Recently reinstalled civ V

[vincentz]

I wouldn't worry myself with "what is my FPS rate". If the game is running smoothly and you're not noticing significant lag in between turns...then you're experiencing the optimal game experience. FPS is more important when playing a fast paced game like a FPS (first person shooter) anyway...not strategy games

when you are playing a game with a fps on 6-10 then it is lagging like hell. If it was 25 then I would be somehow satisfied, but at 6-10 then it just isnt fun to play.
I guess my point about the fps was so people could understand the severity of the lagging. If I just wrote : the game is lagging and sluggish, its somewhat of a relative description.
some people with a very good rig will complain about 60 fps being too sluggish, while I think that everyone understands that a fps of 6 ,being a FPS game or civ, is VERY low.

Don't care that much atm as there are many other good games out there to play.

I guess so (Skyrim I'm looking at you!), just wanted to see if I could enjoy civ 5 now that I bought a new rig.
TBH if it wasnt for the sluggishness (a word?) I would probably have found other issues to rant about, so maybe for the better.

 

[qalsip1977]

Is it lagging during your turn (do you notice "click lag" where you click something and it takes 2-3 seconds to respond), in between turns (you click next turn and it takes 30 seconds before you can do anything), or what?

 

[Dedrytus]

I wrote some time ago, that is something wrong with 3D in CiV. My laptop tries to fly away with CiV (and Minecraft) but with other games fans works just fine. Similar situation is on my PC, graphic card is going crazy. Laptop: ATI 5650 and Intel, PC: 9600GT and AMD.

 

[Mavfin]

Core 2 Duo, that's why. That's a pretty weak CPU these days.

Civ 5 is very CPU heavy. I've got an i7, and I don't have a great graphics card, and I get good (60+) FPS on mine. So, I imagine the difference is in the CPU.

 

[qalsip1977]

Yeah it's a hardware issue. If you read the system requirements for the game it says dual core is required but 1.8 Ghz quad core is recommended...

 

[vincentz]

Core 2 Duo, that's why. That's a pretty weak CPU these days.

Civ 5 is very CPU heavy. I've got an i7, and I don't have a great graphics card, and I get good (60+) FPS on mine. So, I imagine the difference is in the CPU.

Yeah it's a hardware issue. If you read the system requirements for the game it says dual core is required but 1.8 Ghz quad core is recommended...

so it renders the graphics in the cpu? didnt civ 4 do that also?

 

[qalsip1977]

so it renders the graphics in the cpu? didnt civ 4 do that also?

I doubt it's a graphics issue, although it could be, my experience with CiV is that there's just so much "thinking" going on by the AI that it bogs older computers down. Many players have complained about this, especially on the larger map sizes, due to the number of AIs and such...

 

[Thaitanium]

Vista Ultimate 64bit
Core2Duo E7300 2.66 MHz, 4 GB Ram, Nvidia 9800 GT 512 MB (driver 285.62)
settings on high. res 1680x1050. big map.

Not that highend but not that crappy either. As mentioned all other games runs really smooth and fast, yet a game that looks like a simple board game cannot?!?
I tried to load up an old (heavily modified) version of Civ IV BtS and getting 70-80 fps

I have almost the same spec as your except my Core2Duo is around 2.80Ghz
but my res is abit lower its 1280(max) smthing i dont remember and I uses XPSP3

Anyway what I'm saying is that the spec u have isn't quite enough.....
9800GT (which I also have) is a bit outdated.

The first time I played civ5 I played it with default settings and for about a week later I got a game error (smthing about nv4_display stopped working), so I figured its the Graphic Card, so I changed all the Graphic settings to Low (All of them) and it works fine.

I also recommended Quad Core is better with civ5
About the Fraps issue, could you check if your frap setting if itsets to maximize the fps or not ?

With the spec almost the same to you, I can't even do a Giant Earth Map. :/ lame...

 

[ense7en]

Runs wonderfully maxed out @ 2560x1600 w/ my i7 + GTX 570.

You've got an old CPU, and an old GPU...pretty much self-explanatory why it doesn't run so well.
The game is quite demanding on both the CPU and the video card.

 

[PieceOfMind]

Runs wonderfully maxed out @ 2560x1600 w/ my i7 + GTX 570.

You've got an old CPU, and an old GPU...pretty much self-explanatory why it doesn't run so well.
The game is quite demanding on both the CPU and the video card.

This pretty much.

Yes it's a shame that a turn-based game is such a massive resource-hog, especially graphics wise, but what can you do...

At the very least I recommend turning down shadows in graphics settings. I find that with an outdated graphics card, in many games it the shadows that really pull framerates down.

 

[King_Course]

This pretty much.

Yes it's a shame that a turn-based game is such a massive resource-hog, especially graphics wise, but what can you do...

At the very least I recommend turning down shadows in graphics settings. I find that with an outdated graphics card, in many games it the shadows that really pull framerates down.

