Bogged Down!

[Buck]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

I was playing RAR on a large map. The game got so slow that It takes
over three minutes to process after completing my turn. I am running
a P-4 1.3Ghz, 500MB ram 1024 screen resolution.

any suggestions?
Buck
--
For what it's worth.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 15:38:32 -0500, Buck <Buck@your.guess> wrote:
> I was playing RAR on a large map. The game got so slow that It takes
> over three minutes to process after completing my turn. I am running
> a P-4 1.3Ghz, 500MB ram 1024 screen resolution. any suggestions?

Look at the task manager's tab which shows CPU and memory utilization.
If you're at 100% CPU when this happens, that's all the horsepower you've
got. If you're at 100% Memory usage when this happens, go get more ram.
I'd bet the latter (RAM) is your limiting factor. Is your hard drive
thrashing while this long delay happens? When your system needs more
memory than it has in RAM, it uses the hard drive for swap space, always
slower than solid-state memory.

Oversimplified, but a good starting point (in case anyone wants to pick
nits with the above, yes, I know, but it's close enough to right to start
from).

Dave Hinz

 

[Buck]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 26 Nov 2004 21:08:47 GMT, Dave Hinz <DaveHinz@spamcop.net> wrote:

> Is your hard drive
>thrashing while this long delay happens?


Nope! Not at all. In fact, it just sits there. I haven't looked at
the task manager so I'll keep in on in the background this game.
Maybe it will show maximum processing or something.

The machine isn't locked down or anything, it just takes forever in
the "wait" mode on the game. I tried killing all the background
operations safe to kill and that doesn't help. The game does have the
highest memory usage in the task manager when it is there.

--
Thanks

Buck
--
For what it's worth.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

ram

upgrading from 512 to 1024 made a massive difference in my game speed.

--
From Adam Webb, Overlag
www.tacticalgamer.com
CS:SOURCE server now active

"Buck" <Buck@your.guess> wrote in message
newsu4fq0pia6uh1eujfm5sm5u6tkf0s10cis@4ax.com...
> I was playing RAR on a large map. The game got so slow that It takes
> over three minutes to process after completing my turn. I am running
> a P-4 1.3Ghz, 500MB ram 1024 screen resolution.
>
> any suggestions?
> Buck
> --
> For what it's worth.
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.801 / Virus Database: 544 - Release Date: 24/11/2004

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 18:45:01 -0500, Buck <Buck@your.guess> wrote:
> On 26 Nov 2004 21:08:47 GMT, Dave Hinz <DaveHinz@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
>> Is your hard drive
>>thrashing while this long delay happens?
>
>
> Nope! Not at all. In fact, it just sits there. I haven't looked at
> the task manager so I'll keep in on in the background this game.
> Maybe it will show maximum processing or something.

Just for giggles, go download adaware and see how much spyware you have
on your system. lavasoft.com - it's a free download. There could be
other things going on hiding on your system.

> The machine isn't locked down or anything, it just takes forever in
> the "wait" mode on the game. I tried killing all the background
> operations safe to kill and that doesn't help. The game does have the
> highest memory usage in the task manager when it is there.

Well, that makes sense, but as long as your memory used is less than
your physical memory, it's just that your CPU is busy. Make sure you're
not running something you don't intend (adaware for that), and if it's
still slow, well, you may just be pegging your CPU.

If it's not out of memory, _and_ it's not out of CPU capacity, well, I
don't know why they wouldn't have the program running at top priority.
Are you up to patch?

