How does your system behave when SC4 is running

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

My machine is an AMD Athlon II X2 245 running at 200 GHz MHz with an

AMD/ATI (fusion) 760G (Radion 3000) GPU Chip Set .

Build by Gigabyte Technologies. 

It currently has 2GB of real memory, and I am running Linux (UBUNTU 10.10 64-bit) WITH 20GB of swap space.

I am running under control of the wine kernel layer (32-bit version) that interprets and translates windows calls version 1.3.6 (Beta).  I am currently experimenting with the Virtual Desk Top supplied by wine to see just how much screen I can use.  This is proceeding satisfactorily.  The game will not run without the VDT because of some glitch in my accelerator chip set.

I am planning to up the memory to 4GB next week because the motherboard manual says that the system will use dual fetch if I have two memory sticks which will give my 64-bit system a 128-bit memory fetch.  This should give a power boost of, I estimate, 10 to 30%.  The bigger fetch to the caches means that there will be half as many memory cycles on the bus.

An interesting thing about the GPU is that it is capable of running HD devices, and there are two HD ports on my machine's back plane: one is for HD audio, the other for an HD monitor.  If I ever get enough money for the gear, I will surely try this out.  I think running SC4 in HD might be interesting.

When running SC4, my system monitor shows both processors running at about 70%.  I was under the impression that SC4 did not get along well with multiple processors, but this seems fine, except there are more CTD's, so you have to save a lot.  Meanwhile, I have never had the game run so well.

I am not at all familiar with the Linux processor dispatcher, but whatever it is doing is working.  I was actually monitoring this morning when a CTD occurred.  I have a wine log that I will look at.  It might well have been an application hiccup, so I am not really concerned.

I am curious about the experiences of other people running modern multi-core machines in various operating systems, and what your customizations experiences have been.  We may get an Omnibus update of out this, but maybe not.

If the moderators feel this is too technical a thread for this list, please feel free to move it to Bugs and Technical Issues, but it is a discussion, and not a bug or technical problem.

[diamonddog_74 32]

My computer is an Intel iMac that's a few years old. I play the game in a Windows XP partition. It's a Dual Core processor, and I have 2GB RAM and 256MB VRAM. It's not the most sophisticated video card (I think it's an ATI Radeon 1400M), but it works well. I have a lot of plugins, so I know that causes a lag in-game. As far as the computer, the cooling fan spins up a lot after a short while of playing the game. I do get the CTD on zoom bug, so I do save often. I think there's a way of making the game ignore the second CPU so it doesn't get all wonky, but the instructions seem more geared to Windows 7, which is not supported with drivers for my computer, so I don't know if it'll work on Windows XP.

[joshriddle 29]

Before I begin,

WinXP SP3 w/ Latest updates at 2.85 GB swap

Intel I4 2.25 GHZ

0.99 RAM, 1.96 GB Virtual memory, 64 MB Video memory with Intel Extreme 2 for Mobile.

Gateway 400VTX model.

Usually before I start the game I close everything. Unfortunately, it isn't just a kill everything except system and explorer. I use that ObjectDock program with a huge high-graphics desktop from the internet, 32 Bit color quality, with the Visual effects under the Control Panel>>System>>Advanced area set to Best Performance.

I get CTDs often, it is because my disk's contents become fragmented throughout the day. I defrag daily as well as use the Disk Cleanup utility. I even went as far as to write up two Batch Files that will automatically clean out my TEMP and Prefetch Folder. 

Now I found out how to write a batch file that can stop and start services on a website. I'm researching all services that are on the Services List I have under the Computer Management Console. Some I wish to be able to kill before I launch the game include networking, print spooler, net runtime optimization, computer browser, fast user switching compatibility, telenet, and workstation. There may be others, that is why I am researching these and others. Net rumtime, I don't know about stopping that yet. Net runtime is part of Net Framework, which is needed to run Stardock, which basically ads a second taskbar, except it is more graphical and uses up a small amount of ram in the process.

Of course I could close that dock before I begin playing that game, and reopen it after I exit the game. I may do that yet, I may also look into making a batch file to end certain processes which I find unnecessary, such as the one to update Java, Synaptics, and others.

