Does The Sims 3 run well on Windows 10?

TS3 runs fine on Win 10 for most of us. Your hardware set is just strong enough to carry the entire game, meaning all EPs and all the store content you may want, although possibly not entirely on the highest of graphics settings in game options. Player experiences will differ there, but a GTX 1050 should be able to manage most of it.

You will most certainly need to cap the frame rates (fps) and check to make sure that they are staying at or below the refresh rate of your monitor as unlike newer games, TS3 has no functional built-in fps limiter and your graphics card is strong enough to be throwing too high frame rates if left untended to and that is bad for both game performance and the lifespan of the computer. But we can help with that as needed if/when you get the game installed again. :)

The goal for the upper limit would be the refresh rate of your monitor. Most are 60 Hz, so that's 60 fps but some can run higher. If you aren't sure what yours is, right-click on your desktop, Display Properties, Advanced Display Properties, and it should be one of about six things that show up there.

To see the actual frame rates you are getting in-game, Ctrl+Shift+C to bring up the cheats console and type fps on (enter). As you play and move the game camera around, the displayed fps rate should never exceed 60 or whatever the refresh of your monitor is. To make the display go away, cheats console again and type fps off (enter).

To cap the rates, first we try the Nvidia Control Panel. Set up a profile for the correct executable program, that's TS3.exe (for Patch 1.69/Origin) or TS3w.exe (with the "w" for 1.67/Disc or Steam). Set Vertical Sync to On or Adaptive (whichever one works better), Triple Buffering to On, and if your Control Panel is new enough it will include a setting to explicitly designate a maximum frame rate at or just under the refresh rate goal (so usually 60 or 59.something).

If the above is not enough to keep things locked in, or the Control Panel does not include a max rate setting and vertical sync alone does not do the job sufficiently, then we move on and add Nvidia Inspector which includes its own maximum frame rate setting that it will apply on top of the Control Panel settings.

"SuzyCue72;c-17533632" wrote:

"igazor;c-17532884" wrote:
TS3 runs fine on Win 10 for most of us. Your hardware set is just strong enough to carry the entire game, meaning all EPs and all the store content you may want, although possibly not entirely on the highest of graphics settings in game options. Player experiences will differ there, but a GTX 1050 should be able to manage most of it.

You will most certainly need to cap the frame rates (fps) and check to make sure that they are staying at or below the refresh rate of your monitor as unlike newer games, TS3 has no functional built-in fps limiter and your graphics card is strong enough to be throwing too high frame rates if left untended to and that is bad for both game performance and the lifespan of the computer. But we can help with that as needed if/when you get the game installed again. :)

It sounds as if you don't think that the GTX 1050 (mobile) is powerful enough to handle TS3 with all its content? It would be interesting to know exactly what you base that opinion/assumption on.

I never said that. A 1050 mobile is the lowest ranked of the cards in that series that should be capable of carrying all 11 EPs. The question of can a piece of hardware run a complicated program with many variables in play well is not a strictly binary one that can always be answered just yes/no. Some players will have absolutely no problems with it, some will depending on their play styles find that they need to turn some of the graphics settings down a bit to maintain stability and may have more struggles with higher populated worlds, overly ornate lots, intense weather, and pet fur than those with slightly higher ranking cards like the 1050Ti and 1060s. In theory it shouldn't matter since the game is only programmed to make use of 800 MB of Vram and these cards all have much more than that with speeds and bus widths that are adequate, but actual real live players report otherwise.

If I had a 1050 mobile already, I would run the entire game on it (if I wanted to play TS3 on a laptop, that is). If I were in the market for a new machine with TS3 in mind specifically, budget permitting I would try to aim a little bit higher and advise the same.

I base this conclusion on the same thing I base everything else that you argue with me about on this forum. It's all random gibberish I like to spout to confuse the players because I don't really like helping them, and it comes to me by way of strange voices in the middle of the night that emanate from deep inside my wardrobe. (that's of course not true, but it may as well be since you never listen to the real answer anyway...so do kindly stop asking me.)

https://www.currys.co.uk/gbuk/computing/laptops/laptops/asus-tuf-fx505dt-15-6-gaming-laptop-amd-ryzen-5-gtx-1650-512-gb-ssd-10200640-pdt.html - this is mine and it runs so well, don't even hear the fans whirring <3 .

I beg to differ. The game is GPU intensive (by 2009 standards). What that means in a practical sense today in 2020, since probably no one is going back in time to buy 2009 computers to run it, is that the following kinds of cards will not be sufficient to carry all 11 EPs well even though they are newer than 15 years old and some are considered current but are to be found on systems not meant to be playing such games. These are not borderline cases like mentioned prior, this is a matter of the cards not being designed to handle the required throughput.

-Just about any integrated graphics chip (so that's Intel or some of the AMD's like the now popular Vega 8s); the newest, strongest ones can actually give the game a run for its money, but only up to a point, they still put too much stress on RAM usage, and the heavier EPs are still likely to be too much for them

-Nvidia cards in the 0-4 levels (middle digits) of each series. Examples would be GT 705s/710s (through 740s), 820Ms, 920s (through 940MXs), 1030s, MX 130s and 150s, I think there are some newer ones out now just like the recent MX series. In some ways, some (but not all) of these weaker but still dedicated cards would actually be worse for the game than integrated, depending on how much stress was thrown at them.

