Blanchflower
Prince
OK, is Civilization 5 a 64-bit software or a 32-bit software? If it is a 64-bit software, it would be able to utilize more RAM and the game would run faster!
Technical Requirements?
- Thread starter sbrylski06
- Start date
Tylerryan79
Emperor
You will be able to play it on vista or 7 x64, just so no one reads this and gets confused.
Yes, but it will still run in 32 bit mode, so you won't get the benefit of a bunch more RAM. It will no doubt be large address aware though, just like BtS, so you'll be able to use up to 3 gig, rather than just 2 with a 32 bit OS.
Blanchflower
Prince
Well this is indeed bad news! Civilization 5 should be 64-bit because 64-bit OS is becoming quite common now!
Shurdus
Am I Napoleon?
Ouch, so not true. In the 32-bit architecture single programs can only use up to 2GB of memory. This means that no single program with the default settings can benefit from more than 2GB of memory, but since the OS and stuff running in the background will eat a non-negligible chunk of that memory one may definitely benefit from more memory. Also with more mmemory one may make programs aware of the fact that a computer houses more memory, so that if you are willing to learn how to make an executable high-adress-aware you may benefit from this.
Well this is indeed bad news! Civilization 5 should be 64-bit because 64-bit OS is becoming quite common now!
Not common enough to justify releasing a commercial product based on it. 64 bit users are still the minority, you won't see too many games being made for it until that changes. Maybe by the time Civ 6 comes out.
To put things into context, here are the Minimum System Requirements, from the respective Instruction Manuals.
Minimum Requirements-------Civ III-----------------Civ IV---------------Civ V ?
CPU Chip---------------300MHz Pentium II-----1.2GHz Pentium 4---2.+GHz dualcore ?
RAM------------------------32 MB-----------------256 MB------------1 - 2 GB ?
HD Free Space-------------500 MB-----------------1.7 GB------------4 - 6 GB ?
DX------------------------DirectX 8.0a-----------DirectX 9.0c-------DirectX 11.0b ?
Not to be redundant, these were the minimums (choppy, low resolution, game failures). The Recommended System Requirements (smooth, even, enjoyable play) were roughly double for chip speed and RAM.
The likely enormous size of the Civ V download probably explains the Steam delivery. If they actually sell a physical Game in the stores, it'll likely be 5 - 7 CDs.
Cost of Civ V $59.99
New Computer $699.99
Expansion Pack 1 $39.99
Sucker Pack $29.99
Expansion Pack 2 $49.99
Minimum Requirements-------Civ III-----------------Civ IV---------------Civ V ?
CPU Chip---------------300MHz Pentium II-----1.2GHz Pentium 4---2.+GHz dualcore ?
RAM------------------------32 MB-----------------256 MB------------1 - 2 GB ?
HD Free Space-------------500 MB-----------------1.7 GB------------4 - 6 GB ?
DX------------------------DirectX 8.0a-----------DirectX 9.0c-------DirectX 11.0b ?
Not to be redundant, these were the minimums (choppy, low resolution, game failures). The Recommended System Requirements (smooth, even, enjoyable play) were roughly double for chip speed and RAM.
The likely enormous size of the Civ V download probably explains the Steam delivery. If they actually sell a physical Game in the stores, it'll likely be 5 - 7 CDs.
Cost of Civ V $59.99
New Computer $699.99
Expansion Pack 1 $39.99
Sucker Pack $29.99
Expansion Pack 2 $49.99
Shurdus
Am I Napoleon?
yeah, except that they will not set dx11 as a minimum requirement. They will use dx9.0c as the bare minimum - at least that is what I would suspect - because even though win7 will be big in the near future, there are quite a few people who have winXP still. People like me.
And 6GB is not that huge a deal to download, especially from steam. Portal is available for free on steam and that game has a roughly 5GB download. Now I would describe my internet as weak, especially since the house I moved out of last january had internet that as very good. EVen on my weak internet connection I downloaded the 5GB that is portal with 300+ kB/sec, so the game was in in under 30 minutes. If civ5 will be like portal in size I would take it that you can download that in roughly that timeframe too. And given that fact that you can start the downloading well before the game is out I think anyone can have it in by the time the game goes live.
player1 fanatic
Fanatic
If you buy laptop, but only (and I say only) plan to play Civ5 on it. I would suggest just to take notice and not in any way get any of integrated graphics solutions (especially various Intel GMA solutions, they are cr*p of cr*p, incapable to run 5 years old games decently).
As minimum I would advise modern entry level dedicated graphics, like 4570/5470 radeon mobility or G210M/G310M from nVidia. These are pretty modest graphics cards, if compared to desktop solutions, but I have hunch they would be more enough to be able to "play" Civ5 (not on full details or resolution).
Look at those as minimum requirement and get better if you want to spend more money on laptop.
And of course, at lest dual core machine.
As minimum I would advise modern entry level dedicated graphics, like 4570/5470 radeon mobility or G210M/G310M from nVidia. These are pretty modest graphics cards, if compared to desktop solutions, but I have hunch they would be more enough to be able to "play" Civ5 (not on full details or resolution).
Look at those as minimum requirement and get better if you want to spend more money on laptop.
And of course, at lest dual core machine.
Shurdus
Am I Napoleon?
