Everybody complains about lag on minecraft regardless of what graphics card they have. Its a problem for everyone and needs to be addressed.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Minecraft has over a million accounts sold. If "everbody" complained about it, the forums would be swamped. Even if a fraction of those people complained, the forums will still be swamped. Since MOST people run Minecraft just fine, from myself to MOST of the people on the forums, there's obviously nothing wrong with the game. But since you're too clueless about your PC (or whatever software of configuration on your PC is contributing to it) you decide to come on the forums to rant and point a finger at Minecraft. Your problem, not ours. You deal with it and take whatever information is here to help you. It's of no concern to us if you only want to blame Minecraft for your system's poor performance with it.
Quote from Sandrino »
You think all these optimization mods are being made just for intel graphics users? Stop hating on Intel when clearly minecraft should most definitely be running A LOT more smoother on any computer than it already is. Notch needs to fix it.
Wrong, I never said anything about "optimization mods" for "intel graphics users". And right, Minecraft could be playing a lot smoother than it is, but even a mainstream NVIDIA or AMD/ATI based video card will run Minecraft just fine. As for Intel integrated graphics, the GPUs su ck for gaming. Just Google that for yourself. You're running a Clarkdale GMA HD with that Core i3 chipset. It's going to be poor to acceptable in terms of gaming performance, and even worse in a Java-based game using OpenGL.
I was trying to use Minecraft on my parents laptop instead of on my desktop I normally use and I had only 3-4 FPS! After installing this I got up to 24-27 FPS, which is much better than before! This program is awesome!
I was trying to use Minecraft on my parents laptop instead of on my desktop I normally use and I had only 3-4 FPS! After installing this I got up to 24-27 FPS, which is much better than before! This program is awesome!
Everybody complains about lag on minecraft regardless of what graphics card they have. Its a problem for everyone and needs to be addressed.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Minecraft has over a million accounts sold. If "everbody" complained about it, the forums would be swamped. Even if a fraction of those people complained, the forums will still be swamped. Since MOST people run Minecraft just fine, from myself to MOST of the people on the forums, there's obviously nothing wrong with the game. But since you're too clueless about your PC (or whatever software of configuration on your PC is contributing to it) you decide to come on the forums to rant and point a finger at Minecraft. Your problem, not ours. You deal with it and take whatever information is here to help you. It's of no concern to us if you only want to blame Minecraft for your system's poor performance with it.
Quote from Sandrino »
You think all these optimization mods are being made just for intel graphics users? Stop hating on Intel when clearly minecraft should most definitely be running A LOT more smoother on any computer than it already is. Notch needs to fix it.
Wrong, I never said anything about "optimization mods" for "intel graphics users". And right, Minecraft could be playing a lot smoother than it is, but even a mainstream NVIDIA or AMD/ATI based video card will run Minecraft just fine. As for Intel integrated graphics, the GPUs su ck for gaming. Just Google that for yourself. You're running a Clarkdale GMA HD with that Core i3 chipset. It's going to be poor to acceptable in terms of gaming performance, and even worse in a Java-based game using OpenGL.
Finally, you said it could be running a lot smoother. Thats all I wanted to hear. Yes, i know my graphics card isn't top notch but think about it, if Call of duty 4, is made by a large publisher, employing hundreds of people. Minecraft is made by 1 guy who just recently started an indie studio employing 5 people.
Gee, which one should perform better? Obviously, Call of duty 4. And, i get amazing quality and no lag on that game. Notch can make some changes. For the quarter of amount of people that have lag problems.
Yes, i know my graphics card isn't top notch but think about it, if Call of duty 4, is made by a large publisher, employing hundreds of people. Minecraft is made by 1 guy who just recently started an indie studio employing 5 people.
All it takes is one person to make a fast game. As for making a game perform better, the same could be said about almost any game. That is not a concession nor an admission of fault.
Regardless of that, you're comparing apples and oranges. Here's what you're really comparing...
Call of Duty: DirectX programmed in either C or C++
Minecraft: OpenGL programmed in Java
Here's an example of another game that uses OpenGL...
In that article, they specifically state the painful truth for Intel HD users...
Also, most Intel GMA video cards are known to cause lots of trouble due to their poor support of more advanced OpenGL features such as shaders.
