Minimum System Requirements...

[Commander Bello]

The main problem will be the coding. Civ3 (up to and including C3C) was very poorly programmed.
And when I say "programmed", I mean "programmed". Ever tried to link a set of let's say 3 road tiles to an existing network of roads? This easily lasts for a minute on a huge map with many nations, although there is almost no new information to compute.
This is just a matter of the programming style, not on machine power.

And, btw, it pays off not to buy the "spearhead machine", but one generation below - you get this one for small money and it will still serve you for years.
So, don't aim at the PIV 4.0 GHz 800 MB FSB and whatever, but get a reasonable good machine somewhere in the 3.x (low x!) GHz area with a sufficient but good graphics card. (at least, if you make Civ4 the requirement)
After all, it will still be a TBS with "almost" nothing to calculate during your turns. And between turns, it again is a matter of programming - by poor programming, they could make any machine looking old, even "Deep Blue".

 

[Portuguese]

I'll buy a new comp next Xmas, so I think I'll have a comp to run cIV...

 

[alco75]

Shame, with the new 3D engine there's no way it'll run on my (work) laptop and therefore no way I'll be able to play it during my two hour daily rail commute. On the other hand Civ4 isn't likely to trouble my home PC, having as it does, a fully softmodded 6800nu.

 

[Darwin420]

I agree with Commander Bello. It all really boils down to programming. Depending on how the 3D aspect is done, it might actually make the game faster, if they do it right.

Having a video card with a decent amount of separate memory doesn't hurt, as it allows your CPU to process the logic, not the graphic. A separate audio card also helps, btw. The more you take away from the CPU, the faster your computer (and cIV) will run!

 

[covenant]

The main problem will be the coding. Civ3 (up to and including C3C) was very poorly programmed.
And when I say "programmed", I mean "programmed". Ever tried to link a set of let's say 3 road tiles to an existing network of roads? This easily lasts for a minute on a huge map with many nations, although there is almost no new information to compute.
This is just a matter of the programming style, not on machine power.

And, btw, it pays off not to buy the "spearhead machine", but one generation below - you get this one for small money and it will still serve you for years.
So, don't aim at the PIV 4.0 GHz 800 MB FSB and whatever, but get a reasonable good machine somewhere in the 3.x (low x!) GHz area with a sufficient but good graphics card. (at least, if you make Civ4 the requirement)
After all, it will still be a TBS with "almost" nothing to calculate during your turns. And between turns, it again is a matter of programming - by poor programming, they could make any machine looking old, even "Deep Blue".

And buy parts that can be upgraded. Get the most recent motherboard, but there is no point in getting the most powerful chip. The best motherboard will set you back 180 dollars, the best chip 800. But because the motherboard is top of the line, in a year you will be able to upgrade the chip and video card with ease keeping your machine running great, for less then you would have spent on that 800 dollar chip. The difference between the 150 and 800 dollar chip is not that great... less then ten percent performance game. But if the motherboard can support the next generation chip, which will be dual -core chips both from Intel and AMD, you will see a much larger performance gain in a year when you upgrade while saving you tons of money. That money is much better spent on more higher quality ram and a better GPU.

For instance:
NForce 4 Sli 939 PCI motherboard... 180 (Sli allows for two graphics cards though you dont have to have two, so you buy one now and one in a year when your machine is slowing down with the newer games.)
AMD 64 3000+ chip... 150
Nvidia 6600gt... 180

in a year you can now upgrade the chip to dual core when they drop in price because it will still be 939 motherboard compliant and add a second graphics card. another $200 and $150.

All told around 850 dollars and you have a great running machine that lasts you two or possible three years.

A note... its actually better to get the 6800 or better card for sli, the 600gt does not really add enought to make it worth it, but that only adds between 200 and 300 dollars... still very reasonable compared to just getting an 800 chip.

 

[Paasky]

My own computer is 800MHz P3, 360SDRAM & GF4MX 64mb. It runs Pirates (with 1024x768 & all gfx's @ medium) very well, doesn't lag too much (ie it doesn't affect gameplay). So cIV will propably run well on my comp (I don't play XL maps because of the turntime).

The real joke is that civ3 is very laggy (in scrolling) when a 3d game is not lol: ?)

 

[EDA Green]

I also have a PIII, with 512Mb, and a Radeon 9600, and Pirates runs great on it. But like u say, civ3 has more lag than the Need for Speed Underground at 1024...!

 

[The Last Conformist]

Gah, I suck at hardware. Is a Radeon IGP 340M card enough?

 

[warpstorm]

Gah, I suck at hardware. Is a Radeon IGP 340M card enough?

Thats' what I have on my laptop On the upside, Pirates! runs on it okay with a few of the settings turned down from max.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Thats' what I have on my laptop On the upside, Pirates! runs on it okay with a few of the settings turned down from max.

IOW, I should be OK?

 

[evil_linus]

You guys know that the system requirements are really low actually? If you're computer are 2-3 years old (or newer ofcourse) you shouldn't have any problem with Civ IV. Thats more than can be said about most new games. Sure it's a strategygame and that kind of stuff, but if your computer is too slow to be able to play civ IV it will probably crash of it's own soon. So those of you that complain about needing to buy a new computer... I don't feel so sorry for you actually.

 

[Abegweit]

This whole discussion is quite silly and I think it turns on the fact that people don't fully understand how cheap PCs have become in the last few months. For 300 bucks, you can buy a brand new computer which far exceeds Civ4's minimum requirements. Add another 300 and it could be a laptop.

 

[apatheist]

Or maybe you take $300 for granted. I've been waiting for the parts I want to drop a couple hundred or so in price for the last 6 months, and I'm not exactly poor.

 

[Paasky]

If you're computer are 2-3 years old [...] but if your computer is too slow to be able to play civ IV it will probably crash of it's own soon.

Excuse me? My two own PC's (the "game-PC" is mutually owned & bought) are 233MHz & 800MHz Pentiums with 64mb & 364mb ram. They are 8 & 5 years old and both are still working just fine. It's a matter of keeping them working.

 

[Yusaku Jon III]

I got around to thinking of the options that I have and I could just get a custom-built PC for around (US) $1,200 - 1,400 out of one of the local shops where I live, using all the specs that I want (Pentium D 830, GeForce 6800 and 1 Gig of 533 MHz DDR-SDRAM). But I might opt for keeping my still-functional Socket 478 model going with just maxing out the available RAM and getting the biggest compatible upgrade for the graphics card. (GF4 MX 440 to MX4000 or whatever works best on the existing motherboard.) I should spend no more than $300/400 right there.

 

[warpstorm]

Realize that the GF4 MX series is not really a GeForce 4, but a marketing spin on the GeForce 2 (an shouldn't even cost $75). A real GeForce 4 is a lot more powerful.

 

[ronok]

I'm pretty worried about this; you say gr4f1x, I think high system requirements.