Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[idunno]

Getting ready to buy a new desktop...I've only ever experienced DF in terms of small, low-population forts with no or minimal liquids sloshing about.  Long have I lurked, gazing in awe and wonder at posts mentioning 6x6 embarks and armies of dwarves.  Long have I dreamed and plotted for the day when I , too, could experience the true potential of Toady's masterpiece.  This day must come.

So...what should I buy?  I don't know much about computers, and I definitely don't trust my skills enough to just buy parts and build one myself.  From past threads, I've figured out that processor speed is what really matters, and DF can't use more than one core, so more than a dual- or quad-core is unnecessary, I guess.

But, sadly, I am a newb and need advice and recommendations.  You lucky souls out there with huge embarks, populations in the hundreds, and giant waterworks - how did you do it?  What should I look for when shopping to ensure I can orchestrate dwarven insanity on an epic scale?

I realize the new version just came out, so there may be some uncertainties...still, any help would be much appreciated.

tl;dr:  What kind of computer should I buy for great DF performance?

[Satarus]

Dwarf Fortress just rapes your CPU.  Any decent dual core CPU or better will help you run the game fine.  Devoting a single core do DF and then let the other core take care of other programs like the OS, web browser, MP3 player, etc. 

A decent amount of memory is important too.  If you are gonna run Vista of Windows 7, I'd recommend a minimum of 2GB.  If you are going to do some serious video editting or 3D gaming, I'd recommend 4GB.  Also a good speed on that memory helps too.  Sometimes the memory can be the bottleneck of your system.

Since Dwarf Fortress just uses some basic OpenGL, a powerful video card is a waste and any integrated chipset will work fine.  However if you want to do some 3D gaming like Left 4 Dead, you'll want a good video card.  Either buy a computer with one already installed, or get a system that has a PCI-express x16 slot in it and get the video card separate.


For the TL;DR.  Just get anything with a decent CPU.  Go for other options if you want to play other games that do more than just eat your CPU.

[Greiger]

As you have already gathered the power of the CPU is the big thing.  A dual core is a good idea, since it lets DF use up a whole core with nothing else in the way, and since the D# code can use a little of another core for rendering when it gets merged. A quad core is probably not worth it though. 

You'll want a pretty good clock speed. Faster the better. (My own dated Intel Core 2 Duo has 2.66 Ghz could do 220 dwarves at 20 FPS on a 4x4 with water and magma in 40d16 for reference) 

You want at least 2GB of ram if you are on Vista or 7, less than that and your OS might choke.  You'll probably want a little more if yer planning on doing much else, but DF will run fine on that 2 GB.  And if you know your way around control panel you can reduce how much windows needs. When I first got vista it was using up a gig and a half, once I disabled most of the unnecessary vista shinys it now only needs half a gig.

Graphics aren't too important, but you do wanna make sure it can handle open GL capably.  But I would think all graphics cards/chips should be capable of using it these days.

TL;DR what the last guy said.

[Shades]

Devoting a single core do DF and then let the other core take care of other programs like the OS, web browser, MP3 player, etc.

Just to say if your new pc is one of the i5/i7 set then don't do this as, as I understand it at least, it will limit Intel's internal over-clocking system (that only works when you aren't using all the cores).

I'm not sure if the same is true of AMD's offerings though.

[Grimlocke]

Note that clock speeds (measures in gHz or mHz) are only meaningful between processors of the same series. Its the number that gets the most advertising, but due to differences in architecture a processor can be faster than other processors with a higher clock speed.

The now somewhat dated Intel pentium series for example is notoriously inefficiently desinged. A newer Intel or AMD dual core will perform far better than one of those, even using just 1 core.

[Kishmond]

So are Intel CPUs more efficient? There has to be some reason they're so much more expensive.

[Yagrum Bagarn]

So are Intel CPUs more efficient? There has to be some reason they're so much more expensive.

I'll paint a target on my back and say that between AMD and Intel, Intel is probably making better processors right now on average.  But most of that extra price tag is brand name.

I bought an AMD Athlon64 3500+ a few years ago when they were near the top of the market - back then AMD was on top for gamer processors.  I remember its closest Intel competitor was slightly inferior but much more expensive.

I haven't been paying super close attention to the processor market right now, though, so my opinion might be a couple months out of date and that's all it takes to be wrong about processors.

[Calhoun]

Where do you plan to buy your new computer? A retail store? Online?

What's your budget?

I ask because if you're buying straight from, say, Dell, or buying at a retail outlet, you're probaby wasting money. (By over paying)

I'd recommend Newegg or Ibuypower (If you want a bit of customization). Both are great places.

Also, Putting together a rig yourself isn't really that hard. Like, Really. Just find one of 15 million guides online. It'll save you anywhere between $250-500

[bombcar]

Remember to check the actual performance of the processors you're looking to buy; it makes no sense to see that Intel's $1500 processor is the fastest on the market and then assume that their $100 processor is faster than the AMD $100 processor, for example.

[Yagrum Bagarn]

Word, bombcar, I should have added that caveat to what I said.  Look at benchmark testing of whatever processor you want to buy, and compare it to similarly priced processors.

[Googolplexed]

I think intel currently holds the single-threaded performance crowd
AMD is good valve, but most of the value is due to being cheaper per core then intel, and since DF only uses one core, intel wins

[Thief^]

Intel holds the absolute performance crown (both single and multi-core). It'll cost you though.
AMD is the best value for money at normal prices, e.g. £40-£200.


Getting a new model Intel chip with TurboBoost or a new AMD chip with TurboCore (they're basically the same thing) will get you a few hundred MHz more performance in DF than you would with an older chip. Be careful though, as the different chips boost by different amounts, e.g. all the Intel Core i7 8?? chips boost to around 3.4-3.5 GHz for single-core apps like DF (from 2.5-3.0), while the i7 9?? all boost to 266 MHz more than their normal speed.

[archivis]

Something not to be forgotten, DF also is also much happier if you have liquid cooling on your CPU - especially if you have masterwork or artifact components - and you'll need a big beard to go on the front.

[Calhoun]

Something not to be forgotten, DF also is also much happier if you have liquid cooling on your CPU - especially if you have masterwork or artifact components - and you'll need a big beard to go on the front.

Only if you're overclockin'. But anyone who's going to spend the cash for liquid cooling is going to be overclocking.

Still, Even just replacing the stock cooling fan will let you clock it up atleast 100 MHZ safely.

[Shades]

Manual overclocking of the new Intel chips is essentially pointless, the new i5s also have the 'TurboBoost' along with the i7s. I don't think the i3s do though. If AMD 'TurboCore' is the same thing then again manually overclocking isn't worth while.

The concepts of the tech is that the chips will step up speed in increments while the temperature is low enough. Which is why they throttle back when more cores are in use. I imagine decent cooling can only help this. Manual overclocking disables this effect and unless you really know what your doing it's not going to be as effective as something that monitors it's own temperature.