All modern Intel GPUs, including "Intel HD" have a GMA classification, yours included. In short, you have a system with poor graphics performance for OpenGL. If you did research ahead of time -- before purchasing that system -- you could have saved yourself from this headache.
Great guide, it especially helps because even with all the work I put into optimization, my Minecraft still runs at 5-20 fps at short rendering... I need a new computer.
Great guide, adding the mods increased my fps from ~10 and random dips to 1-2 now it runs at ~40 with dips to ~10 on medium instead of tiny (this is on my laptop btw)
Quote from Asellia »
Intel Pentium 4 2.4GHz
This is better than my processor (P4 2.0 GHz)
Quote from Asellia »
768MB RAM
You've even got more ram (512mb)
Quote from Asellia »
GeForce 7600 GS 512 MB
I can only wish...
Geforce 420go 32mb
Quote from Asellia »
10 fps
You must be doing something horribly wrong... my system specs are a lot worse than yours and I'm also running Windows 7, but minecraft is running better...
I optimized my OS though... no firewall/AV, disabled lots of services, removed a lot of unused stuff; upon booting the OS, task manager only shows like 6 processes running
EDIT: If my laptop can run Minecraft moderately well then why can't your computers run it well?
EDIT: If my laptop can run Minecraft moderately well then why can't your computers run it well?
Indeed. For those unfamiliar with the 420 Go, this is not the newer 400 series in which us desktop people are familiar. Instead, this is GeForce 4 Go series, and the 420 is just a sub-model name. So Eodeth, you're running something earlier than the 6000 series... heck, even older than the FX 5000 series. Yours only supports OpenGL 1.2, which the 7600 GS supports OpenGL 2.1. If you can get faster speeds than the person running that 7600, then indeed, they're doing something wrong or have malware on their PC.
After changing view distance to tiny and installing that light mod posted a few posts up, I get 60+ in caves and 40+ outside with random dips to like 15fps
Quote from cipher_nemo »
Yours only supports OpenGL 1.2, which the 7600 GS supports OpenGL 2.1.
It also runs only DirectX 7... (which makes it hard to play DirectX games)
You didn't even mention the drivers; 7600gs runs 266.58, this is running 33.71 (I think)
Minecraft is actually one of the few games that I can play, others are emulators and it can play Warcraft III just fine too...
If only it supported the shaders, then I would be able to play Super Meat Boy
Also... I play Minecraft at 1440x1050 (I didn't know this resolution existed before I got this laptop)
Everybody complains about lag on minecraft regardless of what graphics card they have.
Is that a joke?
My desktop video card plays it just fine and I've got mods (see sig) that make the game look beautiful without any lag.
And my laptop video card which is much worse than every other card I've seen on this entire board can play the game just at moderate speeds.
Quote from Sandrino »
Stop hating on Intel.
Intel HD Graphics do suck... they use system memory in place of video memory
It's also hard not to hate on Intel...
s to cipher_nemo for understanding that it isn't Minecraft's fault, it is all user error.
and... sorry for the double post, this seemed to long to just edit my other post
Intel HD Graphics do suck... they use system memory in place of video memory
It's also hard not to hate on Intel...
s to cipher_nemo for understanding that it isn't Minecraft's fault, it is all user error.
Thanks. Aside from my desktop PCs, I also have a little Asus Eee PC 701 netbook (the first gens) with that horrid Intel integrated graphics. It's not the Intel HD, but it's still an Intel GMA and stinks at any gaming, let alone worse with OpenGL games. It was sort of funny for Sandrino to try to say I hate on Intel, as if I've never owned or worked with them in the past?
But unlike Sandrino, at least I don't expect my netbook to be a whiz at gaming. On that netbook I get about 10 FPS in both Lord of the Rings Online and the Torchlight game, so I don't play them on it. But at least the old Diablo II works fine on that thing. :smile.gif:
It will help with volume organization and OS fragmentation (since you're not constantly writing to the OS file system), but not to an appreciable degree. Same drive partitioning is better used for redundancy (OS and data in separate partitions so if the OS gets corrupted a reinstall won't destroy your data) or when necessary (SWAP, / , /home, <etc>). NTFS file systems don't fragment all that bad under normal use. ...
