System requirements are out!

I have a laptop with a GT 650m and I'm scared :(

Me too. My CPU just-barely-kind-of-not-really meets the minimum standard according to Hajee's game-debate.com link, but it says my GFX card (The 650M) falls far short. Which I'm a little confused about because if I google a comparison of geforce 650M vs geforce 450 (the listed minimum) it seems to be, again, just-barely-kind-of-not-really okay.

The thing is, I know I'll be upgrading within the next few months, I just would like to know if my laptop could hobble along in Civ 6 for a few months, or not run it at all.
 
To any one who has questions about if they can run the game or not

http://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=23894&game=Civilization VI

Their processor drop down list appears to be missing some CPU processors:
My mini tower is an AMD FX-8800P Radeon R7

The dropdown under AMD FX has both higher & lower numbers than 8800 but not 8800 itself.

What's interesting about my machine bought in March of this year is it has 16 GB RAM (double what is listed as recommended, and is a quad core [12 Computer Core 4 C] but "only" listed as 2.1 GHZ on My Computer tab. It has a dedicated video card)
AMD's site says the 2.1 GHZ is its base speed but it's max turbo speed is 3.4 GHZ; so I'm wondering:
1. Is this a machine that when fairly idle stays at 2.1 GHZ but automatically switches to a higher speed when given CPU intensive tasks?
2. For the purposes of game specs is it "base speed" or "max turbo speed" that matters?

http://products.amd.com/en-us/searc...Laptops/FX-8800P-with-Radeon™-R7-Graphics/123
 
A quick question, if I run dxdiag and go to the display section, Is the Approx. Total Memory part the one I'm looking for to see if it meets the 2GB Video Card recommedation? Mine says it's a GTX 750 and has 4041MB of memory.

Also, I have a 1st Gen i7 950 (3.07GHz). That should run it decently right?

Planning on upgrading my RAM to at least 12gb and installing an SSD, which should help too.
 
I just built a new rig, but I don't have a graphics card yet, since I don't need one to play Civ5.
I7-6700 (6th generation), HD 530 integrated graphics plays civ5 great. 16 GB RAM. I was planning to get one of the newest graphics cards (1060), but if I don't need it I'll wait.
 
This thread amazes me. I'm not sure I've seen a gaming forum with so many ancient machines and still hoping a game will work. Also, people being genuinely surprised that their specs surpass the recommended; although looking at some of the recommended specs coming out lately, these are rather tame. Also, the number of people who play on laptops. And the number of people who buy off the shelf boxes with i7 beefy processors with bottom of the barrel GPUs.

Here's my tips for laptop owners, if it's more than a year old or so, it will struggle because of the graphics processing. The exception is if you have a gaming laptop, which if you are not sure, then if you spent over $1500 on it. There's exceptions to the exceptions, but if you fit that category you probably know because you probably specifically bought it because of the discrete GPU.

Actually a better tip for laptop owners and anyone else that plans to play any games on a computer, do your homework and research before you buy anything. Also, the GPU is important if you want to play PC games.
 
It is perfectly possible and legal to put Windows on a Mac via Bootcamp, VMware Fusion, or Parallels Desktop. After all, Macs are technically PCs.

An iMac with Retina Display with Windows 10 works wonders. Even a MacBook Pro with Retina Display (the new upcoming one) is capable of playing Civ VI with high settings without lag (either on the native Mac version (will come later) or with Windows).

Best of both worlds indeed.
 
This thread amazes me. I'm not sure I've seen a gaming forum with so many ancient machines and still hoping a game will work. Also, people being genuinely surprised that their specs surpass the recommended; although looking at some of the recommended specs coming out lately, these are rather tame. Also, the number of people who play on laptops. And the number of people who buy off the shelf boxes with i7 beefy processors with bottom of the barrel GPUs.

1. Note that the official specs for Civ VI only came out today; before then all we had to go on was the Beyond Earth specs, released very roughly 1 1/2 years before Civ VI announcement. It's a bit of a surprise how much the CPU minimum processor speed increased between BE & Civ VI; raw CPU speed had been fairly flat in the past few years right around 2 GZ with all increases in performance being from more CPUs, more cores, more memory, and other internal improvements not measured in clock speed. By contrast I fully anticipated the increased RAM requirement and the 64 bit requirement.

2. In case of myself, the only games I've bought in the past eleven years are Civ IV, Civ V and their expansions. 100% of my video game playing time goes to the civ series.

3. Also in case of myself, I'm also not sure at all what "max turbo charge speed" means relative to the stated game minimum specifications. Are they talking about the "regular" CPU speed, or the "max turbo speed" which is about 50% faster than regular in the case of my machine?
 
A quick question, if I run dxdiag and go to the display section, Is the Approx. Total Memory part the one I'm looking for to see if it meets the 2GB Video Card recommedation? Mine says it's a GTX 750 and has 4041MB of memory.

Yes

Edit : Or not. My dxdiag shows twice the amount of VRAM on that metric of my GPU (8 instead of 4) so I guess your card might be a 2GB ?

What you can do instead is to look at the properties of the hardware itself. Go to your display settings and then the display adapter properties. Should show the right amount of VRAM on your gpu.
If you are on win 10, right click desktop > display settings > advanced settings > display adapter properties.
 
Their processor drop down list appears to be missing some CPU processors:
My mini tower is an AMD FX-8800P Radeon R7

The dropdown under AMD FX has both higher & lower numbers than 8800 but not 8800 itself.