As far as it behaves, everything remains normal as far as Windows goes, but my CPU fan kicks in and doesn't want to slow down or stop until I exit that game. And from what it looks like in Task Manager, the page file is active, hitting about 500 MB. Usually according to Task Manager the usage stays down at 120-200.

Was also examining the memory usage. It climbed to 600,000 while a city was loading. Usually while the game is loading it jumps to 150,000 at highest. I don't know about while a city is being used as I haven't checked then.

I run in Windowed mode, so if I need quick access to the rest of the computer, I have it. But usually folder browsing is very slow, and the graphics sometimes even look chunky.

---

As far as running this game on a dual core though, I had more frequent CTDs, which I got around easily with frequent saves, and updating the game (to build 640)

[Loney 22]

Laptop: ASUS N61Jq

OS: 64-bit Window 7 Home Premium

Processor: Intel i7 Q720 1.60Ghz (4 cores)

RAM: 4GB

Graphic card: ATi Mobility Radeon HD 5730

SC4 occasionally crashes, it might be because I am running multiple cores, but I did not run SC4 on one core due to excessive lag. The computer kept on switching back to the desktop whenever SC4 starts. I then have to click on the SC4 tab in the bar, and after selecting a city, the desktop pops up again, forcing me to manually reopen SC4 to start playing.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Loney:  I run dual core, and I suspect the program occastionally falls over its own feet, but it is a single key-stroke for me to reload since I run controlled by a windowed script.  I just save every time I have done something that will be a nuisance to redo.

I am starting to think that what happens is that each of the two processes get a processor, but sometimes the dispatch gets crossed up and the wrong context is restored causing the crash.  It would be a shame if that were so, because that would be a major bug in the Linux kernel, and a security problem as well.

[tungston 19]

I have run the game on Intel Core2duo, and Core2quad, with no special settings.  The game uses all available cores, which when you add all percentages of use, amounts to more than 100%.

I have used these setups with Windows XP, Vista 32 bit, and Windows 7 64 bit.

I have just built a system with an Intel i7 875K, with 4 cores and hyperthreading, amounting to 8 cores, and Windows 7 64 bit.  As soon as I have racked up some hours, I report the results.

[z1 566]

If you have multiple processors, you should run with the command line argument "-CPUCount:1" (usually in your shortcut), or optionally use a number greater than 1, up to the number of processors you have, including the virtual ones created by hyperthreading. This will spread SC4 over that number of processors, while eliminating the CTDs associated with multi-processor machines. I have a Core i7 920 machine, which looks to the OS like it has eight processors, and I find that using 2 in the above argument works quite well.

I am running under Win7 x64, and I can also say that I've never had the game run so well.

[tungston 19]

I don't use any "affinity", or "cpu count" tags, and have little to no CTD's when I run the game under Vista, or Win 7,  The core usage is generally spread fairly equal among the cores.  Generally, the core usage is between 30 to 60% on the  four cores.

[Tysons4 68]

your processor is running at 200 ghz moose???

my quad core amd only runs at 2.5 ghz.... runs great, but 200?? how do you keep it cool

system specs

os: windows 7 64

cpu: amd phenom quad 2.5

ram: 4 gb 1066

gpu: 1gb nvidia 9800gt

i have a dual monitor setup and can play simcity in window mode at 1680x1050 with hardware rendering and full graphics and on my other monitior i can do whatever i want... say play rollercoaster tycoon 3, watch movies, surf the web, or even play another window of simcity (when i make a road connection and save i can open the city next to it in the other region and keep playing without having to go to region... makes building fast

currently with a region map loaded that is 61 square miles the game uses a gig and a half of ram and only uses 24% of the cpu

my only gripe is my computer doesnt have enough ram to display my whole region with the region census, which is a letdown, but i can always upgrade my ram to the max my motherboard can handle, which is 16 gb...

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Originally posted by: Tysons4

your processor is running at 200 ghz moose???

.quote>

I hold it under Niagara Falls.  Oops, sorry, that's a typeo.  200MHz.  It is capable of running at 800 MHz but I suspect it would need a Freon cooling system.