It will help with volume organization and OS fragmentation (since you're not constantly writing to the OS file system), but not to an appreciable degree. Same drive partitioning is better used for redundancy (OS and data in separate partitions so if the OS gets corrupted a reinstall won't destroy your data) or when necessary (SWAP, / , /home, <etc>). NTFS file systems don't fragment all that bad under normal use. ...
Indeed!
My current world is 8,994 files in 5,483 folders. So if those individual files are strung all around on my hard drive array, it would be much slower in loading them. Other people's worlds will also be thousands of files as well.
Ok i have a question about speeding up my fps in minecraft on a windows vista laptop, i have some money and which could i buy to make it run better a large external drive, more RAM or a better graphics card??
Ok i have a question about speeding up my fps in minecraft on a windows vista laptop, i have some money and which could i buy to make it run better a large external drive, more RAM or a better graphics card??
Very few laptops have the ability to swap in/out a graphics card. If yours came with integrated graphics, you won't be able to do this.
The memory will help you more overall. The drive isn't going to do much for you unless your existing drive is a POS.
And I wouldn't add an external drive to a laptop if you're looking to upgrade your storage, since that sort of hinders the portability of the laptop. If you want to get more storage or a faster drive, change out the drive inside the laptop. Use a USB drive adapter (typically $20) and a third-party utility such as GParted to copy over your partition(s) to a new drive, avoiding the new to reinstall your O/S.
In short, the memory is upgrade is going to be the easiest and most beneficial solution if you're already running less than 2GB of RAM. If your laptop does use discrete graphics, then this would be the most expensive and most beneficial solution for gaming performance.
So buying additional RAM would be my best choice then? Is that easy to install in a laptop? And how much would like 2g cost?
Very easy to install in just about any laptop. The price depends on the type, which is DDR version, speed, and latency, and can vary from one brand to another. Find out what your laptop can take, then go here and narrow your search: http://www.newegg.com/Store/SubCategory.aspx?SubCategory=381&name=Laptop-Memory. You're looking at prices anywhere from $20 to $60 for 2GB and $40 to $80 for 4GB. Make sure you know what your laptop can take before ordering.
My copy of Minecraft would always crash after about 5 minutes without it.
Edit: Whoo! 42 posts: The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Minecraft Land Generator | Memory issues? Try this:java -Xincgc-Xmx1024M -Xms512M -jar Minecraft.jar "We must be that generation that stands athwart history yelling: 'Hey, jackass, get your government off my freedom!'" - Jason Mattera
My copy of Minecraft would always crash after about 5 minutes without it.
Edit: Whoo! 42 posts: The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything...
That's a good point, and on a further note, the values for:
-xmx<insert value here> (maximum heapsize)
-xms<insert value here> (minimum heapsize)
can be tweaked according to the amount of memory you have, as they control the heapsize. If you have a system with 512MB of RAM (shudder), you don't want to set the max heap size to 1GB. Setting the heapsize extremely high, even on high memory systems can be counterproductive though, and if you're running the 32 bit Java VM, keep in mind the javaw process will never be able to address more than 4GB of RAM, counting the video cards RAM. (So if you have 1GB of VRAM and 4GB of RAM, than only 3GB of RAM will be available).
Also, don't set your max heapsize to the total amount of RAM you have, I recommend leaving at least 25% free for the system.
Just thought this was worth mentioning, as a lot of people seem to just blindly copy+paste someone else's advised heapsize, without considering their own memory constraints. If this has already been highly discussed, forgive me for the captain obvious post, I'm new here :biggrin.gif:
EDIT: Also, garbage collection may not always be good. The Java VM usually handles it pretty well, but in theory, garbage collection can actually decrease performance, as it consumes memory+CPU cycles when freeing other parts of memory (ironic I know, but it's good at stopping memory leaks). That's one of the reasons why languages such as C++ often have superior performance to Java, is that Garbage Collection is done manually, forcing the programmer to free unused variables/objects themselves. This is good in that it's more efficient, but even the best of programmers may make a mistake, creating a memory leak.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Tread carefully, for you're treading on my dreams. -- Yeats
Feel free to PM me if you have any technical issues/questions, I'd be happy to help.