- Some AMD hybrid cards and those that are just not strong enough like the Nvidias above, unlike stronger AMD cards like Radeon Pros that can handle the throughput and are fine


The older AMD HD cards from so many years ago mentioned in particular were not low-end cards. They each had lower-end counterparts back then that also made a mess of the game as the EPs were rolling out. I played on an older AMD series card myself, a Radeon HD 6670M, until just over a year ago and although there were some minor limitations, for the most part the entire game was fine and its age was not really a factor over its throughput.

Not that this should make too much difference to the player today, but the game is programmed to work with up to 2 cores, not single-core only. Quad cores and higher cannot be utilized by the game more effectively, but where they can help is by handling other system processes they are given to do while the game is running. It's TS2 that is single-core only, but that game is from 2004 and doesn't require nearly as much processor power to run anyway, so it's much less likely to stress out a modern system.

The processor and RAM matter too, up to a point each as does of course the built in 32-bit limitations, so having a better card alone is not a magic solution to make the game operate smoothly at all times. But there is a threshold that has to be passed on the GPU first or else we are limiting the player to base game only or base game plus a small number of the earliest released EPs. And some of you may disagree and even argue back if you like, doesn't really matter. The point is that a player who is going shopping for a new computer and is ready to spend what is (to them) a large amount of money, or is trying to determine how far they can take this game on their existing hardware, is not served well when they are told that any GPU manufactured in the last 15 years can be expected to run this game with all EPs on more than low graphics setting in Game Options because this is just not true.

"McTosh;c-17534709" wrote:
You're talking as though we're talking about Crysis here :P

It's pretty much guaranteed any GPU people are using today is more than enough. Unless you bought it from a museum or an antique shop :D

I've never found the graphics that intensive. I found switching from a mechanical drive to an SSD to be way more advantageous than when I switched from the HD 7970 to an RX 580, i saw literally zero performance boost from upgrading GPU, but did from mechanical to SSD. Also when I upgraded RAM (speeds that is, not amount). To a lesser amount, I saw mild improvements when switching from an FX 8350 to a Ryzen too. But not GPU, because my old GPU was good enough, and that was ancient by today's standards.

The game is from dinosaur times compared to today now, unless your GPU was made literally in the stone age, moulded from soft rock banged against a flint stone tool it shouldn't have any problems.

I can't reiterate it enough, the problem is the 32bit binary. You can have a 5 year old computer or a computer from the future, you'll still always be limited to 4gb memory. There's literally nothing you can do about it and it will cause lag and freezes and sometimes crashes as your world gets older and bigger. GPU won't make a difference to it.

Yep, I'm just not "getting it." An AMD Radeon HD 7970 is an upper end card. It doesn't at all matter that it is old as long as it's still functioning mechanically. An upgrade from that to a strong Radeon/Radeon Pro card of today is a good investment in that the newer card should be expected to keep working longer as all hardware wears out after a while, and it should be able to handle other games better as things tend to evolve over the years, but the performance benefit as it relates to TS3 would not be huge if it's even noticeable.

Another example would be an Nvidia GTX 280. That would be over the top fantastic for the game, if they still make drivers for it that would be compatible with Win 10 updates or if the player were running an older operating system and planned to continue doing so.

I'm not talking about 7970s or 280s here because today's players are probably not purchasing systems with the older powerful cards in them, although they may still have them in use. I'm talking about players who have purchased or plan to purchase laptops that cost $300 (USD) or less and that have no dedicated graphics card. Or those that maybe cost $400-450 and might have one that is too weak. Or yet more expensive ones that cost more because they are designed to be ultra-lightweight and conserve battery power, generally be web-surfing, email, and streaming video players or tablet/laptop hybrids on which to do homework or light office tasks with poor to no internal cooling systems, but not be able to handle anything that requires heavier duty processing and they may have hard drives that are way too small (like way under 128 GB). This is all modern hardware, but modern hardware that is too weak to service the game. Price is of course not the correct determining factor to be using, but it's what sometimes relates better to players who don't feel they have much else to go on.

When players hear "any modern GPU can run TS3" and see a laptop on sale for $200-300 at an office supply store or online, they see that the hardware is new and think it must be a fine investment for the game. It will not be.

Yes, the game is severely limited by being a 32-bit app. But we can't do anything about that except be aware of those limitations and give it the best possible environment in which to run without breaking the bank to do so.

@KevinL5275 - No card manufactured after 2013 is automatically recognized, but formally unrecognized cards still work. Not recognized means you will likely get a lower than necessary default set of options. That and possibly a 32 MB texture memory override (sometimes). Those things can be fixed pretty easily, with some help from those familiar with sgr file editing.

"KevinL5275;c-17535552" wrote:
Looks like I will be following this:

http://simswiki.info/wiki.php?title=Game_Help:Getting_new_graphics_cards_recognized_by_the_game

That way will work, but there are easier methods. Feel free to PM once you get your new card installed.

Much more important than all that is checking on the games fps rates and capping them to the refresh rate of your monitor. TS3 being an older game has no functional built-in fps limiter and it needs some help in this regard.

@MamaSimTee - If you could share some specs on this new laptop (processor, RAM, graphics card) or a link to its configuration from a vendor site, we could perhaps tell you what kind of performance to expect out of it.

@MamaSimTee - That link takes me to a configuration page with a large number of options, so we can't really see which one you are purchasing that way. Alienwares are not low-end computers though, and I'm sure the system you get will be over the top fine whichever one it is. They aren't known for being all that cost-effective either as they once might have been before Dell acquired the brand name, but that of course is a different matter.