Digging around I found a system command (schedtool) that sets all kinds of interesting properties for the running process.  I used it to set my affinity to CPU 0 and most of my CTDs went away.  Aoparently, with Linux, context switching with dual cores is sometimes a little dicey with this version of the kernel.  It is easy to use, and it works like this:

I put that in the code section, so it wouldn't be seen by the smiley interpreter.  the -a sets the processor number, in this case the low bit is CPU0, and the -e gives the script calling my game.

[cooliosimdude 0]

200mhz? Seriously?

I suppose running an E8400 @ 4.0ghz is probably overkill for SC4.

[Tysons4 68]

yeah you went from being future tech, to something between my first (100mhz) and second (333mhz) computers and simcity needs at least 500mhz to run

i bet the real number is close to 2ghz... as 200ghz is out of this world, and 200mhz would hardly run windows 95

i used to have a single-core amd athlon 2.2 ghz which was amazing at running simcity but i upgraded because i wanted a system that could handle all these new games that are flooding the market (which my new rig does exceedingly well) if i had known that i was going to go back to simcity i would have kept it operational

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Well, here's the specification from the lshw output.

id:	cpu
description:	CPU
product:	AMD Athlon II X2 245 Processor
vendor:	Advanced Micro Devices [AMD]
physical id:	4
bus info:	cpu@0
version:	AMD Athlon II X2 245 Processor
slot:	Socket M2
size:	2900MHz
capacity:	3GHz
width:	64 bits
clock:	200MHz
capabilities:	fpu fpu_exception wp vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush mmx fxsr sse sse2 ht syscall nx mmxext fxsr_opt pdpe1gb rdtscp x86-64 3dnowext 3dnow constant_tsc rep_good nonstop_tsc extd_apicid pni monitor cx16 popcnt lahf_lm cmp_legacy svm extapic cr8_legacy abm sse4a misalignsse 3dnowprefetch osvw ibs skinit wdt npt lbrv svm_lock nrip_save cpufreqMaybe

Maybe they are really reporting 2.9 GHz. It is a dual core processor, and it runs like a scared rabbit. However, they do say the clock is 200MHz, so that's what I read. Some of these outputs are a little arcane.

[Tysons4 68]

i see what you are saying now... that could be your front size bus size... my old computer was 512, and was made to play games... different oses have a unique way of displaying specs

the large the front size bus the better it can utilize the ram and in turn take more strain off the processor

my current computer has 1333mhz fsb and my processor runs at 22% or lower when playing simcity, from region view to the largest city, it never gets any higher than this number.. i would say that the newer computer puts less strain on the system and is more limited to the programing of the game

im sure better computers would make this even more apparent

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

That is only an excerpt from what I get when I ask for a full lshw in super user state.  Confusing, but with a 200MHz clock, they seem to have used some kind of multiplier to arrive at the speed of the processors.

My GUI -based sysinfo package is broken, and thows a fault, so I'll have to report it.  Tsk, tsk.

[Loney 22]

Originally posted by: cooliosimdude

200mhz? Seriously?

I suppose running an E8400 @ 4.0ghz is probably overkill for SC4.quote>

Nothing is ever an overkill. I bet a computer with two of those processors would still lag while trying to run a large city with six million population and around 500,000 intercity commuters just passing through.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Latest guff from the operating system.  This is output from the 'lscpu' command.  The operating system should know what its running, wouldn't you think?

Architecture:          x86_64
CPU op-mode(s):        64-bit
CPU(s):                2
Thread(s) per core:    1
Core(s) per socket:    2
CPU socket(s):         1
NUMA node(s):          1
Vendor ID:             AuthenticAMD
CPU family:            16
Model:                 6
Stepping:              2
CPU MHz:               800.000
Virtualization:        AMD-V
L1d cache:             64K
L1i cache:             64K
L2 cache:              1024K

All of which seems to indicate that the basic clock has been multiplied by four, giving me two 800 MHz processors. Considering the speed with which this machine responds to things like an SC4 save (5 seconds or less), I am inclined to think that this is the valid stuff.

