Would this PC run Civ 5 well on higher settings?

What would you consider higher settings? Most issues people have is playing on huge maps with lots of units and cities. That is what causes slow downs. This computer will basically play the game just fine.
 
timtofly said:
What would you consider higher settings? Most issues people have is playing on huge maps with lots of units and cities. That is what causes slow downs. This computer will basically play the game just fine.
Click to expand...
Thanks. My current pc can't play on high settings; in fact it can only do DX9. So I know that this will be a nice upgrade. I just wanted to make sure before I actually ordered it. I'm also curious if it will let me play on the highest settings on a large maps. I guess huge maps are slow no matter what.
 
It will probably let you see the white caps or the actual reflection of flying craft or ships in the water when playing on large maps.
 
timtofly said:
It will probably let you see the white caps or the actual reflection of flying craft or ships in the water when playing on large maps.
Click to expand...
I'd imagine that turn times would be a fairly decent on this as well. Hopefully a lot quicker than my previous pc.
 
It does not have a dedicated video card. Could this be a problem?

I don't know much at all about computer hardware, so any advice would be great.

Thanks in advance.
 
What was your previous computer?

According to the specs and one of the reviews it has an actual Nvidea GT 640 in it. The only way to tell is to see if it actually has a card in the machine. Most of the connections will go along the edge. If there are dvi or hdmi connectors by themselves on a card that is at a 90' angle from the other connectors then the GPU is separate from the MB.
 
If you had an extra $200+ this one has a lot better GPU. The processor is still an i5, but it is faster also.
 
Well, for reference, I have this PC http://www.bestbuy.com/site/xps-des...1389&skuId=2148157&st=dell xps 8700&cp=1&lp=4

I had bought a radeon 7770 to go with with it but it was defective. So, for the mean time, Im just using the Nvidia gt 635 that came with it.

In civ V at 1920x1080 the fps are between 20-30. Not very good.
However, at 1366X768 at medium settings it gives between 50-60fps. This is all in DirectX 11 mode

Turn times are very fast as well. I guess with these lower end gpus at high resolutions it just doesnt have the power to get good frames. For now lowering the resolution has been very playable.
 
timtofly said:
What was your previous computer?

According to the specs and one of the reviews it has an actual Nvidea GT 640 in it. The only way to tell is to see if it actually has a card in the machine. Most of the connections will go along the edge. If there are dvi or hdmi connectors by themselves on a card that is at a 90' angle from the other connectors then the GPU is separate from the MB.
Click to expand...
My previous pc was a Dell XPS 420 from 2008:

Operating System: Windows Vista™ Home Premium (6.0, Build 6002) Service Pack 2 (6002.vistasp2_gdr.130707-1535)
Language: English (Regional Setting: English)
System Manufacturer: Dell Inc.
System Model: Dell XPS420
BIOS: Phoenix ROM BIOS PLUS Version 1.10 A06
Processor: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q6600 @ 2.40GHz (4 CPUs), ~2.4GHz
Memory: 3326MB RAM
Page File: 3128MB used, 3748MB available
Windows Dir: C:\Windows
DirectX Version: DirectX 11
DX Setup Parameters: Not found
DxDiag Version: 7.00.6002.18107 32bit Unicode


Display Devices
---------------
Card name: ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT
Manufacturer: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Chip type: ATI display adapter (0x9588)
DAC type: Internal DAC(400MHz)
Device Key: Enum\PCI\VEN_1002&DEV_9588&SUBSYS_25421028&REV_00
Display Memory: 1657 MB
Dedicated Memory: 250 MB
Shared Memory: 1406 MB
Current Mode: 1280 x 1024 (32 bit) (60Hz)
Monitor: Generic PnP Monitor
Driver Name: aticfx32.dll,aticfx32.dll,atiumdag.dll,atidxx32.dl l,atiumdva.cap
Driver Version: 8.17.0010.1129 (English)
DDI Version: 10
BGRA Supported: Yes
Driver Attributes: Final Retail

It died about 5 days ago, and I replaced it with a new HP Pavillion (DxDiag attached).

but soon after trying the HP, I realized that it wasn't good enough. My old Dell XPS 420 actually ran Europa-Universalis IV better than the new HP.
 

Attachments

I think that gtx 650 will be good with civ. It has DDR5 and that should help with the higher settings.

In fact I think im going to put a gtx650ti in mine
 
GT 640 pass mark score 1290 average price $70.00 USD. i5 2.8 GHz $664
GTX 650 pass mark score 1833 average price $106.00 USD. i5 3.2 GHz $744
GTX 760 pass mark score 5006 average price $230.00 USD. i5 3.1 GHz $861

That would be the rough difference between the 3 computers at best buy.

Compared to the HP, the ASUS is a step up because the GPU is separate and dedicated. There are some here who are dedicated to either AMD or Intel, but personally, I have no preference. Are you taking the HP back? I would assume that if you added a good $100 to $150 GPU to the HP, it should not void the warranty, but it would give you better performance. However, it would be nice for an AMD user to give some input on how to optimize the integrated amd GPU and an added graphics card from AMD, which is beyond my point of experience.

The HP GPU only has a pass mark of 681. You definitely need a better GPU.


Snazzye said:
Well, for reference, I have this PC http://www.bestbuy.com/site/xps-des...1389&skuId=2148157&st=dell xps 8700&cp=1&lp=4

I had bought a radeon 7770 to go with with it but it was defective. So, for the mean time, Im just using the Nvidia gt 635 that came with it.

In civ V at 1920x1080 the fps are between 20-30. Not very good.
However, at 1366X768 at medium settings it gives between 50-60fps. This is all in DirectX 11 mode

Turn times are very fast as well. I guess with these lower end gpus at high resolutions it just doesnt have the power to get good frames. For now lowering the resolution has been very playable.
Click to expand...