Dave Hinz

 

[Buck]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 29 Nov 2004 16:14:13 GMT, Dave Hinz <DaveHinz@spamcop.net> wrote:

>On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 18:45:01 -0500, Buck <Buck@your.guess> wrote:
>> On 26 Nov 2004 21:08:47 GMT, Dave Hinz <DaveHinz@spamcop.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Is your hard drive
>>>thrashing while this long delay happens?
>>
>>
>> Nope! Not at all. In fact, it just sits there. I haven't looked at
>> the task manager so I'll keep in on in the background this game.
>> Maybe it will show maximum processing or something.
>
>Just for giggles, go download adaware and see how much spyware you have
>on your system. lavasoft.com - it's a free download. There could be
>other things going on hiding on your system.
>
>> The machine isn't locked down or anything, it just takes forever in
>> the "wait" mode on the game. I tried killing all the background
>> operations safe to kill and that doesn't help. The game does have the
>> highest memory usage in the task manager when it is there.
>
>Well, that makes sense, but as long as your memory used is less than
>your physical memory, it's just that your CPU is busy. Make sure you're
>not running something you don't intend (adaware for that), and if it's
>still slow, well, you may just be pegging your CPU.
>
>If it's not out of memory, _and_ it's not out of CPU capacity, well, I
>don't know why they wouldn't have the program running at top priority.
>Are you up to patch?
>
>Dave Hinz


I've been checking it out. I keep my computer tuned up with virus
checks, trojan checks and adaware checks on a regular basis. I
terminate procedures not necessary to operations when running the game
including my IM, webshots and PGP. I also disable internet access
with my firewall and terminate NAV Autoprotect while playing to keep
them from activating.

It appears that I am just maxing out processor use. I started
monitoring the task manager and checking it out. The processor peaks
at 100 % and the history chart shows a flat line across the top of the
scale while processing. I get the program back when the line drops to
normal again. Maybe I need a faster machine. I find it hard to
believe that the game bogs down a 1.3ghz machine with 500 MB RAM. I
would hate to think of how big a machine must be required for the
largest map, or worse yet, the maximum map of 300 x 300 that can be
setup in the editor.

Thanks all.
Buck
--
For what it's worth.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:24:39 -0500, Buck <Buck@your.guess> wrote:
> On 29 Nov 2004 16:14:13 GMT, Dave Hinz <DaveHinz@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
>>Just for giggles, go download adaware and see how much spyware you have
>>on your system.

> I've been checking it out. I keep my computer tuned up with virus
> checks, trojan checks and adaware checks on a regular basis.

Good. You'd be amazed (or maybe you wouldn't) how many people don't,
even people who you think would be careful about that.

> It appears that I am just maxing out processor use. I started
> monitoring the task manager and checking it out. The processor peaks
> at 100 % and the history chart shows a flat line across the top of the
> scale while processing.

Well, there you go. It's just a horsepower issue. The good news (?) is
that you don't have to throw more RAM at it to find out that that won't
help.

> I get the program back when the line drops to
> normal again. Maybe I need a faster machine. I find it hard to
> believe that the game bogs down a 1.3ghz machine with 500 MB RAM. I
> would hate to think of how big a machine must be required for the
> largest map, or worse yet, the maximum map of 300 x 300 that can be
> setup in the editor.

Hard to say. I'm running mine on an 800 MHz iMac with a G4 processor, and
it's not painfully slow by any means between turns. But, clock speed
between processor families is as meaningless as comparing car engines
by the RPM that they're turning, so numbers there don't mean much.

Do you have animations turned on, and/or are you watching the moves of
other civilizations? It would be interesting to turn whatever is off, on,
and the other way around, to see how much that changes lag time. If
you're watching their units move around, that takes more cycles obviously
than letting it move in the background. But, you're probably going to
get incremental gains at best at this point, without a faster CPU
(and probably motherboard).

Dave Hinz

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 14:24:39 -0500, Buck <Buck@your.guess> wrote:

>It appears that I am just maxing out processor use. I started
>monitoring the task manager and checking it out. The processor peaks
>at 100 % and the history chart shows a flat line across the top of the
>scale while processing. I get the program back when the line drops to
>normal again. Maybe I need a faster machine. I find it hard to
>believe that the game bogs down a 1.3ghz machine with 500 MB RAM. I
>would hate to think of how big a machine must be required for the
>largest map, or worse yet, the maximum map of 300 x 300 that can be
>setup in the editor.