Reading the implications of this output seems to indicate you could have more than one cpu socket which imiplies a very impressive multiprocessor capability.  Some of the newer AMD chips have four cores, for if you could handle, say, four sockets, you could have 16 cpu's.  You'd probably burn out your memory chips.

[diamonddog_74 32]

Originally posted by: z1

If you have multiple processors, you should run with the command line argument "-CPUCount:1" (usually in your shortcut), or optionally use a number greater than 1, up to the number of processors you have, including the virtual ones created by hyperthreading. This will spread SC4 over that number of processors, while eliminating the CTDs associated with multi-processor machines. I have a Core i7 920 machine, which looks to the OS like it has eight processors, and I find that using 2 in the above argument works quite well.

I am running under Win7 x64, and I can also say that I've never had the game run so well.quote>

So, you think I should use "-CPUCount:2"?

This is what I have:

Like I said before, it's an Intel iMac. It has 2GB RAM, and 256MB VRAM.  I'm running 32-bit Windows XP Pro SP-3 with all the latest and greatest updates that are relevant to my system.

Additionally, I just updated Apple's Boot Camp software to v. 3.2 which seems to have alleviated some performance issues. Last night when I fired up the game, the fans didn't spin up as if the computer was about to take off. It also seems to have alleviated the graphics lag I was having before in-game. So they may have updated the video drivers. The game screens pan very smoothly now. I do have it set for 16-bit graphics, though. But I'm running the game at the display's native resolution of 1680 x 1050.

I installed CAM a couple of weeks ago, and it gave me the opportunity to really clean up my plugins folder, so that greatly reduced my CTDs.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Well, I don't know if the processor scheduler/dispatcher is smart enough to dispatch multi-processors or not to a single thread, which doesn't make much sense.  Does anyone know if Sc4 is actually multitheaded or do the modern machines just make it look that way.

By the way, chum, if I had that machine, I would have a swap partition (VRAM) that was double the size of my RAM.  Why do you only have  256MB of VRAM.  Disk is cheap, so you could easily set yourself up with lots of swap.  The more plugins you have, the more you are going to need it.

Because I have tons and tons of disk (a 500GB drive of which only 200GB is even formatted), I have set up my Linux installations at 100GB each with a 90GB ext4 partition with a 10GB swap partition above it.  I have two instances of the Linux operating system.  So the second installation (the one I use for production) finds both 10GB swao spaces and uses them both, so my production environment has a 90GB program/data space, and a 20GB swap area.  Unintended, but harmless.

I was reading the way that the VM in Linux works (I am studying the kernel), and they do it right.  They only put dirty pages on the swap area, and if a clean page is needed and not in memory, the simply get it from the program exeutable file.  I wonder if our friends at Microsoft are still copying whole programs to a special area in order to paginate them.

[diamonddog_74 32]

Oh, by VRAM I meant Video RAM. It's what came with the Radeon X1600. It's not the Windows swap file. The swap file is whatever Windows wants it to be. I think it's set on automatic by default. I don't really touch that.

To tell you the truth, I really only use the Windows partition to play the game, so I formatted only 60GB of my hard drive for Windows. The rest of the 500GB drive is for Mac OS X's UNIX goodness.

I really wish the game would work natively in Mac OS X for Intel because it would be more efficient. But Aspyr, the company which ported the game to Mac OS, never fully converted it to work on Mac OS X for Intel. Also, since most of the custom content is more Windows-specific, that's why I play the Windows version.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Be careful of a windows-managed swap file.  It is often in fragments.  Since your O/S is UNIX-like, you can probably run wine, and use it to operate SC4.  If that's the only reason you have a windows partition at all, you can maybe put it to bed.

Have a look at the site.  The current release, 1.2, runs SC4 (windows verision) without a problem after you update your environment with the run time for C version 6 (use winetricks, vc6run).  The pseudo registry kept by this service is quite interesting.  wine is not an emulator.  It is a kernel layer that intercepts windows calls and translates them to native on the fly.  The regular code just runs on the intel architecture.

[diamonddog_74 32]

Originally posted by: A Nonny Moose

Be careful of a windows-managed swap file.  It is often in fragments.  Since your O/S is UNIX-like, you can probably run wine, and use it to operate SC4.  If that's the only reason you have a windows partition at all, you can maybe put it to bed.

