1 - The game is 32 bit -> you won't need more than 4 GBs of RAM
2 - No game lags at normal speed? What about higher speeds?
3 - 1k galaxy with how many empires?
4 - What about during large battles?
Is it worth to upgrade CPU?
- Thread starter alteration
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
1 - The game is 32 bit -> you won't need more than 4 GBs of RAM
2 - No game lags at normal speed? What about higher speeds?
3 - 1k galaxy with how many empires?
4 - What about during large battles?
No need, but RAM is so cheap now, that if there is plenty of ram for windows)or whatever your SO is) and for it's secondary services it will be always better than only having 4. 32 maybe is overkill for anything not professional but it's nice for the future.. unless you play cities skylines with lots of mods where YES, you will use all of your ram
.png){kind=avatar}
1. True didn't think of that
2. Normally I can keep at speed 3. But I never tried to use it during a big battle
3. default number
4. No lags, but a) I don't use over speed 2 in battles and b) as I said I usually don't bring humungous fleets (mostly something like 50 ships of each type for one fleet and I only bring more than one Fleet if I am up against an AE or endgame crisis)
In regards to system specs since I'm not overly knowledgeable on Intel Processors or what have you I currently have yet to run in to issues running on a AMD A8-6500 and a GeForce GT 520.
Stellaris is a pause-able real time strategy game where things more along at a snails pace. You really don't need more than 20 FPS for this type of game, unless your mad about huge space battles and their graphics all the time. I mean, I'm running everything on max with a CPU at 2.4 GHz and I get about 20 FPS, which is playable, and mid game battles still look good. I can take a quick glance at late-game battles, but generally speaking you only need to look at it once and you don't need to see it again. There's no point for an overly powerful CPU because its a bad thing if you stare and spectate at the space battle for the whole duration while you could be in galaxy view, constructing other more vital stuff.
Stellaris isn't like most games in that sometimes it requires very little CPU power, and other times it takes up loads. This is simply because being a grand strategy game, it has to do A LOT of things other games don't do, such as incorporate various styles of game design into the game, including but not limited to: skyboxes, particles, flare, mathematical calculations, HD textures, advanced AI algorithms and UI all in the same game, when usually other games would be dedicated in 1 of those areas of design, and have basically none of the others.
If the devs made it so it would utilize all 16 threads you have, then you'd find it impossible to multitask when your not at war because a game that does not require a lot of resources it hogging it all, and when you have to use all those resources everything else becomes laggy.
TLDR
Stellaris is a huge game and the resources it requires varies greatly. If you put too much power into it, most of the time you won't need it and it will affect your computers performance elsewhere.
No, their games use more than one core. What I hate though is how they always respond with "It uses more than one core" or "We do optimization every patch" while refusing to address their optimization is utter shit, and that the game is unplayable later game. I bet if they just dedicated one patch towards optimization the game would run so much better later game.
The HoI4 Developers made massive improvements to optimization in 2 weeks according to a developer diary (and fixed a previously unfixable codeloop), how about the Stellaris devs do the same?
Last edited:
Claims about "there is no endgame lag" have a lot to do with galaxy size and some mods. Mods that lessen amount of ships have great effect, as they can halve fleet sizes in endgame. There is also noticeable difference in lag between medium and large galaxies, with small galaxies endgame lag being very non-existent.
PDS games don't do multithreads all that well, hell, most games don't. His rig is perfectly good for any PDS game out now. Unless his CPU is failing there is little point in upgrading.
...
Yes. Yes you should upgrade if you have the money.
But be weary that you'll have to change the Motherboard and thus also your RAM if you upgrade from that relic.
I hold the opinion that if you're going to buy a new motherboard, you'd be better served just buying a new computer pre-built and using that as a base for future upgrades.
It's impossible to say what sort of performance increase you would get. There's no benchmarks for Stellaris. My AM2+ Thuban rig is approximately contemporary with Intel Nehalem (c. 2008 uarchitecture; performance for Thuban is similar to a supercharged Pentium IV though [aka badass pros only]) and gets noticeable drops with Stellaris at around the 2350-2400 mark, becoming a bit tedious at the 2500 mark.
Terrible advice.
It's well known that prebuilt companies skimp on very important things like thermal management and power supplies. This is adequate if all you intend to do is browse Word or surf e-mails, but can cause serious failures (capacitors blowing, dies suffering heat damage, etc.) if you do intense gaming due to poor quality or inadequate components. Since the only thing you'd be saving by having a prebuilt is the power supply and possibly a cooler, you're better off just buying components platonically and assembling them yourself.
It's not like it's difficult or anything anyway.
That was a comment about i5 vs i7 in general, not Ivy vs. Skylake.
Anyway he's running a mainboard that's from 2011. He lacks modern interface ports, which is a perfectly good reason to upgrade. If he were wanting multithread support I'd suggest he get a Ryzen though. Like I siad, Ivy Bridge is probably good for another year or so when GPUs finally pummel 1080p into submission without creating nuclear fusion.
Unless he really wants to get on the Vega or Nvidia <whatever> train early with PCI 4.0, he's probably fine until DX12 and Vulkan become a Big Deal sometime in the coming months-a year.
Last edited:
I have one of the most powerful computers on the market bought very recently and still get late game lag. Even on 25% habitable worlds and medium sized galaxy by 2500 or so it starts to become really noticeable.
With games in general, the Performance of a single core is more important then number of Cores.
There are hosts of Problems you can not solve quicker by throwing more cores at it. Games are prime examples.
The game already uses Multithreading as far as feasible.
Take the code to calcuate the Fibbonacci Sequence up to a certain number. Now try to Mutlithread it so that each number is calcualted by a seperate thread at the same time.
