Best Pc Configuration

[Maxell]

I have a PC with this configuration: motherboard AS Rock B85 Anniversary Edition, 8GB Ballistix Sport ram, Geforce gtx 760 video card, Intel i5-4460 processor, Windows 10. The pc is about two years old and I was thinking of making a small upgrade of Ram and the video card before completely changing everything.
Specifically, I wanted to replace the video card with a Geforce gtx 1050ti and replace 8 gb of Ram with 16 Corsair Vengeance Pro series. I would be grateful for some suggestion because Transport Fever is not very fluid, maybe with this new configuration, I would also be able to make the game without slowing down.

[Buck Fell]

Personally It always annoys me when I ask for suggestions within a price range and some ninny says "don't waste your money, go for the more expensive option", never the less ....

You might want to consider the 1060 6GByte model. It's about $100 more expensive but from what I've deduced it is the most cost effective card on the market, quite a bit more powerful than cheaper options and quite a bit cheaper than more powerful ones.

Check out http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-1060-6GB-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1050-Ti/3639vs3649 for a head to head comparison.

The 1060 3Gbyte option is not a good choice IMO, many games will be negatively impacted by the low memory.

The 1060-6G might cost an extra $100 now but could save $200 in 2-3 years when you start feeling like the 1050 is too slow.

You don't mention disk, I assume you have an SSD ?

[Maxell]

I have a ssd disk for the operating system, a second hd of one terabyte where I install the applications. Transport Fever is installed on this. The amount I want to spend on what I've specified above is around 300 euros between Ram and Video Card. I would only want a good compromise to make Transport Fever more fluid and upgrade the pc without too much pretense.

[Stealth]

keep the 8gb of ram, you wont need it atm

[cszolee79]

1060 6GB if you play other games and want stable 60fps on high/max settings.
Game struggles on everything btw, in late game GPU becomes completely irrelevant. 6-core Intel with quad channel DDR4 might help some, but you'll see fps below 30 even with that.
But for future-proofness I'd forget the 1050 in any form.

You may want to plug in a 4790K though that will help in any situation.
And of course try to run your RAM in dual channel mode at the highest possible speeds.

Edit: just for a comparison, I have a 3770K@4200mhz, 2x8gb HyperX Savage DDR3-1600 (XMP1 timings), GTX 970@1340/3700mhz and it gets as low as 15-20fps on normal game speed in 2000 / max settings (textures medium) 1080p. Even when the game is paused it only goes 30-40fps. Shadows, Geometry and Occlusion settings help a lot with GPU load in early game but later it becomes CPU and/or RAM limited so for me there's just no point in lowering those settings.

[Maxell]

Thanks to everyone for the answers. I play mainly with managerial games: Tropico, Cities Skylines, SimCity, Act Of Aggression, Transport Fever etc. I would like to make this small investment on Ram and graphics card to give the PC the ability to support the games I will buy in the next two or three years before definitively changing the computer.

[Thork]

The most important part would be the CPU, but it's not like more cores would give you much more performance. For now, the game only makes good use of ~2/3 cores, so clock speed would make the most difference and that may not be worth the investment.
Unless you run a lot of mods, 8gb RAM (+GFX) should be fine. An SSD would give you some improved loading speeds, but probably no noticable difference on in-game-performance.
The least thing I'd worry about would be the GFX-card, unless you need it for other games.

[Molybdane]

Originally posted by Stealth:

keep the 8gb of ram, you wont need it atm

This is not true. With 8 GB of Ram, my game became just about unplayable in the year 1950 ish on a large map. However, since I upgraded the memory to the very same 16 GB of Corsair Vengeance memory, the game came back to life.

So if you want to play a big map, you'll need that 16 GB eventually, or quit your game.

[genemead]

It's simple: get the baddest, nastyist CPU and graphics card, and the most RAM you can afford. All your games will appreciate it.

But all that doesn't matter when it comes to TPF's late game. What ever you get (except for a computer only the government can afford), TPF will bring it to it's knees. (But I "heard" that they're working on late-game performance).

[Dan]

I agree with everyone - the 1060 is certaintly the sweet-spot for power-to-price... 1050 is edging a bit underpowered.

If you want to shave cost a bit - don't worry about a particular brand or speed of RAM. Just go for the default max speed your CPU supports without overclocking, and pick a budget range from the likes of Crucial or Kingston. More RAM may help, but faster/premium RAM will give very little extra performance for the extra money. Better to put that money towards bumping up to a 1060

[Maxell]

I'm going for grades. At the moment I ordered 16 gb of Corsair Vegeance pro ram. Let's see what happens, then I'll go to the choice of the graphics card

[Stealth]

Originally posted by Molybdane:

Originally posted by Stealth:

keep the 8gb of ram, you wont need it atm

This is not true. With 8 GB of Ram, my game became just about unplayable in the year 1950 ish on a large map. However, since I upgraded the memory to the very same 16 GB of Corsair Vengeance memory, the game came back to life.

So if you want to play a big map, you'll need that 16 GB eventually, or quit your game.

that´s like buying a cheap office pc and expting to be able to do highlevel cad in 3d with it - 8gb should be enough for small and medium, not that i would have tried, not that my 32gb would help any bit in keeping the game at playable framerates... maybe the 980ti isnt up for the task, or the 8350 isnt any good anymore, well it never really was in singlethread games...

[JK]

I recall I upgraded from 8GB of RAM to 12GB a while back to stop Train Fever crashing when it ran out of RAM (although I would have had a few other programs too). I've got a 750 GTX graphics card and not noticed it having any difficulties with TpF. So you might only benefit from the RAM upgrade, since the concensious seems to be the main performance bottleneck for the game is CPU speed cause by the simulation, rather than the graphics.

[Molybdane]

Originally posted by Stealth:

Originally posted by Molybdane:

This is not true. With 8 GB of Ram, my game became just about unplayable in the year 1950 ish on a large map. However, since I upgraded the memory to the very same 16 GB of Corsair Vengeance memory, the game came back to life.

So if you want to play a big map, you'll need that 16 GB eventually, or quit your game.

That´s like buying a cheap office pc and expting to be able to do highlevel cad in 3d with it - 8gb should be enough for small and medium, not that i would have tried, not that my 32gb would help any bit in keeping the game at playable framerates... maybe the 980ti isnt up for the task, or the 8350 isnt any good anymore, well it never really was in singlethread games...

I think that isn't the case because this game seems to require more memory as the game progresses. That large map was no problem when I was at 1850, 100 years later and it was a grind.

So yes, you can play this game with 8 Gb, just like you could probably do a little with Cad (no idea there), but from experience, you'll run into a memory bottleneck later on. That large map setting isn't a mod, the game should run on a large map from 1850 to 2050 with 8Gb, because it says on the box that 8 GB is enough, but it isn't.

[Stealth]

sounds more like a bug then, i would not know what need that much memory, it wont be some thousand entitys, since they are only a number in a spreadsheet, even if they were a sql-database, it wouldnt take GiB of data to cache them
my medium size map atm runs at 7,6GiB with steam and firefox taking 0,5GiB
though, its hardmode so not that much running around at 1960

[cszolee79]

RAM usage for TransportFever.exe is 4052MB, with mostly vanilla vehicles (about 3-5 different freight cars and locomotives currently in game).
2003, 1:3 large map.

Normal game speed
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1122490709

Paused
http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=1122490660