What's interesting about my machine bought in March of this year is it has 16 GB RAM (double what is listed as recommended, and is a quad core [12 Computer Core 4 C] but "only" listed as 2.1 GHZ on My Computer tab. It has a dedicated video card)
AMD's site says the 2.1 GHZ is its base speed but it's max turbo speed is 3.4 GHZ; so I'm wondering:
1. Is this a machine that when fairly idle stays at 2.1 GHZ but automatically switches to a higher speed when given CPU intensive tasks?
No. At idle it will be at something like 0.8 or 1.0 GHz

2. For the purposes of game specs is it "base speed" or "max turbo speed" that matters?
Depends entirely on how good the cooling solution in your case is, and if you really have a dedicated card. I doubt it a little bit, though.

Worst case, bad cooling and no seperate video card it will run close to the minimum under load.
Best case, good cooling and seperate card, it will run close to the maximum under load.
 
This thread amazes me. I'm not sure I've seen a gaming forum with so many ancient machines and still hoping a game will work. Also, people being genuinely surprised that their specs surpass the recommended; although looking at some of the recommended specs coming out lately, these are rather tame. Also, the number of people who play on laptops. And the number of people who buy off the shelf boxes with i7 beefy processors with bottom of the barrel GPUs.

Seems you are new here :D
We have a thread exactly like this every time a new Civ comes out.

The civ demographics is quite different from your average gaming demographics, at least here on the civfanatics forums.
A lot of civvers play nothing but games from the civ franchise, or at most a few other slow paced strategy games beside those.
And the average non-gaming computer buyer will get either a <<$1000 laptop that tends to be not very gaming friendly or a standard off the shelf box that tends to have a oversized CPU and only integrated/ancient/slow graphics.
 
@ Joncnunn, yeah you Cpu Clock Speed is 3.4Ghz when doing comparisons because that is what your Cpu will do when required. I know laptops generally have larger variations between "economy" and "power" because they are harder to keep cool and quiet. Your Laptop will be fine, if not amazing at Civ6

@Sadsquid, I have the same card in my work machine.. It has 2GB Dedicated Graphics memory and can use up to 8GB of Shared Memory. Pretty sure you will be fine, although when dealing with Graphics Cards , Video memory is the least of your Concerns. My GTX680OC is older but it is a lot faster than my GTX750Ti ranking 33/522 VS 83/522 even though the Core Speed and memory Speed and size is the same. That GTX750 is an excellent budget card though :) and will be fine, but not amazing. at Civ6(i doubt it will do 1080p at Max settings :))

Use this to bench your card if you like peoples

http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-750-Ti-vs-Nvidia-GTX-680/2187vs3148

just pick your card or test your GPU, if you are browsing on the same machine. Anything in the top 150 will be fine...watch out Laptop users,your cards are significantly slower than the desktop versions.

One thing though when doing laptop conversions is to take into consideration that they are different than desktop CPU's, even if they have the same Clocks speed and designation. an I5 in a laptop will not be as powerful as an equivalent i5 in a desktop. generally they have less logical Cores and smaller Cache size. The smaller cache size is generally the important one, though newer games are starting to effectively utilise more logical cores.
On this note, more Cores dont necessarily translate to more power gains. The software needs to be written with respect to this to actually make use of the extra cores effectively. As a general rule i5's are just as quick as i7's with respect to games, assuming similar clock speed. 4 Logical Cores will generally be enough, but if you are upgrading you should go for 8. (Current i5's have 8)
 
I5 4690k oc
16gb ram
r9 270 oc
250gb 850 evo ssd

Good enough... Might get a 4gb RX470 or 6gb 1060 in a black friday sale.
 
Well,

Looks like my integrated Intel 3000 isn't going to work at all!

Not likely to buy a new laptop just to play this.

Nice graphics are pretty, of course, but nothing about the gameplay itself requires anything beyond showing what's what on a hex grid. Of course, eye candy is much easier to program than good AI, and probably more likely to matter to more prospective customers.

Checking in again 2 or 3 years from now is probably a better choice anyway! Fewer bugs, more reviews, etc.

Oh well.

Anyway,

Ken
 
I have an i3-3220 with 3,30 ghz and it has always served me well. Didn't have problems with Witcher 3, Dragon Age: Inquisition or Rome 2 (after the dozen or so patches).
Above minimum and below recommended probably just means I'll better have a book ready to read between turns during the mid to late game if I play huge maps with max number of civs.
Now is pretty bad timing for an upgrade since Intel and AMD both have a new CPU generation coming in early 2017, unless you can find a really cheap i5 or i7 for your current motherboard.
Thanks for the heads up. My i3 did an amazing job for me as well. I bought it for civ V and had to replace the GPU when it broke down. I'll just see how the i3 will do and try to postpone the upgrade to the next generation, unless civ IV won't be playable...
 
Supposed I was going to buy a new laptop MSI. What graphic-card should I go for to gain all max. settings ? 970, 1060, 1070 or 1080 (unpayable ???). Not the M-series. No desktop wanted and the only games I play are strategies. Thx for suggestions. :goodjob:
 
Supposed I was going to buy a new laptop MSI. What graphic-card should I go for to gain all max. settings ? 970, 1060, 1070 or 1080 (unpayable ???). Not the M-series. No desktop wanted and the only games I play are strategies. Thx for suggestions. :goodjob:

it'd be hard for you to buy a laptop and not get an M series in there.

unless the laptop is 90% graphics card...
 
Top Bottom