What graphics card do you play C:S with?

[Ichigo951 22]

And how does it preform?

I ask because I'm thinking of getting a new graphics card sometime, and I want to get a decently priced one that preforms well. I have a 750 Ti, and while it's good, it's a bit older now and I want to get something more recent.

[poshbakerloo 186]

4Gb GTX 970

[Ronyx69 2,413]

GTX 550 Ti for now.

Performs not very well in C:S, maybe gets 30fps if lucky, in detailed scenes can drop to 4fps, less than 1fps with dynamic resolution.

Although i rarely drop below 50fps in GTA V on low.

Planning to upgrade to a GTX 1070 some time.

[Judazzz 1,936]

I'm using a 8GB GTX 1070 in my laptop (which means it has slower clocks but more streaming processors than the desktop version), and to be honest, C:SL performance was a pretty big disappointment. Most modern games give a reasonably fluid, console-like (30-45fps) experience even in 4K with all settings except hardware AA at or near maximum settings (GTA V, Battlefield 1, Watch Dogs 2, Witcher 3, Assassin's Creed Syndicate), but C:SL barely manages over 20fps (low 10's to even single digit frame rate when zoomed in) - probably caused by my cargo train-load of mods and assets. The one thing that struck me is that there is hardly seems to be any difference in frame rate between 1080p, 4K and 4K with 200% Dynamic Resolution (my previous laptop with a GTX760M seriously struggled with DR higher than 100%), no idea what causes this - imo. rather odd - behavior.

[Ichigo951 22]

Hm, so mods can slow it down a lot? I may stick with my laptop's GeForce 940M then. It runs fine on that.

[MushyMushy 3,618]

I haven't played it much (especially with mods), but I have a (desktop) GTX 970 and it runs quite well. I'd imagine with the release of the 10xx series of Nvidia cards you could probably get a 970 on the cheap (in relative terms). Alternatively you could buy  GTX 1060, which is still more powerful than a 970 based on what I've heard.

 

On Wednesday, December 14, 2016 at 8:33 AM, Judazzz said:

I'm using a 8GB GTX 1070 in my laptop (which means it has slower clocks but more streaming processors than the desktop version), and to be honest, C:SL performance was a pretty big disappointment. Most modern games give a reasonably fluid, console-like (30-45fps) experience even in 4K with all settings except hardware AA at or near maximum settings (GTA V, Battlefield 1, Watch Dogs 2, Witcher 3, Assassin's Creed Syndicate), but C:SL barely manages over 20fps (low 10's to even single digit frame rate when zoomed in) - probably caused by my cargo train-load of mods and assets. The one thing that struck me is that there is hardly seems to be any difference in frame rate between 1080p, 4K and 4K with 200% Dynamic Resolution (my previous laptop with a GTX760M seriously struggled with DR higher than 100%), no idea what causes this - imo. rather odd - behavior.

 

Considering the power of the GTX 1070 and the fact that changing the resolution that dramatically had no effect, is it possible some of your other hardware is at fault? City sims are total pigs when it comes to processors and lots of mods will eat computers with insufficient RAM alive.

[johndoh4 13]

AMD R9 280, though this game in particular is much more CPU intensive than GPU intensive, being a simulation game after all.

[Turjan 1,048]

On 12/15/2016 at 6:49 PM, johndoh4 said:

AMD R9 280, though this game in particular is much more CPU intensive than GPU intensive, being a simulation game after all.

This. Cities Skylines is processor-limited in its performance. Mod assets are RAM-limited.

[Judazzz 1,936]

On 12/15/2016 at 1:37 AM, MushyMushy said:

Considering the power of the GTX 1070 and the fact that changing the resolution that dramatically had no effect, is it possible some of your other hardware is at fault? City sims are total pigs when it comes to processors and lots of mods will eat computers with insufficient RAM alive.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure the CPU is much more a bottleneck than the GPU (especially a brute like the 1070 has few problems shoveling pixels by the many millions at a time): the 6700HQ is a hyper-threaded quadcore CPU, a pretty fast one but performance-wise comparable to a higher-end desktop i5 rather than a - quite a bit faster - desktop i7 CPU.
I doubt any of the other components in my laptop bottlenecks the system: RAM is 2133 or 2400MHz DDR4 (I have 16GB, but the game combines RAM and V-RAM, so C:SL has 24GB at its disposal), and the harddrive is a Samsung M2 PCIe SSD.

[MushyMushy 3,618]

4 hours ago, Judazzz said:

Yeah, I'm pretty sure the CPU is much more a bottleneck than the GPU (especially a brute like the 1070 has few problems shoveling pixels by the many millions at a time): the 6700HQ is a hyper-threaded quadcore CPU, a pretty fast one but performance-wise comparable to a higher-end desktop i5 rather than a - quite a bit faster - desktop i7 CPU.
I doubt any of the other components in my laptop bottlenecks the system: RAM is 2133 or 2400MHz DDR4 (I have 16GB, but the game combines RAM and V-RAM, so C:SL has 24GB at its disposal), and the harddrive is a Samsung M2 PCIe SSD.

Yeah, looking up the specs of the CPU leads me to believe that that's the cause. According to the stuff I read the base clock is 2.6 GHz, but if you haven't already you could activate the Intel "Max Quad Core Turbo" (I think Intel Turbos are activated in the BIOS if I'm not mistaken) to bump it up to 3.1 GHz without overclocking it (if you haven't already done that and don't want to). Of course, that all really depends on how efficient your system's cooling setup is.

[Judazzz 1,936]

13 minutes ago, MushyMushy said:

Yeah, looking up the specs of the CPU leads me to believe that that's the cause. According to the stuff I read the base clock is 2.6 GHz, but if you haven't already you could activate the Intel "Max Quad Core Turbo" (I think Intel Turbos are activated in the BIOS if I'm not mistaken) to bump it up to 3.1 GHz without overclocking it (if you haven't already done that and don't want to). Of course, that all really depends on how efficient your system's cooling setup is.

Well, I think that'll be a limiting factor for sure: I have an i7 and a GTX1070 crammed into a 0.85" thick laptop, so it already sounds like a jet engine in afterburner mode when playing a demanding game   Not complaining about the performance though: C:SL is a hard-ass, but pretty much everything else I throw at it runs like a dream in 4K.

[LeeMeister57 7]

I have an R9 390 on a Core i7-6700k with 32GB RAM and an SSD. When I run the vanilla game, city size doesn't seem to be a problem. When I add the 15-25 mods I'm using and my custom assets, it takes a while to load, but it runs quite smooth for the most part on my 4k monitor, even with the graphics set to be super high. It's all air cooled for now too...so it's pretty loud with CS running, even paused.

[hugo_prado 4]

Intel HD4600. I have to play in windowed at 1024x768 medium details/textures. Runs at 15fps, playable as the simulation runs fine. 

[MisterBlueStar4 1,004]

Radeon RX 480.It's not too bad but if I put all of my settings at high the game will get 1-2 fps.

[Darf 1,439]

Graphic cards don't make much of a difference, C:S is mostly about CPU speed and than more about individual core speed than multithreaded clockspeed.