Have a look at the site.  The current release, 1.2, runs SC4 (windows verision) without a problem after you update your environment with the run time for C version 6 (use winetricks, vc6run).  The pseudo registry kept by this service is quite interesting.  wine is not an emulator.  It is a kernel layer that intercepts windows calls and translates them to native on the fly.  The regular code just runs on the intel architecture.

quote>

Well, I run XP Pro which is a bit better than XP Home as far as stability. In fact, I've never had a Windows machine as stable as my Mac. Go figure. I think Windows sets the swap file at 3GB in my computer.

Hmm, thanks for reminding me of the Wine project.

I just read quickly through the application compatibility list, and it seems no one has tested SC4 Deluxe on the Mac OS X version of Wine. Most of the tests (on Linux) give it a "Gold" performance rating. I have 3.14GB of plugins, however. I suppose it wouldn't hurt to try it, though.

BTW, the only other reason for my Windows partition is also SC4-related. I'm trying to learn how to use the BAT with gMax. Again, I read the WineHQ compatibility list and gMax/BAT doesn't run well in Wine.

EDIT: Getting back to the CPUCount argument, I already have this argument:

What's the syntax if I want to add the -CPUCount:x item? Do I put a comma or a space after the existing Target argument?

[synyster31 0]

So im just about to reinstall SC4:RH on my quad-core system, 8gb ram & win 7 64bit. What would be the recommended steps to take? Install the game, get updates from SC4 site, anything else? Any essential mods (STEX lot/buildings content aside)

Are there any recommended arguments i should add to the target line as listed above considering im running a quad-core processor etc?

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

synyster31:  Just do a normal install and run it.  There are some critical addons, but you can find them either in the Omnibus or in discussion threads in SC General Discussion.  You may want the NAM and its friends, but it depends on what you want out of the game.

diamonddog_74: As far as I know, SC4 follows the POSIX standard for command line parameters.  White space is the delimiter between options and option values unless the option specifically requires other things, in some cases colons.  If you hunt around, you will find the correct syntax for setting affinity, but I don't think it is needed.

It is true that there is OLE trouble with gmax in wine 2.1.  I have the 3.1.7 beta and am sort of working on gmax and I think I am alone in this endeavour.  Most people with the exception of this community are not much interested in SC4 and its appurtenances any longer.  We are large, but people are more concerned with their newer games.  If you've been on the appdb at winehq, you know what the popular games are.

And then you have the unenlightened who stick to windows like the ol' tar-baby.  Anything else is more than they want to cope with, they think.  Microsoft is a nice secuity blanket until it doesn't do what you want.

[synyster31 0]

Ok thanks, it's just i've not played or been on the site for a while & I just wondered if there was anything new i'd missed out on, win 7 wise at least, I last played when I had XP installed.

So no tweaks or anything recommended for multi-cores or 64-bit OS?

[GMT 389]

I'm on a q8300 2.5ghz quadcore with oc running at approx. 3.0ghz with an overclocked gtx260 (+15%), 4 gb ram on nforce 780i chipset and a couple gb swap (I think about 6)

about 99% of my CTDs occure due to plugins, when I run vanilla sc4+rh I barely get any CTDs, no matter if forced singlecore or not (via startup manager)

If I ever get enough money for the gear, I will surely try this out.  I think running SC4 in HD might be interesting.

quote>

I play it in 1080i (means 1920x1080 with 60hz refresh) on a 24" screen. apart from getting used to the much smaller depiction of everything (I tend to use zoom 4 where I was happy with zoom 3 or even 2 on my laptop (720p resolution) or even my old pc with valve screen on 1024x768 - consider a large city tile at furthest zoom almost fitting the screen - I don't see too much difference.

never cared for system loads, I know that I was at about 100% (both ram and cpu) on my dual core laptop (t5750 @ 2ghz, 1gb ram), I gotta check them on my pc one day...

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Originally posted by: synyster31

Ok thanks, it's just i've not played or been on the site for a while & I just wondered if there was anything new i'd missed out on, win 7 wise at least, I last played when I had XP installed.

