View Full Version : Computer specs that can handle EB well. Its good to be back.
Vasiliyi
07-08-2011, 23:36
So after a long break from EB, I have been itching to play.
Unfortunately, I don't currently own a PC, and I don't want to use my wifes mac.
So I was wondering if you I could get some reviews on whether these computer specs would handle EB well. Sorry if this is in the wrong forum.
Model: Optiplex 755
CPU Type: Intel Core 2 Duo E6550
CPU Speed: 2.33 GHz
Memory Type: DDR2
Ram: 4 Gigs
video card EVGA GeForce GTX 550 Ti
Thanks ahead of time.
Jebivjetar
07-09-2011, 00:38
I can't believe you're back, Vasiliyi- my Romaioktonoi friend :)
As for your question: i used to play EB on a low-end computer (~2 GHZ CPU (single core)+ ATI Radeon 128MB + 768MB RAM) pretty good on the lowest video settings, so i presume you'll be able to run the game on high (video) performances with the machine you have: i believe that the only thing that matters in EB requirements is RAM, unless you have some stone-aged video card which can't handle even the vanilla R:TW.
Now, grasp your shield and take up your blade!
Hello my brother. I have missed you dearly. How wonderful to see your face again.
To answer your question, from what I see, you will be able to run EB at medium or even higher settings (granted, you will see a quickly spinning fan on the higher settings). I say this because those specifications are so very close to my own. But that of course is no surprise; brothers have similar taste!
Vasiliyi
07-09-2011, 05:12
Sounds good. Luckily this setup will cost me less than $450. Hope to be back playing EB in less than 2 weeks. Who knows maybe ill even finish my aar.
Basileus_ton_Basileon
07-09-2011, 08:00
Good to see you return, philos.
granted, you will see a quickly spinning fan on the higher settings
I always have my fans on maximum. Since temperature here is around 90 degrees F. Or 30 C
~Jirisys ()
That is more than enough, I have the exact same rig as yours without the Gfx card, and I can run it fine on medium. be sure to check up on www.ebonline.tk when the comp arrives.
Vasiliyi
07-11-2011, 03:01
New specs for my comp that are coming in the mail.
Intel core i3 3.06ghz dual core processer
4 gigs ddr3 ram
No video card yet, but that will be coming next week sometime.
Probably will get the evga geforce 9800
QuintusSertorius
07-11-2011, 11:46
Something to bear in mind about processors, old games like R:TW don't use more than one core. So having four 2GHz processors is worse than having a single core 3.2GHz for example.
But its still better since one core can handle all the background processes.
Yes. Vasiliyi a big recommendation is when you play RTW or any of its mods on that new system, after loading up RTW or the mod(s) go to the task manager find Rome-TW.exe under processes, right click and go to Set Affinity and choose Core 1 (there is Core 0 and 1 for dual cores). This means the second core (which is normally idle until needed) can focus on your Rome/Mod game. This can be shown to lower the likelihood of crashes.
I wouldn't spend more money unless absolutely necessary and I will tell you to use your wifes mac. :p I am on my mac book pro (2.4GHz Core2Duo & 4b 1067 Mhz DDR3 ram) and EB runs beautifully on all high (low aa) aside from a few sound issues (not eb related). So if you can live with those you'll save yourself a couple hundred $$. :)
I didn't want to game on a mac either, but since I am away from my gaming PC for the summer I couldn't stay away. And I must say the game might actually run a bit smoother on this laptop rather than my built up gaming rig.:dizzy2:
P.S. If your wife is okay with this of course.
YD23 I play EB on my PC laptop, but I do have an iMac desktop and was wondering: now that Rome: Total War is out on OS X, are you playing EB on the Mac version or is this bootcamp Windows?
No it's just on a mac with no extra software. I did, however, spend 30$ on the game copy (buy from apple appstore).. Feral ported the game onto mac from PC but they charge as if it's a new game. I just had some Apple giftcards so I basically got it for free & since I love the game so much I would have spent the 30$ anyway.
Vanilla runs fantastically except the game characters for some odd reason do not make sounds; for me anyway. (EG: diplomat will not say "no more moves") It's a bit annoying but I can live with it. EB was somewhat tricky to get up and running but I can help you with it if you decide to play it on the mac. :)
having a reasonably fast hard drive will reduce turn times quite a bit...
