Okay, so I got 16x16 SphaxpureBDCraft, and my average FPS dropped from 60-64 to 25-27. However, I got the 32x32 "Alice" texture pack and my FPS is now 40-45. How is that? When I had Sphax, Either my FPS was horrible, but stable, or it would constantly fluctuate every 2 or so seconds from 40 FPS to 0 FPS, then restart the cycle. How ever, with Alice, my FPS stays a constant 40-45 FPS. Could anyone explain this to me? Thanks!
Some texture packs (Sphax being one of them) have a LOT of additional textures. Like; random mobs, random textures, custom skies, etc.
So, even though Sphax is only 16x it technically may be more resource intensive than Alice is due to all the additional stuff it has to load. I would find another 16x pack and see how it does. I know Sanity is a no frills no mods required pack, it'd be a good benchmark.
Thanks for the promotion, but Sanity is becoming less and less "no frills". I keep adding animations and optional mod stuff to it. It's still pretty friendly, though, being a mere 300KB heavier than its original "no frills" version.
But on the subject at hand, Ray is correct. For example, even a simple animation with only five frames uses the same texture memory as five additional blocks. Packs with loads of CTM and animations can easily equal four or five packs worth of texture memory. Even though going up a size means that you'll automatically be using four times the texture memory, it may still be less than a texture pack that loads a dozen textures per tile.
Some texture packs (Sphax being one of them) have a LOT of additional textures. Like; random mobs, random textures, custom skies, etc.
So, even though Sphax is only 16x it technically may be more resource intensive than Alice is due to all the additional stuff it has to load. I would find another 16x pack and see how it does. I know Sanity is a no frills no mods required pack, it'd be a good benchmark.
Thanks Ray! I'll check out Sanity, but I still love the Alice pack X3 Also, I looked at how much memory Sphax and Alice used a couple of minutes ago. Sphax used about 1,000 KB more than Alice, thanks!Thanks Alvoria aswell
So, even though Sphax is only 16x it technically may be more resource intensive than Alice is due to all the additional stuff it has to load. I would find another 16x pack and see how it does. I know Sanity is a no frills no mods required pack, it'd be a good benchmark.
http://www.planetmin...as-sanity-pack/
But on the subject at hand, Ray is correct. For example, even a simple animation with only five frames uses the same texture memory as five additional blocks. Packs with loads of CTM and animations can easily equal four or five packs worth of texture memory. Even though going up a size means that you'll automatically be using four times the texture memory, it may still be less than a texture pack that loads a dozen textures per tile.