Had some serious lag myself earlier. Found out that my computer was, for some reason, not running of my bad-ass nVidia GeFoce GT 225M, but some sort of built-in graphics thingie. Switching that up helped it for me. Just saying, if you know your computer should run it easily, that might be the problem. Or if your computer is set to low battery usage, low performance or something like that.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. Minecraft has over a million accounts sold. If "everbody" complained about it, the forums would be swamped. Even if a fraction of those people complained, the forums will still be swamped. Since MOST people run Minecraft just fine, from myself to MOST of the people on the forums, there's obviously nothing wrong with the game. But since you're too clueless about your PC (or whatever software of configuration on your PC is contributing to it) you decide to come on the forums to rant and point a finger at Minecraft. Your problem, not ours. You deal with it and take whatever information is here to help you. It's of no concern to us if you only want to blame Minecraft for your system's poor performance with it.
Wrong, I never said anything about "optimization mods" for "intel graphics users". And right, Minecraft could be playing a lot smoother than it is, but even a mainstream NVIDIA or AMD/ATI based video card will run Minecraft just fine. As for Intel integrated graphics, the GPUs su ck for gaming. Just Google that for yourself. You're running a Clarkdale GMA HD with that Core i3 chipset. It's going to be poor to acceptable in terms of gaming performance, and even worse in a Java-based game using OpenGL.
Glad it helped you! :-)
Finally, you said it could be running a lot smoother. Thats all I wanted to hear. Yes, i know my graphics card isn't top notch but think about it, if Call of duty 4, is made by a large publisher, employing hundreds of people. Minecraft is made by 1 guy who just recently started an indie studio employing 5 people.
Gee, which one should perform better? Obviously, Call of duty 4. And, i get amazing quality and no lag on that game. Notch can make some changes. For the quarter of amount of people that have lag problems.
All it takes is one person to make a fast game. As for making a game perform better, the same could be said about almost any game. That is not a concession nor an admission of fault.
Regardless of that, you're comparing apples and oranges. Here's what you're really comparing...
Call of Duty: DirectX programmed in either C or C++
Minecraft: OpenGL programmed in Java
Here's an example of another game that uses OpenGL...
http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php/Supported_Video_Cards
In that article, they specifically state the painful truth for Intel HD users...
All modern Intel GPUs, including "Intel HD" have a GMA classification, yours included. In short, you have a system with poor graphics performance for OpenGL. If you did research ahead of time -- before purchasing that system -- you could have saved yourself from this headache.
This is better than my processor (P4 2.0 GHz)
You've even got more ram (512mb)
I can only wish...
Geforce 420go 32mb
You must be doing something horribly wrong... my system specs are a lot worse than yours and I'm also running Windows 7, but minecraft is running better...
I optimized my OS though... no firewall/AV, disabled lots of services, removed a lot of unused stuff; upon booting the OS, task manager only shows like 6 processes running
EDIT: If my laptop can run Minecraft moderately well then why can't your computers run it well?
[email protected] - 4GB DDR3 1600 - GeForce 280GTX
Indeed. For those unfamiliar with the 420 Go, this is not the newer 400 series in which us desktop people are familiar. Instead, this is GeForce 4 Go series, and the 420 is just a sub-model name. So Eodeth, you're running something earlier than the 6000 series... heck, even older than the FX 5000 series. Yours only supports OpenGL 1.2, which the 7600 GS supports OpenGL 2.1. If you can get faster speeds than the person running that 7600, then indeed, they're doing something wrong or have malware on their PC.
It also runs only DirectX 7... (which makes it hard to play DirectX games)
You didn't even mention the drivers; 7600gs runs 266.58, this is running 33.71 (I think)
Minecraft is actually one of the few games that I can play, others are emulators and it can play Warcraft III just fine too...
If only it supported the shaders, then I would be able to play Super Meat Boy
Also... I play Minecraft at 1440x1050 (I didn't know this resolution existed before I got this laptop)
[email protected] - 4GB DDR3 1600 - GeForce 280GTX
Is that a joke?
My desktop video card plays it just fine and I've got mods (see sig) that make the game look beautiful without any lag.