That is probably normal. I have an AMD 2400 and on a large map it
might take 20 seconds between turns later in the game. The RAR mod
adds in so much extra stuff it just takes a lot more resources to run
it. The more civs you destroy the faster the time in between.

The main problem I have had with slowness in between turns was because
of automated workers. When workers ran out of stuff to do it seemed
to take a long time to cycle through them all. That was in PTW so I
am not sure they fixed it or not. Check your advisor screens and see
if you have workers hanging about in your cities. If so activate them
to turn of automation. I found workers in RAR to be very slow so I
built like 80 of them myself.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

all games max out CPU usage, thats how they work

--
From Adam Webb, Overlag
www.tacticalgamer.com
CS:SOURCE server now active

"Buck" <Buck@your.guess> wrote in message
news:1btmq0lu23ofaqadvjpbojqs3pbc7rb333@4ax.com...
> On 29 Nov 2004 16:14:13 GMT, Dave Hinz <DaveHinz@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
> >On Fri, 26 Nov 2004 18:45:01 -0500, Buck <Buck@your.guess> wrote:
> >> On 26 Nov 2004 21:08:47 GMT, Dave Hinz <DaveHinz@spamcop.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Is your hard drive
> >>>thrashing while this long delay happens?
> >>
> >>
> >> Nope! Not at all. In fact, it just sits there. I haven't looked at
> >> the task manager so I'll keep in on in the background this game.
> >> Maybe it will show maximum processing or something.
> >
> >Just for giggles, go download adaware and see how much spyware you have
> >on your system. lavasoft.com - it's a free download. There could be
> >other things going on hiding on your system.
> >
> >> The machine isn't locked down or anything, it just takes forever in
> >> the "wait" mode on the game. I tried killing all the background
> >> operations safe to kill and that doesn't help. The game does have the
> >> highest memory usage in the task manager when it is there.
> >
> >Well, that makes sense, but as long as your memory used is less than
> >your physical memory, it's just that your CPU is busy. Make sure you're
> >not running something you don't intend (adaware for that), and if it's
> >still slow, well, you may just be pegging your CPU.
> >
> >If it's not out of memory, _and_ it's not out of CPU capacity, well, I
> >don't know why they wouldn't have the program running at top priority.
> >Are you up to patch?
> >
> >Dave Hinz
>
>
> I've been checking it out. I keep my computer tuned up with virus
> checks, trojan checks and adaware checks on a regular basis. I
> terminate procedures not necessary to operations when running the game
> including my IM, webshots and PGP. I also disable internet access
> with my firewall and terminate NAV Autoprotect while playing to keep
> them from activating.
>
> It appears that I am just maxing out processor use. I started
> monitoring the task manager and checking it out. The processor peaks
> at 100 % and the history chart shows a flat line across the top of the
> scale while processing. I get the program back when the line drops to
> normal again. Maybe I need a faster machine. I find it hard to
> believe that the game bogs down a 1.3ghz machine with 500 MB RAM. I
> would hate to think of how big a machine must be required for the
> largest map, or worse yet, the maximum map of 300 x 300 that can be
> setup in the editor.
>
> Thanks all.
> Buck
> --
> For what it's worth.
>


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.802 / Virus Database: 545 - Release Date: 27/11/2004

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

Given what I've seen of RAR it's not terribly suprizing.

Turn off all graphic automations of AI moves is the bigest thing you
can do for an existing game.

For new games, try playing with fewer AI oppoents.

Buck <Buck@your.guess> wrote in message
news:<ou4fq0pia6uh1eujfm5sm5u6tkf0s10cis@4ax.com>...
> I was playing RAR on a large map. The game got so slow that It takes
> over three minutes to process after completing my turn. I am running
> a P-4 1.3Ghz, 500MB ram 1024 screen resolution.
>
> any suggestions?
> Buck

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

Also, if a virus scan program is constantly running it can greatly
reduce the number of machine cycles adviable for more important
programs like C3C.