You will realsie you can not.
And programming a games main calculation is like the Fibbonacci Sequence, to the 10th power.
Ashes of the Singularity uses multithreading as far as feasible, not Stellaris.
Not sure why you'd make that statement in the first place, though. Not all games have a generic multithreading support. Clausewitz engine is just kind of old I guess. It's been really bad at doing long games since at least HOI3, where it started chugging around 1941-42. Same in HOI4.
Not sure why you'd make that statement in the first place, though. Not all games have a generic multithreading support. Clausewitz engine is just kind of old I guess. It's been really bad at doing long games since at least HOI3, where it started chugging around 1941-42. Same in HOI4.
I just finished a game. One month took 17 seconds to pass.
This was around the year 2500 in a 1000 star system, with 3700 fleet size and 100% habitability. Owned 40% of habitable planets(179 planets of which 136 directly owned, rest through vassals).
i7-4790K CPU, not overclocked.
But my CPU was only running at a temp of around 45°C. If it was being stressed it certainly wasn't showing in terms of heat.
CPU is 25-27°C when idle (ambient temp around 17-18°C).
It had been since the summer since I last played. Back than the endgame lag was worse and made reaching the victory condition a major drag because going past 2400 was very slow and laggy. So only this weekend I've actually reached a victory condition.
Back in the summer I actually left the game aside due to the endgame performance and decided I'd just wait for updates to improve performance.
It has improved notably since than. Back than there was also a 1000 fleet cap.
So since the summer time performance is smoother further into endgame and with an almost four times larger fleet.
Still, I hope more big steps in optimization will follow. If not for my smoothness, for that of others with less powerful pc's. And as well to compensate for added game dynamics as more DLC will follow.
This was around the year 2500 in a 1000 star system, with 3700 fleet size and 100% habitability. Owned 40% of habitable planets(179 planets of which 136 directly owned, rest through vassals).
i7-4790K CPU, not overclocked.
But my CPU was only running at a temp of around 45°C. If it was being stressed it certainly wasn't showing in terms of heat.
CPU is 25-27°C when idle (ambient temp around 17-18°C).
It had been since the summer since I last played. Back than the endgame lag was worse and made reaching the victory condition a major drag because going past 2400 was very slow and laggy. So only this weekend I've actually reached a victory condition.
Back in the summer I actually left the game aside due to the endgame performance and decided I'd just wait for updates to improve performance.
It has improved notably since than. Back than there was also a 1000 fleet cap.
So since the summer time performance is smoother further into endgame and with an almost four times larger fleet.
Still, I hope more big steps in optimization will follow. If not for my smoothness, for that of others with less powerful pc's. And as well to compensate for added game dynamics as more DLC will follow.
So you're telling me that my pre-built machine shouldn't be able to run Stellaris, CKII, EUIV, or HoI4?
Funny. No one seems to have told my computer that because it does it flawlessly, with performance heavy mods like MEIOU & Taxes.
No, I'm telling you that prebuilt companies are known for skimping on power supplies and thermal management. Why take the risk when you can spend the same amount of money and avoid the risk? The only thing you have to do is turn a screwdriver.
Prebuilt computers are awful. Never buy one. Ever. You can literally build a more powerful computer for the same price, sometimes you'll even save money too.
Yep, this is true.
I built my computer for only 700$ using an I5-4690K, an 120$ Mobo, 16GB of nice ram, a GTX 970, a Fractal Design Nano S, a Seasonic M12II 620 Watt Fully Modular PSU, good thermal paste, a Cryorig H7 CPU cooler, 3 Fractal Design case fans, Windows, a Keyboard, and a Mouse. I had a monitor already, so that was taken care of.
The GTX 970 was more recent at the time, but I've overclocked it to GTX 980 levels.
Far cheaper with arguably higher quality parts when it comes to the PSU and CPU cooler than it ever would have been if I had gotten a prebuilt computer. I was able to make use of a lot of sales and snagging new parts on Ebay to bring the price down even further. If I had skimped on some things like the case, I could have shaved off even more from the price.
Now, can a prebuilt computer preform well? Yes it can, but you are still overpaying massively for what you get. If you bought a prebuilt computer for 1000$, for that same price you could build a far more powerful computer if you did it yourself. You will also have more control over what's in the computer in regards to hardware, which includes the quality of the parts you choose to buy.
There is a reason the prebuilt PC market has been in decline for years now.
Last edited:
If you build your own computer, do get a CPU cooler, even nice CPUs can come with bad stock fans, they're not very expensive either.
.png){kind=avatar}
This is not always true, not if you need the OS as well and you don't want to assemble it yourself. Yes, you probably on the whole get better components - as in better motherboard, slightly faster SSD and so on), but especially if you have decent largish local shops you can often get good gaming systems prebuilt. And the argument "well build it yerself, it's fun!" does not apply to everyone. Some people don't have the interest or the time to learn how. It is not much to learn, but some people have no idea even how to handle their phones and have no idea what a RAM is and is freigtened by the concept of screwdrivers. Or they just have no idea about what is good, which is why we have people buying death-PSU's on Ebay and old GPU's for new GPU money because the seller told them it was good. Saying X is best for everyone is rarely correct.
Many OEM gaming machines, the Dells and Acers and whatever, are often overpriced though, but it does not apply to all prebuilds.
Anyway, I have a Pentium G3220, 16GB 1400Mhz RAM (4x4) and a GTX760, and with the game resting on an HDD the proper endgame-empires (1000 stars, all claimed and several 150k fleets) are ... not unplayable, but not very enjoyable either. It is almost perversely pleasing to hear about you guys and your expensive computers having the same issues as me. Thank you for that.