Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: When it means minimum system requirements what does that mean?

  1. #1

    When it means minimum system requirements what does that mean?

    2 questions.

    1. I have a Nvidia 9300M GS graphics card. Is that good enough to play?

    2. My CPU is the only thing that doesn't meet the recommended system requirements (and maybe my graphics card). What does that mean? It'll just be slower?

    Thanks.

  2. #2
    It may mean that it is just slower, and you might have to play on small maps as well as turn off all the options. But in the big picture it means that 2K makes ZERO guarentee that the game will even work below the stated min requirements.

    Fortunately there is a demo coming that we can all use to test the game before we buy it if you are worried about the hardware requirements.

    CS

  3. #3
    on the Can You Run It? site I ran a test on my hardware with the game Call of Duty MW2.

    Here is what it says on my graphics card:


    Required You Have
    Video RAM 256 MB 2.2 GB
    Hardware T&L Yes Yes
    Pixel Shader version 3.0 4.0
    Vertex Shader version 3.0 4.0

    And it says:


    Minimum: Intel Pentium 4 3.2GHz or AMD Athlon 64 3200+ processor or better supported
    You Have: 2.00 GHz Performance Rated at: 3.3 GHz

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by TemperingPick View Post
    on the Can You Run It? site I ran a test on my hardware with the game Call of Duty MW2.

    Here is what it says on my graphics card:


    Required You Have
    Video RAM 256 MB 2.2 GB
    Hardware T&L Yes Yes
    Pixel Shader version 3.0 4.0
    Vertex Shader version 3.0 4.0

    And it says:


    Minimum: Intel Pentium 4 3.2GHz or AMD Athlon 64 3200+ processor or better supported
    You Have: 2.00 GHz Performance Rated at: 3.3 GHz
    yeah this is the thing that has been bothering me. codmw2 will run on my system just fine. why would civ5 need a higher graphics card? i'd figure the main trouble would be all the game mechanics calculations it'd have to make, which would be CPU intensive rather than GPU, right? anyway, my card is just below the min, so i'm guessing this'll mean low fps, and at worse i'll have to turn off things like unit animations. they weren't that good in the previous games, and i never play civ for the graphics, so oh well.

    but, as stated, there will be a demo. try it out and see.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    "Fake" Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,487
    Quote Originally Posted by TemperingPick View Post
    2 questions.

    1. I have a Nvidia 9300M GS graphics card. Is that good enough to play?
    The 9300GS is definitely below the recommended specs. "Good enough to play" becomes more complex, especially since everyone has their own opinion on what "good enough" is.

    Quote Originally Posted by TemperingPick View Post
    2. My CPU is the only thing that doesn't meet the recommended system requirements (and maybe my graphics card). What does that mean? It'll just be slower?
    It's hard to say. Combined with the fact that your video card is so far below the minimums, it starts to look a little worse.

    There is no real standard for what "minimum requirements" are. I've seen someone running CoD MW2 on low end integrated graphics cards. That's way below the minimum, but the game still ran. Now, they were getting 8 frames per second, which puts the quality somewhere between "ye olde tyme movie" and "rapid slideshow". You could understand what was happening in the game, but you couldn't play it effectively.

    In a game like Civ where there is no need for twitch responses or mouse accuracy, maybe people will be fine with 8 fps. Lots of people had below-minimum processors for Civ4 and experienced nothing worse than longer load/turn times. People with sub-par graphics cards were able to turn down detail and apply other tweaks to keep performance at an acceptable level. You may be able to do the same.

    The nVidia 9000 series is basically a more efficient re-manufacture of the 8000 series which is still a great series for gaming cards. The game should run on your hardware, but we don't really know what sort of behavior you'll get by running so far below the minimum. Possibilities range from the relatively benign low framerate and lagging animations to the outright disabling catastrophic-slowdown or even a crash-to-desktop. Since you can guarantee that both your processor and graphics cards will be worked to their max levels, you may or may not have issues with heat buildup. It seems safe to expect turns to take longer, dialogs to appear slower, and noticeable pauses as you move from one location to another.

    No matter what, CanuckSoldier was right in pointing out the one thing that we do know for sure: 2K/Firaxis will give you absolutely no guarantee that the game will even play, and they probably won't even give you support if you buy it and it have any technical problems.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by slowtarget View Post
    The 9300GS is definitely below the recommended specs. "Good enough to play" becomes more complex, especially since everyone has their own opinion on what "good enough" is.



    It's hard to say. Combined with the fact that your video card is so far below the minimums, it starts to look a little worse.

    There is no real standard for what "minimum requirements" are. I've seen someone running CoD MW2 on low end integrated graphics cards. That's way below the minimum, but the game still ran. Now, they were getting 8 frames per second, which puts the quality somewhere between "ye olde tyme movie" and "rapid slideshow". You could understand what was happening in the game, but you couldn't play it effectively.