In addition, presence of adware can steal machine cycles.

Buck <Buck@your.guess> wrote in message news:<ou4fq0pia6uh1eujfm5sm5u6tkf0s10cis@4ax.com>...
> I was playing RAR on a large map. The game got so slow that It takes
> over three minutes to process after completing my turn. I am running
> a P-4 1.3Ghz, 500MB ram 1024 screen resolution.
>
> any suggestions?
> Buck

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 09:20:08 -0000, Adam Webb <adam@ajmysecondname.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:
> all games max out CPU usage, thats how they work

All applications on any system, will max out CPU usage _unless_ they hit
another bottleneck first. Online interactive games will probably max
out I/O (network) first. Other games, heavily image-intensive, may
max out video resources first (Halo2, for instance). Yet others may have
a large memory usage, which combined with the OS, causes the system to
use disk for swap storage rather than RAM, so the game will run slow but
the CPU won't be pegged.

It's all a matter of identifying the bottleneck in performance and moving
it. A good systems guy can predict the next one or two in the right
order, before fixing a current bottleneck. If all of the other factors
are in place (simplistically, memory and IO), _then_ CPU will be the
limiting factor. But, if you're out of RAM, all the CPU won't do you
a damn bit of good if it's waiting for all that stuff to be written to,
and read from, a spinning magnetic disk.

Dave Hinz

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 30 Nov 2004 10:12:03 -0800, Jon Nunn <joncnunn@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Also, if a virus scan program is constantly running it can greatly
> reduce the number of machine cycles adviable for more important
> programs like C3C.

He already mentioned he has that turned off.

> In addition, presence of adware can steal machine cycles.

That's been covered as well.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 30 Nov 2004 15:35:07 GMT, in alt.games.civ3 you wrote:

>All applications on any system, will max out CPU usage _unless_ they hit
>another bottleneck first. Online interactive games will probably max
>out I/O (network) first. Other games, heavily image-intensive, may
>max out video resources first (Halo2, for instance). Yet others may have
>a large memory usage, which combined with the OS, causes the system to
>use disk for swap storage rather than RAM, so the game will run slow but
>the CPU won't be pegged.

Your assuming all systems are running Windows. Just because Windows
doesn't know how to multi-task properly you shouldn't assume other
OS's are the same way. A proper multi-tasking OS should be able to
handle multiple tasks without bogging down the system so much the
screen doesn't even refresh.

 

[Buck]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 02:32:52 -0500, P12 <nowhere@all.com> wrote:

>. Check your advisor screens and see
>if you have workers hanging about in your cities. If so activate them
>to turn of automation. I found workers in RAR to be very slow so I
>built like 80 of them myself.

I just started doing that. Once my workers finish building railroads,
I destroy all but ten workers per continent. If I need more later, i
build them.


Buck
--
For what it's worth.

 

[Buck]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 30 Nov 2004 15:35:07 GMT, Dave Hinz <DaveHinz@spamcop.net> wrote:

>On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 09:20:08 -0000, Adam Webb <adam@ajmysecondname.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:
>> all games max out CPU usage, thats how they work
>
>All applications on any system, will max out CPU usage _unless_ they hit
>another bottleneck first. Online interactive games will probably max
>out I/O (network) first. Other games, heavily image-intensive, may
>max out video resources first (Halo2, for instance). Yet others may have
>a large memory usage, which combined with the OS, causes the system to
>use disk for swap storage rather than RAM, so the game will run slow but
>the CPU won't be pegged.
>
>It's all a matter of identifying the bottleneck in performance and moving
>it. A good systems guy can predict the next one or two in the right
>order, before fixing a current bottleneck. If all of the other factors
>are in place (simplistically, memory and IO), _then_ CPU will be the
>limiting factor. But, if you're out of RAM, all the CPU won't do you
>a damn bit of good if it's waiting for all that stuff to be written to,
>and read from, a spinning magnetic disk.
>
>Dave Hinz


Would a dual processor system work better?