Right now the best bet if you buy a gaming computer for civ5, it wuld be wise to wait until right before the game comes out. Hardware devaluates rapidly, so your bucks right now would get you a decent system, but for the same price in a few months the same amount of bucks would get you a better system.
Waiting beats spending money now if playing civ5 is what you spend the money for.
Waiting beats spending money now if playing civ5 is what you spend the money for.
Commander Bello
Say No 2 Net Validations
You are confusing me.
A dl of 5 GB using a connection of 300 KB/sec translates to 4,8 hrs or 284.xx minutes in my books.
Not only in yours.
300 kb/s = ~1 mb/3s
-> 1H = 3600 s -> 1h ~1200 mb.
5 Gb ~ 4h.
I have a downstream of 20 kb over the mobil phone network, i'm sitting hear, laughing insanely.
300 kb/s = ~1 mb/3s
-> 1H = 3600 s -> 1h ~1200 mb.
5 Gb ~ 4h.
I have a downstream of 20 kb over the mobil phone network, i'm sitting hear, laughing insanely.
Shurdus
Am I Napoleon?
Ok, apparently I am getting the numbers wrong. Anyway, I would rate my internet connection as 'not that special' yet Portal was in very very fast because steam will send the info to you pretty much as fast as your connection can handle it. It was in in 30 minutes or so, so apparently it was way faster than I expected it to be. When I checked it said that the peak speed was ~400KB/sec. By then the DL was not 10% complete. Since waiting is not really my thing I went on to do something else, only to see the game completed when I checked in roughly half an hour later.
I had assumed that the speed remained constant throughout the download, and I cared not to actually do the math to check. Apparently some people have more problems to let things go - and apparently laugh insanely about it - that I do. The point of my story however is that steam in itself is actually very fast to download from. If you cannot download fast from your connection, trying to download from elsewhere might pay off. The suggestion that my statement should be generalised to apply to downloading over a mobile phone network is completely out of context and apparently false.
Also since no one likes to wait it may be a good idea to let the pc download overnight.
I had assumed that the speed remained constant throughout the download, and I cared not to actually do the math to check. Apparently some people have more problems to let things go - and apparently laugh insanely about it - that I do. The point of my story however is that steam in itself is actually very fast to download from. If you cannot download fast from your connection, trying to download from elsewhere might pay off. The suggestion that my statement should be generalised to apply to downloading over a mobile phone network is completely out of context and apparently false.
Also since no one likes to wait it may be a good idea to let the pc download overnight.
Commander Bello
Say No 2 Net Validations
This may sound now a bit unpolite, but I am more and more "wondering" about your download experiences.
Since I noticed some unexplainable figures in your previous postings regarding that topic, I looked it up (the following are all your remarks).
Honestly, to me it seems that you have had a dl while not being around, and for unknown reasons you feel urged to display it as very, very, very quick.
Since I noticed some unexplainable figures in your previous postings regarding that topic, I looked it up (the following are all your remarks).
From this posting:
And initially it has been:
****
Honestly, to me it seems that you have had a dl while not being around, and for unknown reasons you feel urged to display it as very, very, very quick.
Edit: @shurdus:
I did not really want to generalize anything here, just wanted to point out, that not everyone has fast internet, and that it was not a long time ago, when nobody had.
6 gigabyte is really something, not everyone wants to download.
I did not really want to generalize anything here, just wanted to point out, that not everyone has fast internet, and that it was not a long time ago, when nobody had.
6 gigabyte is really something, not everyone wants to download.
Shurdus
Am I Napoleon?
3+MB/sec? Ha.
I just recalled the 3 from memory, and figured that 300KB/sec sounds very fast still. It thought it was probably that. I guess it was indeed 3MB/sec then, since when I posted that it was fresh in my memory. I can always when I get home DL a game and take a screeny to end all discussion if you so please. Just ask and I will do it, it is no problem at all. It is possible to see how fast the DL is, and it didshow the exact numbers. If I reported 3MB/sec earlier then I am completely sure that it was indeed that, and that it did indeed peek at 4MB/sec.
To me it sounds like a critical note on some false claims I made rather than a not very polite remark. That is always the danger when one is trying be be specific -> if the numbers do not add up you sound like a fool.
I did not try to mislead anyone, I was posting my results when I downloaded a game. I started to DL portal and was amazed to see it was in so fast after what had seemed to me like a blazing fast download. Just because the numbers do not add up it does not make me a liar, just a very very inaccurate reporter who checks not the facts.
@The_J: granted, but there may be workarounds for that like keeping the pc running overnight, or taking it to a friends place for the download - and for some LAN games while the game downloads of course. I am not saying it is not a big deal because steam is always fast, but if there are people out there like me who think downloading over steam will suck because they have poor experiences with their internet at home, they may be pleasantly surprised.
What makes my point less strong though is that I tested my internet speed once. It was then as fast as pretty much slower than the cheapest internet out there. However I share my internet with the rest of the appartments at my complex, and the results may have been muddied by the surfing and downloading behavior of others. I may have had a lucky half-hour there... I just do not know.
All I meant to report was indeed that you can download form steam with blazing speed if your internet supports that... It is therefore safe to say that steam as a DL client is as fast as one could possibly want.
Similar threads