So no tweaks or anything recommended for multi-cores or 64-bit OS?quote>

Nope, but you will want the latest NAM and friends.  I particularly like the SAM and the NWM supplements to the NAM.  If you like doing a little civil engineering and getting great highways, try the RHW.  I no longer have the patience to play with the RHW, too much like work for me.

If you are into mass transit, you will also want the RTMT which gives you a lot of flexibility with bus/subway.

My new system with a dual core Athlon II X2 processor and an new AMD/ATI fusion graphics chip set runs just fine under wine in Linux.  I still get CTD's, but they are managable and I just save frequently.  I was having problems with the O/S being first out of the box for a while, but the fixes that have come in recenty have fixed things up nicely.  I am currently running Linux with UBUNTU 10.10 64-bit with the wine 3.1.7 beta (which I had to recompile when the distribution centre sent out a new ia32.lib update).  The new 32-bit library seems to have fixed a lot of the CTD's I was getting.  And setting affinity or not didn't make any difference to getting CTD's.  So, as far as I am concerned, it is a myth.  This may not be true for some systems, but the guilty party appears to be Vista.

The hairiest part of all this is keeping up with who has their fingers in which pie.  wine is very solid, but the 64-bit version of Linux has had its problems.  And we have the game itself with all its idiosyncracies to contend with.  Doing cross-platform stuff is one of the interesting things that keeps me going.

[GMT 389]

Ok ust did a quick check with my standard settings - in terms of plugins which are a few gb actually in this setup - for playing at the moment and tested it on a large and developped city tile. (oh btw I was right about my Swap, it's 6320mb)

according to coretemp:

When running SC4 on all 4 cores, I get loads between 15% and 45% scattered over all cores, while there's always 1 of them that bursts into the mid 60s every couple heartbeats, but it's not the same core each time. (here the load average, on all 4 cores together, according to the vista-internal resource monitor barely crosses 35%, while the physical memory load approaches, but not crosses 77%)

When limited to 1 core, it runs on core 0 and barely below 90% load while all others struggle to get above 10%.

[DocRorlach 25]

While I rarely agree with Tungsten on technical assesments of playing SC4, as far as Windows 7 & multi-cores are concerned he is right on the money. The OS handles the core assignments better than any of its predecessors. I am using an Intel I5 board, with a nVidia GTX260, 8GB RAM, on a 1600x1280 resolution (with at least Outlook & DIC running beside the game on another monitor), and the only CDTs I get have to do with bad lots (usually my own).

Vista is another kettle of fish altogether. It usually (expressed with caution) requires some help in form of CPU assignments. When I started with Vista, CTDs were a matter of routine until I found rushmore5's brilliant solution and repacked the EXE (see Omnibus). Under Win7-64 this proves unnecessary.

Moreover, I recently tested the game (6.2 GB in plugins) with and without DAT-Packer. The astonishing result was that DP or no DP made no difference other than during the initial load of a city tile. Even after exiting & reentering the game - once a city had been loaded at least once, the load and menu-load times where more or less identical. And if the game was restarted, the unpacked load times where actually better. Now this may have to do with my using an older version of DP (I have had serious issues with the latest version), but I tend to think it is Win7 that does the tricks here.

My only regret is that Alt-Tab between the game and another application can only be done during region view otherwise graphics go haywire. That problem did not exist for me under XP. My next test is running the game on an XP Virtual machine on the same PC.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Well, with the help of some back and forth with Tungston, I have determined that assigning single cores to the game in Linux 64-bit has little or no effect.  I have run this both ways within an hour of each other, and the number of CTD's was about the same.  wine is reporting some program errors being emitted by the .exe.  Anyone know what error L"6" and L"7" are?  I seem to get an L"7" just before a CTD.  On the wine log, I can actually see where it is coming down. 

Apparently, if you run the game from a console window, these things will show up in any environment.  Could someone check that on W7?  Instead of starting the game from the shortcut, open a console window and use the command line from your shortcut, then see if anything is reported back to the console.  You might have to dig around to find the W7 console, but it has to be there somewhere.  Who knows, we might just get a better handle on the bugs that are causing these crashes.