And my laptop video card which is much worse than every other card I've seen on this entire board can play the game just at moderate speeds.
Intel HD Graphics do suck... they use system memory in place of video memory
It's also hard not to hate on Intel...
s to cipher_nemo for understanding that it isn't Minecraft's fault, it is all user error.
and... sorry for the double post, this seemed to long to just edit my other post
[email protected] - 4GB DDR3 1600 - GeForce 280GTX
Thanks. Aside from my desktop PCs, I also have a little Asus Eee PC 701 netbook (the first gens) with that horrid Intel integrated graphics. It's not the Intel HD, but it's still an Intel GMA and stinks at any gaming, let alone worse with OpenGL games. It was sort of funny for Sandrino to try to say I hate on Intel, as if I've never owned or worked with them in the past?
But unlike Sandrino, at least I don't expect my netbook to be a whiz at gaming. On that netbook I get about 10 FPS in both Lord of the Rings Online and the Torchlight game, so I don't play them on it. But at least the old Diablo II works fine on that thing. :smile.gif:
Indeed!
My current world is 8,994 files in 5,483 folders. So if those individual files are strung all around on my hard drive array, it would be much slower in loading them. Other people's worlds will also be thousands of files as well.
Very few laptops have the ability to swap in/out a graphics card. If yours came with integrated graphics, you won't be able to do this.
The memory will help you more overall. The drive isn't going to do much for you unless your existing drive is a POS.
And I wouldn't add an external drive to a laptop if you're looking to upgrade your storage, since that sort of hinders the portability of the laptop. If you want to get more storage or a faster drive, change out the drive inside the laptop. Use a USB drive adapter (typically $20) and a third-party utility such as GParted to copy over your partition(s) to a new drive, avoiding the new to reinstall your O/S.
In short, the memory is upgrade is going to be the easiest and most beneficial solution if you're already running less than 2GB of RAM. If your laptop does use discrete graphics, then this would be the most expensive and most beneficial solution for gaming performance.
Very easy to install in just about any laptop. The price depends on the type, which is DDR version, speed, and latency, and can vary from one brand to another. Find out what your laptop can take, then go here and narrow your search: http://www.newegg.com/Store/SubCategory.aspx?SubCategory=381&name=Laptop-Memory. You're looking at prices anywhere from $20 to $60 for 2GB and $40 to $80 for 4GB. Make sure you know what your laptop can take before ordering.
java -Xincgc -Xmx1024M -Xms512M -cp Minecraft.jar net.minecraft.LauncherFrame
My copy of Minecraft would always crash after about 5 minutes without it.
Edit: Whoo! 42 posts: The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything...
"We must be that generation that stands athwart history yelling: 'Hey, jackass, get your government off my freedom!'" - Jason Mattera
That's a good point, and on a further note, the values for:
can be tweaked according to the amount of memory you have, as they control the heapsize. If you have a system with 512MB of RAM (shudder), you don't want to set the max heap size to 1GB. Setting the heapsize extremely high, even on high memory systems can be counterproductive though, and if you're running the 32 bit Java VM, keep in mind the javaw process will never be able to address more than 4GB of RAM, counting the video cards RAM. (So if you have 1GB of VRAM and 4GB of RAM, than only 3GB of RAM will be available).
Example heapsize config for my shitty laptop:
Also, don't set your max heapsize to the total amount of RAM you have, I recommend leaving at least 25% free for the system.
Just thought this was worth mentioning, as a lot of people seem to just blindly copy+paste someone else's advised heapsize, without considering their own memory constraints. If this has already been highly discussed, forgive me for the captain obvious post, I'm new here :biggrin.gif:
EDIT: Also, garbage collection may not always be good. The Java VM usually handles it pretty well, but in theory, garbage collection can actually decrease performance, as it consumes memory+CPU cycles when freeing other parts of memory (ironic I know, but it's good at stopping memory leaks). That's one of the reasons why languages such as C++ often have superior performance to Java, is that Garbage Collection is done manually, forcing the programmer to free unused variables/objects themselves. This is good in that it's more efficient, but even the best of programmers may make a mistake, creating a memory leak.
Feel free to PM me if you have any technical issues/questions, I'd be happy to help.