YD23 have you noticed the phalanxes not really engaging at all or closing in on each other in the mac version? :(
Phalanx on phalanx? I actually had a battle against some Carthage phalanxes yesterday. (played as Romani) My Hastati/Principes/Triari engaged them just fine. They had their pikes down and everything even after I encircled them.
Worked both fine on rtw/bi. But I noticed that the AI is MUCH better on BI, I get tons of naval invasions after I started playing campaign with BI.
If you're talking about a phalanx on phalanx I can't say that I've had one of those battles recently. : \
Try custom battle with 1 pike against another.
Swapped my files to be able to play custom battles and I think I saw what you meant. They sometimes tend to stand there awkwardly.. And keep switching from ready - fighting without really fighting. Only solution to this I found was to walk into the enemy unit which made them attack normally. Of course you'll probably take some losses though..
https://img199.imageshack.us/img199/5533/screenshot20110716at120.png
https://img121.imageshack.us/img121/1579/screenshot20110716at121.png
Mhm. I walk into enemy anyway online, or at least I used to when I played often. If a person knows what they're doing, anything is possible. With the poor engagement of pike vs pike in OS X, it's probably a problem that arose during the porting of the code.
QuintusSertorius
07-17-2011, 23:50
But its still better since one core can handle all the background processes.
If the thing is written to use only one core, it will use only one core.
If the thing is written to use only one core, it will use only one core.
LazyO's point was that one good core cpu is better for a single-core game than a bad multi-core cpu.
QuintusSertorius
07-18-2011, 16:42
LazyO's point was that one good core cpu is better for a single-core game than a bad multi-core cpu.
But that's exactly what I said before. When I said a single-core 3GHz machine is better than a quad-core 2GHz machine. Even though in modern terms the latter is "better".
But that's exactly what I said before. When I said a single-core 3GHz machine is better than a quad-core 2GHz machine. Even though in modern terms the latter is "better".
And he disagreed because the single-core machine does not only have to run the game but also every background process of the system. With a multi-core the background process does not have too be calculated by the same core which is running the game. So it's not so simple.
And he disagreed because the single-core machine does not only have to run the game but also every background process of the system. With a multi-core the background process does not have too be calculated by the same core which is running the game. So it's not so simple.
Thanks Kival. This is exactly why a lower average clock-speed multi-core system is superior to a single-core high clock-speed system. Even though some of us and clearly the major chip manufacturers have long figured this out, there are many out there who don't see the advantage. When you have an entire core devoted to a single process...that's called dedication ^_^
QuintusSertorius
07-19-2011, 09:37
And he disagreed because the single-core machine does not only have to run the game but also every background process of the system. With a multi-core the background process does not have too be calculated by the same core which is running the game. So it's not so simple.
Thanks Kival. This is exactly why a lower average clock-speed multi-core system is superior to a single-core high clock-speed system. Even though some of us and clearly the major chip manufacturers have long figured this out, there are many out there who don't see the advantage. When you have an entire core devoted to a single process...that's called dedication ^_^
And how exactly do you make the split so that your background processes run on one core, and the game on the other? I've got a dual core machine that I tried EB on when I first got it and there was no difference in performance whatsoever to the old single core machine I'd been using before.
Vartan mentioned that, look at some of the above posts.
Vasiliyi
07-19-2011, 14:21
Got my system up and running, EB is running very smoothly even with full unit detail and huge unit size. Takes less than a minute to start up EB and 30-45 secs between turns. Better than my old rig by a lot. One thing I did run into was that I did have to set my cpu fan to 100% to keep it from overheating. Now it runs flawlessly.
RAM also makes the biggest difference in loading times.
Vasiliyi
07-19-2011, 16:40
Yes it does. Going from 1gigs to 2 gigs is a big difference. Anything more and its not as noticeable. Depends though, if you have 32bit or 64bit.
2 GB of quick ram or 4 GB of decent ram should be good enough for EB. You'll need more for any modern high-demand software (irrelevant in this case). Glad to hear it's going well Vasiliyi. Quintus you don't tell the computer to run the game on one core and the rest of the processes on another. By default the CPU uses Core #0 for all processes as it is the first in the set of cores. Visit your task manager and set affinity of Rome-TW.exe to Core #1 (meaning the 2nd core). This can usually reduce crash rates if you are having CTDs due to overloads.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.