Civ3 system requirements from the infograms website

korn469 · July 8, 2001, 12:15

here's the website

http://us.infogrames.com/games/civ3_pc/

and here are the system requirments posted there

Quote:

Pentium 300 mhz
32 megs or ram
100 megs of hard drive space (+50 for swapfile)
4X CD-Rom
DirectX 7 compatible video card (must be able to display 1024x768x16bit)
DirectX 7 compatible sound card
Windows 95/98/ME/2000

though nobody from firaxis has confirmed this, it seems about right...

though i bet with the minimum system specs (especially only 32 megs of ram...if you look closely there is a typo on the infograms page...it says megs or ram instead of megs of ram) it will run really slowly...but nothing on here seems like it would prevent the majority of people from running civ3 on their system...and really if you have a pentium 166 i think it's about time for you to upgrade your system

Executor · July 8, 2001, 14:00

Anybody know if a swap file is required. I got rid of mine, permanently.

Nemo · July 8, 2001, 14:11

While infograms should be an official word, i highly question these requirements that they posted.

As stated here by microsoft:
http://apolyton.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?forumid=17
it shows that win2k ALONE requires at least 64 Mb of ram

However, Windows ME requires at least 32Mb to run alone.
Windows 95/98 requre at least 16mb alone.

so, if civ 3 supports windows 95/98/me/2000 as it states, AND only requires 32Mb of ram...how can this be?

---

also, what is the "1024x768x16bit" compatible video card all about? does that mean that the MINIMIUM screen resolution is 1024x768?

while neither of the two deter me from playing the game (although, the processor is getting vicariously close to my 450mhz), i just found the requirements very odd and contradictory.

ancient · July 8, 2001, 14:15

so it wont work on a amd?

or should it just say Pentium 300 or equivilant?

Nemo · July 8, 2001, 14:20

Executor:
getting rid of your swap file is not a good move.
but anyway, essentially by saying that the system req is 32mb + 50mb swap is the same as saying the minimium system RAM req is really 82Mb ram.
so you better be running win95/98/me with at least 82 mb ram or win2000 with at least 114mb ram. and if you are even CLOSE to that ram without ANY virtual memory/swap file you should expect some blue screen of death, and other errors even random program shutdowns.

Executor · July 8, 2001, 14:20

Quote:

Originally posted by ancient
so it wont work on a amd?

or should it just say Pentium 300 or equivilant?

There's no difference between an Athlon and a Pentium III, I have an Athlon.

Executor · July 8, 2001, 14:22

WinME is a lot more stable now that I disabled the swap file. Why do I need it anyway, it just slows down my computer?

ancient · July 8, 2001, 14:30

Athlons a hell of a lot faster

Nemo · July 8, 2001, 14:45

a swap file (a.k.a. virtual memory) is a ram overflow. it is a file on you hard disk that is used as as extra RAM. e.g. if you have 64Mb ram, and lets say your operating system is using 50Mb ram on its own, and you decide to open mulitple applications which use up 34Mb of ram (this can be done by 3 netscape windows and outlook open at the same time). Well. that extra 20Mb of ram has to come from somewhere, or else the computer crashes. So, what happens is, windows uses the virtual memory for the extra 20Mb of ram. Now, when ever your virutal memory is being used, windows must resize the virtual memory to 20Mb and since it is an actual file, that means that the access speed is limitted by your HDD rpm and access/seek time. Thus, whenever your system requires/uses swap file, it noticably slows down your system. In order to HELP reduce SOME of the slowness from using a swap file, you can set your minimium and maximium virutal memory to the same settings. (i.e. min virtual memory = 500mb :: max virtual memory = 500mb; the higher the better, if you make the max too low, it will crash the PC) this, at least, will eliminate the time it takes to create the swap file, but you willstill be limitted by the access time.

on my home computer with windows 98 i had 256mb ram with 500mb set swap. i would get out of memory errors easily when doing web page developement, or playing flight sims. now i am running win 2k with 512 mb ram ...yet i still have 800mb of swap set aside. i usually peak about 400mb of ram usage, and average about 180-200 mb of ram usage (i.e. i have win2000 with icq, zone alarm, antivirus, sound card driver apps, video card driver apps running in the systray, and that uses about 110mb as my base memory usage ...but since i have 512 mb of ram, i dont need swap, but if i had 96 mb ram, i would need 14mb swap just to turn on my pc)

Executor · July 8, 2001, 15:00

I have 384MB of RAM and never have less than 80MB free.

Inverse Icarus · July 8, 2001, 15:32

i can handle that.

looks like i can run 3 games at once!

MORON · July 8, 2001, 15:37

YES, I SURVIVED.

Gramphos · July 8, 2001, 15:59

Quote:

Originally posted by Nemo
While infograms should be an official word, I highly question these requirements that they posted.

I don't know they seem to be very badly informed by Firaxis. If they can't even get the website right, how shall they be able to get the system requirements right?

That site (www.civ3.com) is just a Swedish Telecom company.

KoalaBear33 · July 8, 2001, 17:17

Executor you are the first person that I have ever met who doesn't use a swap file

The swap file is basically virtual RAM so if you run out of RAM then the OS uses the swap file as extra RAM. Since you have 384MB RAM you should be all right under most circumstances. I wonder what happens when you do run out of memory (try opening up as many applications as you can). I think your PC will crash. It's best to enable swap file unless you are 100% positive that your PC is not going to use all of the 384MB RAM.