    In a game like Civ where there is no need for twitch responses or mouse accuracy, maybe people will be fine with 8 fps. Lots of people had below-minimum processors for Civ4 and experienced nothing worse than longer load/turn times. People with sub-par graphics cards were able to turn down detail and apply other tweaks to keep performance at an acceptable level. You may be able to do the same.

    The nVidia 9000 series is basically a more efficient re-manufacture of the 8000 series which is still a great series for gaming cards. The game should run on your hardware, but we don't really know what sort of behavior you'll get by running so far below the minimum. Possibilities range from the relatively benign low framerate and lagging animations to the outright disabling catastrophic-slowdown or even a crash-to-desktop. Since you can guarantee that both your processor and graphics cards will be worked to their max levels, you may or may not have issues with heat buildup. It seems safe to expect turns to take longer, dialogs to appear slower, and noticeable pauses as you move from one location to another.

    No matter what, CanuckSoldier was right in pointing out the one thing that we do know for sure: 2K/Firaxis will give you absolutely no guarantee that the game will even play, and they probably won't even give you support if you buy it and it have any technical problems.
    Hmm...well that sucks. I'll definitely give the demo a go when it comes out. If it doesn't run well then yet another reason to get a new computer. It's a win win.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    "Fake" Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,487
    Quote Originally Posted by TemperingPick View Post
    Hmm...well that sucks. I'll definitely give the demo a go when it comes out. If it doesn't run well then yet another reason to get a new computer. It's a win win.
    That's smart advice for anyone here.

    Even if you pre-purchased, lots of places will let you cancel if you do it before the game ships. The demo should at least give us that much time. Buying/Building a new computer might take a bit longer, but its also fun, so the lost Civ time is acceptable.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by slowtarget View Post
    That's smart advice for anyone here.

    Even if you pre-purchased, lots of places will let you cancel if you do it before the game ships. The demo should at least give us that much time. Buying/Building a new computer might take a bit longer, but its also fun, so the lost Civ time is acceptable.
    You two are both part of the problem!

    Programmers should aim to develop software within the normal range of capability of the public user. Furthermore, it's people like you who will be justying the release of patches only days after the game goes on sale.

    I heard a rumour that Sid Meyer had personally taken on board the leasons learned from the debarkle that was Civ 4 - which required patches only weeks later.

    To increase the specification requirements of the PC (which is constantly driving up the price to play newly released games - what about your gen Y market who cannot afford the constant updates with their commensusate costs - I ask you, what about the children?) is part of IT industrial complex conspiracy.
    Last edited by CivInfidel; 08-20-2010 at 10:34 PM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    5,478
    main purchasing power of the gamer 'industry' is from 18-35 year olds. they have the money, mostly, so that's the market game companies go for, mostly.

    So upgrading to a new video card isn't something they worry about.

    Mostly it comes down to what textures/shaders they're using, which drives the need for upgrading video cards. i had to update my video card for civ 4 since I lacked good shaders on my prior card. the jungles still ate most of the ram and video card resources, so i had to turn down the graphics til I got rid of them and then turned them back up.

    minimum requirements always seem like a shot in the dark. But most companies shoot for something that will give you 30 fps on lower settings. In civ 5's case, they redesigned the engine to be multithreaded (we'll see how well it actually works) meaning that they really do need to get past the old tech to run the game at the minimum level.

    it's been said before but needs to be repeated, civ isn't like COD. civ has many models and minor graphics whereas COD has few models and major graphics. it's not quite the samething, but processing wise 1000's of models need more to get it to look nice.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by drunkugly View Post
    yeah this is the thing that has been bothering me. codmw2 will run on my system just fine. why would civ5 need a higher graphics card? i'd figure the main trouble would be all the game mechanics calculations it'd have to make, which would be CPU intensive rather than GPU, right? anyway, my card is just below the min, so i'm guessing this'll mean low fps, and at worse i'll have to turn off things like unit animations. they weren't that good in the previous games, and i never play civ for the graphics, so oh well.

    but, as stated, there will be a demo. try it out and see.
    Bacause CIV5 uses DX11 heavily. To use newer features we must have games use newer video cards, if not we all would still be playing NETHACK.

    "HEY guys!!! I just bought my VT100 ASCII accelerator from ATI, OMG look at the those crisp @ signs, man they look toooo cool."

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by MadDjinn View Post
    main purchasing power of the gamer 'industry' is from 18-35 year olds. they have the money, mostly, so that's the market game companies go for, mostly..
    Just so you realize, I did not have one tenth the cash for computers I have now, and I am 40 this year. At 18 I had to beg scrounge, save and pray for a game purchase, let alone a whole new system. In fact I had to take a loan out for my first 486 going to school.