Buck
--
For what it's worth.

 

[Buck]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 30 Nov 2004 10:08:59 -0800, joncnunn@yahoo.com (Jon Nunn) wrote:

>Turn off all graphic automations of AI moves is the bigest thing you
>can do for an existing game.
>
I have my AI moves turned off. The bogging down I am referring to is
when nothing is happening at all. The screen just sits there and
looks dumb


>For new games, try playing with fewer AI oppoents.


lol, and I am the one who likes to change the maximum ai opponents on
the different worlds.

I haven't done that in RAR so it isn't an issue, but that might be a
consideration.

Ever want a thrill play a game with 21 opponents on a tiny world
Buck
--
For what it's worth.

 

[Buck]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 30 Nov 2004 10:12:03 -0800, joncnunn@yahoo.com (Jon Nunn) wrote:

>Also, if a virus scan program is constantly running it can greatly
>reduce the number of machine cycles adviable for more important
>programs like C3C.
>
>In addition, presence of adware can steal machine cycles.


I set my firewall to block all, turn off NAV autoprotect and disable
background programs such as IM, webshots, and things that I might have
running.


Buck
--
For what it's worth.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 13:41:07 -0500, Buck <Buck@your.guess> wrote:
> On 30 Nov 2004 15:35:07 GMT, Dave Hinz <DaveHinz@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
>>It's all a matter of identifying the bottleneck in performance and moving
>>it. A good systems guy can predict the next one or two in the right
>>order, before fixing a current bottleneck.

> Would a dual processor system work better?

If the application in question is capable of using two CPUs at the
same time (google "multithreaded"), then yes. Even if it's not, the
system can assign the app to only one CPU, and use the other for the
other system-ish stuff that it's got to do anyway. So, the answer is
"it depends, and will vary anywhere from very little to quite a bit".

Dave Hinz

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

Buck <Buck@your.guess> wrote in message news:<tkouq0t9i6rv8fb5raantmi0r4lqnqru48@4ax.com>...
> On 30 Nov 2004 10:12:03 -0800, joncnunn@yahoo.com (Jon Nunn) wrote:
>
> >Also, if a virus scan program is constantly running it can greatly
> >reduce the number of machine cycles adviable for more important
> >programs like C3C.
> >
> >In addition, presence of adware can steal machine cycles.
>
>
> I set my firewall to block all, turn off NAV autoprotect and disable
> background programs such as IM, webshots, and things that I might have
> running.
>
>
> Buck

Have you checked how much resources your machine uses right after
start up before starting Civ III? This would give us a better idea.
(Number of processes running, total memory utilization, "System Idle"
not having 99%+ of the CPU)

 

[Buck]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 3 Dec 2004 11:32:16 -0800, joncnunn@yahoo.com (Jon Nunn) wrote:

>Buck <Buck@your.guess> wrote in message news:<tkouq0t9i6rv8fb5raantmi0r4lqnqru48@4ax.com>...
>> On 30 Nov 2004 10:12:03 -0800, joncnunn@yahoo.com (Jon Nunn) wrote:
>>
>> >Also, if a virus scan program is constantly running it can greatly
>> >reduce the number of machine cycles adviable for more important
>> >programs like C3C.
>> >
>> >In addition, presence of adware can steal machine cycles.
>>
>>
>> I set my firewall to block all, turn off NAV autoprotect and disable
>> background programs such as IM, webshots, and things that I might have
>> running.
>>
>>
>> Buck
>
>Have you checked how much resources your machine uses right after
>start up before starting Civ III? This would give us a better idea.
>(Number of processes running, total memory utilization, "System Idle"
>not having 99%+ of the CPU)
Good Idea. I'll have to try that next time I play.


Buck
--
For what it's worth.