"Such a massive ressource hog", is another way of saying that Firaxis as the first developers actually aim at using all cpu cores, and have finally taken the game industry into the multicore age, years behind hardware development.

I really see no point in patting the OP on the back. His computer-system is obsolete, standing on the very edge of the digital abyss. Next game that comes out it will probably fall.

But his sad story made alot of you cry, and made you chime in on the "evil Firaxis" chant, which frankly, is a bore to listen to.

Moderator Action: Last couple of lines are quite borderline- no point in adding them to the post but to provoke a negative reaction. Doesn't further the thread in any regard.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[King_Course]

Runs wonderfully maxed out @ 2560x1600 w/ my i7 + GTX 570.

You've got an old CPU, and an old GPU...pretty much self-explanatory why it doesn't run so well.
The game is quite demanding on both the CPU and the video card.

Same here, on 2560x1440. Excellent game, excellent performance. If there was one thing, then I wished they had come over the top with the A.I. too, which we all know they haven't.

 

[Optional]

I really see no point in patting the OP on the back. His computer-system is obsolete, standing on the very edge of the digital abyss. Next game that comes out it will probably fall.

If as a costumer you're spending money, you like to know what you're spending it on.

I'm an old Civ III player, in that game you had tons of towns instead of just a couple, there were lots more units, real trade routes that had to be verified every turn, there were variables for resource costs and tech costs, there was reputation, war weariness, etc.

Civ V is a much more basic game, a lot of stuff got slashed under the hood, yet the game is... more difficult to run?
Games are the main reason people spend money on system specs, it's only right to ask something in return for that. Not spend more and get less.

 

[Bleser]

Take a look at a site like Anandtech.com. Excellent computer review site that only includes games with the latest/most interesting rendering methods.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4008/nvidias-geforce-gtx-580/10

They've been including civilization v since it was released, citing its many firsts in rendering techniques. Even ATI and nVidia have had to re-think their drivers to unlock the game's potential.

Another great read:

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=31520674&postcount=28

 

[Dedrytus]

Bleser, I can not agree with you. I do not care if they made something incredibly amazing with rendering. My poor laptop can play Crysis without problems and without warming out my room. With CiV it goes almost instantly hot. I do not see anything on the screen that can explain this. What is the point of 3D if I can not rotate the view? Poor terrain animations, no rotating, huge use of system resources is so interesting method of showing sth on the screen? 2D isometric graphics would be better in this case.

 

[PieceOfMind]

"Such a massive ressource hog", is another way of saying that Firaxis as the first developers actually aim at using all cpu cores, and have finally taken the game industry into the multicore age, years behind hardware development.

I really see no point in patting the OP on the back. His computer-system is obsolete, standing on the very edge of the digital abyss. Next game that comes out it will probably fall.

But his sad story made alot of you cry, and made you chime in on the "evil Firaxis" chant, which frankly, is a bore to listen to.

Moderator Action: Last couple of lines are quite borderline- no point in adding them to the post but to provoke a negative reaction. Doesn't further the thread in any regard.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

First of all, we'll in some part see just how well the game is coded when the DLL source is released. (I say 'in part' because the dll is only part of the story)

'massive' may have been exaggerating a bit, but the game is a resource hog***. Playing in strategic view is a good compromise though (significantly reducing the graphics load and bringing the bottleneck back to the cpu again) and I applaud Firaxis for making that addition to the game.

I have a modern system I put together May this year and it runs civ5 less adequately than what I'd like. It runs it a lot better than my 3ish year old system however.

***(EDIT... and just in case it's me who's getting the term 'resource hog' wrong, what I mean by that is a program which uses more system resources (whether that be memory or cpu etc.) than it should need. Obviously the 'how much it should need' is open to argument.)

 

[qalsip1977]

My laptop is a Core i7 2670QM 2.2Ghz, 8GB 1333Mhz RAM, and Nvidia GT555M 3Gb video. It runs the game like a top with max settings. I bought this laptop about a year ago from Dell.

 

[Mavfin]

My laptop is a Core i7 2670QM 2.2Ghz, 8GB 1333Mhz RAM, and Nvidia GT555M 3Gb video. It runs the game like a top with max settings. I bought this laptop about a year ago from Dell.

My *2 year old* W3520 i7 2.66 with a 512MB ATI 4870 just purrs like a kitten on Civ 5 or about anything else I throw at it. I play SC2 on Ultra. I played Rift for a while on top settings. This isn't a 'new box', but, I didn't buy the cheapest thing I could get, either. It's not like my GPU is state-of-the-art or anything, either. It's 2 years old.

All the simulation and AI stuff pounds lesser CPUs, and a Core 2 Duo is getting old now. Also, is that a 32-bit Vista or a 64-bit? If it's 32-bit, that's slowing things, too.

Simple as that. You can whinge at Firaxis all you want, but, it's still old hardware, and is less than recommended specs. I'm not trying to put down the OP, just reiterating where the issue is.