    Older you get you may have more responsibilities, but likely you have more free cash, but our toys all get bigger and better, trucks, sports cars, boats, trips and families. You have a lot more money, just a lot more to spend it on too.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    5,478
    Quote Originally Posted by Exmortis View Post
    Just so you realize, I did not have one tenth the cash for computers I have now, and I am 40 this year. At 18 I had to beg scrounge, save and pray for a game purchase, let alone a whole new system. In fact I had to take a loan out for my first 486 going to school.

    Older you get you may have more responsibilities, but likely you have more free cash, but our toys all get bigger and better, trucks, sports cars, boats, trips and families. You have a lot more money, just a lot more to spend it on too.
    oh yeah, should likely skew the upper range to 45 since the range has been the same for more than 10 years.

    it's our generation (gen X) that built the industry, so even as we get older we still buy the games.

  13. #13
    Also Civ 5 has a lot more models to render on the screen than Civ 4. Each unit in civ 4, the computer has to draw like 3 models, but in Civ 5 each unit has like 10-16 models in it.


    When reaching modern age you'll have thousands of units...

    Fortunately in the modern age most are tanks and ships so it goes down to 1-3 models

  14. #14
    can someone help me? need an advise here...

    i want to buy a new laptop and wonder if whether it's good enough to play CIV 5 or not?

    here:

    Detail Specifications

    Platform Notebook PC
    Processor Type Intel Core i5 Processor
    Processor Onboard Intel® Core™ i5-520M Processor (2.40 GHz, Cache 3 MB)
    Chipset Intel HM55

    Standard Memory 4 GB (2x 2GB) DDR3 SDRAM PC-8500
    Max. Memory 8 GB (2 DIMMs)

    Video Type ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5650 1GB

    Display Size 14" WXGA LED
    Display Max. Resolution 1366 x 768
    Display Technology LED backlight

    Audio Type Integrated
    Intel® High Definition Audio
    Speakers Type Integrated
    Built-in stereo speakers

    Floppy Drive Optional
    Hard Drive Type 500 GB Serial ATA 5400 RPM
    Optical Drive Type DVD±RW

    Modem Optional
    Networking Gigabit NIC
    Network Speed 10 / 100 / 1000 Mbps
    Wireless Network Type Integrated
    Wireless Network Protocol IEEE 802.11a, IEEE 802.11b, IEEE 802.11g, IEEE 802.11n
    Wireless Bluetooth Integrated
    standard Ver. 2.1+EDR

    Keyboard Type QWERTY 86 keys
    Input Device Type Touch Pad
    Slot Provided ExpressCard/ 34
    Card Reader Provided Secure Digital, SDHC, Memory Stick, Memory Stick Pro
    Interface Provided 3x USB 2.0, E-SATA, VGA, LAN, Audio

    O/S Provided Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit

    Battery Type Rechargeable Lithium-ion Battery
    Power Supply External AC Adapter

    thx a lot

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Free State Bavaria
    Posts
    2,293
    Quote Originally Posted by Altius View Post
    can someone help me? need an advise here...

    i want to buy a new laptop and wonder if whether it's good enough to play CIV 5 or not?

    here:

    Detail Specifications

    <clip>

    thx a lot
    No, that's a really crappy one, you'll have to do better than that.

    Or; wait for the demo very soon, and decide then.

    Or; read the recommended specifications for yourself, and work it out from there.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Glorious Republic of Melbourne
    Posts
    3,108
    Quote Originally Posted by tfordp View Post
    No, that's a really crappy one, you'll have to do better than that.

    Or; wait for the demo very soon, and decide then.

    Or; read the recommended specifications for yourself, and work it out from there.
    can someone help me? need an advise here...

    i want to buy a new laptop and wonder if whether it's good enough to play CIV 5 or not?

    [snip]

    Keyboard Type QWERTY 86 keys

    [snip]

    thx a lot
    slowtarget could help you for the system requirements, but I think he lives in America, so you may have to wait. He's an expert on both the nVidea cards and the ATI cards, as both companies have released their cards with numbers that just confuse you unless you know what you're talking about.

    You have a QWERTY keyboard? Learn Dvorak. It's a lot better. AND faster.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    "Fake" Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,487
    Quote Originally Posted by tfordp View Post
    Or; read the recommended specifications for yourself, and work it out from there.
    That's excellent advice, except for the fact that the "work it out from there" step isn't so simple as it sounds.

    The minimums say that you need a GeForce 7900GS or better. So, a GeForce 8200GT should be all good, right? Wait. It's not? But 8200 is higher than 7900. What about the 9300? Surely, that should... Wait, that's not good enough either? But hold on, someone said the 8800 is good enough. What about the 8600? Hey. Why is the 8600GT okay but the 8600GS isn't?