KoalaBear33

KoalaBear33 · July 8, 2001, 17:24

As far as the specs are concerned, they seem reasonable. THe processor speed is ok... the RAM is a bit low but I have seen publishers give a really low value so that more people will buy the game. The low RAM shouldn't really be a problem until you hit late stages with tons of cities with lots of races.... The graphics requirement seem to imply that the game will run in 1024x768 at 16 bit colours....

These are probably the minimum requirements. They will likely release recommendations which will be slightly higher. I expect you need the following for Civ III to run well on your system: 450 MHz processor, 128MB RAM, video card with good 16 bit colour support at 1024x768 (some older cards are slow at this res)...

KoalaBear33

Urban Ranger · July 9, 2001, 01:50

I don't think Civ 3 needs a very fast processor. Actually the important thing is amount of memory you have, so the game can fit into memory. If you have a slower processor, all it means is the game will be slower

The graphics mode doesn't seem right, it should be 800x600 to cover a much larger audience. 800x600 is good on a 15" monitor. 1024x768 requires a 17" monitor.

Alex 14 · July 9, 2001, 01:56

The requirments given out by Infogrames look like standard requirments for the game, i'll be surprised if 300 Mhz is a minimal PC requirement. 32MB Ram looks like the least you should have to play the game.

These requirments look a little too high, because I have run more advanced games smoothly on a PC less powerful than the requirments show.

Adagio · July 9, 2001, 09:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
800x600 is good on a 15" monitor. 1024x768 requires a 17" monitor.

800x600 is not good on a 15" monitor, such monitor requires 1024x768! And a 17" needs 1280x1024 otherwise it looks too ugly

Sabre2th · July 10, 2001, 22:09

I disagree ADG. Thanks for your opinion anyway.

Sabre2th · July 10, 2001, 22:10

I would also like to point out that my 17" Trinitron monitor is set on a beautiful 1024x768.

Executor · July 10, 2001, 22:16

Quote:

Originally posted by KoalaBear33
Executor you are the first person that I have ever met who doesn't use a swap file

The swap file is basically virtual RAM so if you run out of RAM then the OS uses the swap file as extra RAM. Since you have 384MB RAM you should be all right under most circumstances. I wonder what happens when you do run out of memory (try opening up as many applications as you can). I think your PC will crash. It's best to enable swap file unless you are 100% positive that your PC is not going to use all of the 384MB RAM.

KoalaBear33

I use a proggie called Cacheman, and it tells me exactly how much RAM I have free at any one moment. Right now, I have 117MB free.

I've tried opening as many programs as possible, and I ran out of the System and User resources (I have 22% free at the moment) with 80MB free.

I disabled the swap file because I noticed that Windows would use it even when there was lots of free RAM.

CivPatriot · July 10, 2001, 22:48

If those specs are correct, and I don't see why not, then GREAT!! I was hoping that my computer would run Civ3.

I wonder if the Mac version will be OS X or Classic? I hope X(I'm buying a Mac before I go to college)

Darkknight · July 10, 2001, 23:12

Well so much for my P166 96mbRAM Win95 PC but it should be fine on my laptop PIII633 256mbRAM Win2K!

July 10, 2001, 23:23

Quote:

Originally posted by Darkknight
Well so much for my P166 96mbRAM Win95 PC but it should be fine on my laptop PIII633 256mbRAM Win2K!

I still think the game will run on a 233 P-1.. Isn't a 300 a P-II?
If it is, than they would loose all of the sales to P-I owners. Keep in mine that Sid himself said he would keep the requirements as low as possible so everone can play the game.
Darkknight, I heard somewhere that MicroSoft will stop supporting Win 95 in 2002.

Solver · July 11, 2001, 04:26

Excellent! I'm so happy I don't need a new machine for this, and I love that civ games have such low requirements. This is why I still have 64MB RAM, just because everything I have runs fine with it. My current concern is getting a cable modem. Thanks Sid, I'll interview you someday, as a reward

.

KoalaBear33 · July 11, 2001, 07:02

Don't get your hopes up on the low system req... things might change a bit so you should reserve some money for upgrades...

KoalaBear33

Grumbold · July 11, 2001, 07:02

A P300 is pretty old and it may be that they are being careful to keep the specs inclusive, i.e. Win95 may run Civ-III on a P233 but W2K is more demanding. A second hand P300 only costs about the same price as a game in the UK now so it might be worthwhile considering upgrading anyway if the prices are similar in the US.

Gothmog · July 11, 2001, 07:47

What is a Pentium 300 anyway? I never heard of that model. They must have meant Pentium II 300 mhz.

Zealot · July 11, 2001, 08:36

It's great to see that you are all happy, but I'm not!

My monitor, despite being 14", only supports up to a 800 x 600 resolution!
I have to demand a support for 800x600! How can I explain to my parents that I need a new monitor just to play a game?!?

After all, a monitor is just a monitor! I didn't play Railroad Tycoon II because of that, but I can live with that.
But not without CIV III!!!

Give me support for 800x600!

Pretty please?

N35t0r · July 11, 2001, 09:30

Urban Ranger, i don't think this is entirely like that...

Processor speeds are very important in this; a CPU with 100 Mhz can handle the same amount of info that a CPU with 200 Mhz but only half it's RAM... (roughly, this does not take RAM speed into account)

I've experienced that SMAC works MUCH better on an P166 with 20 MB RAM than on my P 133 with 20 MB ram...