That GT 635 only has a pass mark score of 950. The nvidea cards in the ASUS are stronger.

It would have been nice to see the performance of the radeon 7770 since it has a pass mark score of 2157.
 
timtofly said:
GT 640 pass mark score 1290 average price $70.00 USD. i5 2.8 GHz $664
GTX 650 pass mark score 1833 average price $106.00 USD. i5 3.2 GHz $744
GTX 760 pass mark score 5006 average price $230.00 USD. i5 3.1 GHz $861

That would be the rough difference between the 3 computers at best buy.

Compared to the HP, the ASUS is a step up because the GPU is separate and dedicated. There are some here who are dedicated to either AMD or Intel, but personally, I have no preference. Are you taking the HP back? I would assume that if you added a good $100 to $150 GPU to the HP, it should not void the warranty, but it would give you better performance. However, it would be nice for an AMD user to give some input on how to optimize the integrated amd GPU and an added graphics card from AMD, which is beyond my point of experience.

The HP GPU only has a pass mark of 681. You definitely need a better GPU.




That GT 635 only has a pass mark score of 950. The nvidea cards in the ASUS are stronger.

It would have been nice to see the performance of the radeon 7770 since it has a pass mark score of 2157.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your reply. I'm definitely returning the HP. I now have to decide between the Asus that cost $664 and the one that cost $744. Just how much better is the more expensive one (especially for running Civ 5 and Europa Universalis 4)? Unfortunately, money is fairly tight right now; so I wouldn't want to choose the more expensive one unless it improves performance significantly.

Thanks again for your help.
 
I have a laptop that is an i7 with 8 cores and a nvidea that scores 930.

The HP you had is an i5 range with 4 cores and a score of 681


I still have late game slow down and that is running everything maxed on a huge map with over 100 cities and 200 total units.

An i5 is going to be slower than an i7 and you are going to have slower turns late game, but the cards in the 3 Asus computers are stronger than mine and may make a difference in frame rate.

The first one will have an improvement of 50%. The middle one will have an improvement of 100%. The last one is a jump to 5006, which may be a 500% improvement. Some people say the game does not really take advantage of more cores, and you may not see that big of difference between an i5 and i7. I have played a couple of late game turns on an i5 with just the AMD 8670D gpu chipset and there is a difference between it and my laptop, but have not had an opportunity to give it a full test, and it does not handle full settings like the dedicated nvidea GPU's.
 
timtofly said:
I have a laptop that is an i7 with 8 cores and a nvidea that scores 930.

The HP you had is an i5 range with 4 cores and a score of 681


I still have late game slow down and that is running everything maxed on a huge map with over 100 cities and 200 total units.

An i5 is going to be slower than an i7 and you are going to have slower turns late game, but the cards in the 3 Asus computers are stronger than mine and may make a difference in frame rate.

The first one will have an improvement of 50%. The middle one will have an improvement of 100%. The last one is a jump to 5006, which may be a 500% improvement. Some people say the game does not really take advantage of more cores, and you may not see that big of difference between an i5 and i7. I have played a couple of late game turns on an i5 with just the AMD 8670D gpu chipset and there is a difference between it and my laptop, but have not had an opportunity to give it a full test, and it does not handle full settings like the dedicated nvidea GPU's.
Click to expand...
Thanks for your reply.

Do you think the first one (the cheapest of the 3 Asus's: $665) could handle max settings on a huge map? I've always played large maps (without max settings) because I knew my pc couldn't handle huge.

I'm trying to decide between the one that is $665 and the next one up, which is about $100 more. I have to decide if the one that's $100 more is worth it for Civ 5, Europa Universalis 4, and (later on) GalCiv 3. I'm sure it's a better pc; but maybe I wouldn't notice much of a difference with these particular games. That difference of 50% to 100%... do you think it would be that significantly noticeable for these 3 titles?

Thanks in advance for any more thoughts.
 
The amount of memory affects how many monitors or how big of a monitor you have. Normal 1920x1080 uses around 1GB. If you have a 30" monitor at 2560x1600 then you will want more than 2 GB.

The cheaper one will allow you to expand monitor wise, but will be slower. The next one up will allow you to have a faster experience, but will keep you at 1080p levels.

The more expensive one has 3GB GPU memory, so it will work fine regardless.
 
There are quite a lot of misconceptions on this thread.
1. It does not matter what the size of the monitor is. its all in the resolution. Your likely to have a 1080p monitor or lower so as long as the card has 1gb of dram you are fine, in fact even at 1440p for civ, based on my experiences you are cpu bound more than gpu bound when things start heating up. In addition memory bandwidth is a far bigger factor. 2gb is fine and dandy but at ddr3 speeds, things fall short. The 650 is a solid card though and will be fine for civ.
2. Laptop cpu =/= desktop. Give that the i5 on the asus is clocked nominally high, bumping to an i7 would be the least benefit to you.

The best buy asus looks solid but you should try shopping online for a desktop. You will often get better prices and most likely tax free. I just took a quick look and newegg has this in stock for comparison, I'm sure you can find a better deals
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16883265534
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
Constant crashes on new PC
Replies
2
Views
1K
Slave of CIV
S
L
Civ 5 won't launch (Solved)
Replies
1
Views
24K
coolhandluke11
coolhandluke11
kitfox
All menus on right side of screen are missing/disabled
Replies
16
Views
570
Necamijat
Necamijat
Z
Problem with Civ4 crashing on bigmaps.
Replies
7
Views
378
s.bernbaum
s.bernbaum
S
Switch Not quite a beginner, but close
Replies
4
Views
390
ScottyCiv7
S
Back
Top Bottom