    It's a little better on the ATi side of the equation, but its still not something just anyone can go figure out for themselves, and its still subject to confusion on the "just how good will it be" question.

    Even processors have this issue. A Core2 Q6850 is slightly more powerful than a Q9300 and noticeably more powerful than Q9100. A new i5 661 isn't as good as a i5 680, but it is better than a i5 670.

    In short: Understanding how your system stands with respect to the minimum/recommended specs takes more than just reading the names and numbers and comparing them to what you've got.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    "Fake" Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,487
    Quote Originally Posted by Altius View Post
    can someone help me? need an advise here...

    i want to buy a new laptop and wonder if whether it's good enough to play CIV 5 or not?
    Cool. All we really care about here is:

    Quote Originally Posted by Altius View Post
    Platform Notebook PC
    Processor Type Intel Core i5 Processor
    Processor Onboard Intel® Core™ i5-520M Processor (2.40 GHz, Cache 3 MB)
    Chipset Intel HM55

    Standard Memory 4 GB (2x 2GB) DDR3 SDRAM PC-8500
    Max. Memory 8 GB (2 DIMMs)

    Video Type ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5650 1GB

    Display Size 14" WXGA LED
    Display Max. Resolution 1366 x 768
    Your OS is obviously fine (being a new computer), your memory is nice, and the graphics card is actually really good for a notebook (on par with a Geforce GTS-250M) and meets the recommended spec. Your weakest link is the CPU, though even that is well above the minimums and I would suspect its good enough to not even worry about. While it is just a dual-core, it is a hyper-threaded dual core from the latest generation so it's still going to drastically out-perform the early Core2 dual cores (Core2 E6xxx series or earlier, basically: The minimum spec) by a comfortable margin.

    You should be all good. That looks like a decent mid-level gaming notebook, and the dual-core processor is going to be more battery-friendly than a quad-core would have been.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    115

    quick question

    I meet all (or exceed) all of the "recommended" stats but one... I run a Pentium Dual-Core E5300 @ 2.60GHz... will I be ok?

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    "Fake" Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,487
    Quote Originally Posted by BigMistake View Post
    I meet all (or exceed) all of the "recommended" stats but one... I run a Pentium Dual-Core E5300 @ 2.60GHz... will I be ok?
    Er... you're above the minimums, so "okay" becomes a relative term.

    You'll be able to play. We can be pretty confident of that.

    But we don't know enough to know just what sorts of effects a weak processor has on the game. They may range from long end-of-turn times to stuttering while scrolling or zooming to general slowness-to-respond from the UI. Civ5 does some nifty tricks with processors, but because those tricks are pretty new, I don't think anyone (outside Firaxis) can really predict how it will behave on decent-but-not-recommended hardware.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    115
    Ah, I see... too bad they don't get in here and talk to us.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    595
    Quote Originally Posted by drunkugly View Post
    yeah this is the thing that has been bothering me. codmw2 will run on my system just fine. why would civ5 need a higher graphics card? i'd figure the main trouble would be all the game mechanics calculations it'd have to make, which would be CPU intensive rather than GPU, right? anyway, my card is just below the min, so i'm guessing this'll mean low fps, and at worse i'll have to turn off things like unit animations. they weren't that good in the previous games, and i never play civ for the graphics, so oh well.

    but, as stated, there will be a demo. try it out and see.
    Have you seen the screenshots? They are stunning. It is not surprising to me that this game will require higher end video hardware than its predecessor.

    A 9300M seems a bit low end even for Civ4, I would imagine it would be constricting on Civ5.

    It really surprises me how many people actually try to run games without a discrete video card...

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    595
    Quote Originally Posted by CivInfidel View Post
    You two are both part of the problem!

    Programmers should aim to develop software within the normal range of capability of the public user. Furthermore, it's people like you who will be justying the release of patches only days after the game goes on sale.

    Judging by Valves periodic Steam Hardware statistics, the latest of which was released today it appears the average user on steam today has a 2.3 to 2.69Ghz dual core cpu, 2GB of system ram, a directX 10 capable Graphics card and either 32 or 64bit Windows 7. (XP is still the most common individual group, but not if you add up 32bit and 64bit Win7)

    In other words, the average user has a computer that is more than capable enough of running Civ 5.

    They DID program the game to run well on the average existing systems the public has.

    The problem is that there are people who expect to run a new game on old hardware, entry level computers without discrete graphics (really only intended for web/email and word processing) or laptops.

    Most laptops were never meant to be able to play games, nor were entry level Dell desktops without discrete (dedicated) video cards, and if you expect your computer to be up to date for more than 3-4 years in todays tech market, you must be high on something...
    Last edited by mattlach; 08-25-2010 at 04:30 AM. Reason: typos

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •