAM I think. I wait a considerable amount of time loading scenarios or saves on big maps (I can't even say considerable, maybe a minute), but even then it's not bad. I have a friend with a fairly recent one, I forget the specifics, 3.0 ghz or something, and it's definitely much better than mine is, but it's not x10 better, so remember that 3 ghz won't be twice as fast as 1.5 ghz. My thought with computers is that whatever is expensive today will be cheap tomorrow (I don't mean that literally, but you get the point.)
However, you might want to upgrade the RAM. RAM is quite cheap and will improve the speed.
GR8Madmax
King of Undefended Cities
mazzz said:
Don't buy into the mhz is everthing nonsense as you can't just go on the mhz any more. If your 1.47ghz chip is a celeron, a 3.4ghz Pentium 4 would be a lot faster. AMD chips run at lower mhz than Intel chips. An AMD Athlon XP 1800+ that runs at 1.4ghz is faster than an Intel Pentium 4 that runs at 1.8ghz. Having more L2 cache is another reason a chip will be faster than another that runs at a higher speed.
The speed of memory also makes a difference. For example, having 512 mb of PC133 SDRAM vs. 512 mb of 3200 DDR makes a huge difference.
Things you need to tell us:
Are you planning to buy a brand new PC or upgrade your current one? Do you know if your motherboard supports a 3.4ghz chip? Does it support DDR and are you currently running DDR memory? If it is DDR that you have right now, what speed is it?
mechoption
Chieftain
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2004
- Messages
- 17
I'm running a 2.4G with 512Mb ram and a 128Mb video card without any issues. If your gonna upgrade, slap in some faster bigger memory, it's the easisiest, cheapest upgrade I think. Also a nice video card should supersede a cpu upgrade?
Anyway, that's my 2 cents
Anyway, that's my 2 cents
Speed is only half the equation. Memory is the 2nd half. My 667 mhz computer was just as fast as someone elses's 1.5ghz. Why? I had 384megs RAM, they had 128megs RAM.
Right now, I have a 3.20ghz with 1 gig RAM, and I hardly notice any slowdown at all until the late middle ages if there's lots of wars. (It used to be late ancient on my old computer).
Right now, I have a 3.20ghz with 1 gig RAM, and I hardly notice any slowdown at all until the late middle ages if there's lots of wars. (It used to be late ancient on my old computer).
Psychonaut777
Chieftain
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2002
- Messages
- 70
I have a 3.2 ghz P4 and 2 gigs of Ram. The computer can play the huge maps fine but I see no point... that would just take forever to actually play out with that many civs.
If you want to upgrade get a AMD 64 over an Intel. =)
If you want to upgrade get a AMD 64 over an Intel. =)
Similar threads
