I've been using texture packs for a while and my computer can't handle anything higher than 16x16 packs. So I decided to look for a way to fix this because there are some really amazing texture packs out there. And then I realized I don't even know what those "measurements" even mean (i'm a complete noob, ik). So could anyone tell me what those numbers actually mean or represent?
The amount of pixels on the face of the block. For example, a 32x32 block would have 16 pixels across and 16 pixels down. a 64x64 block would have 32 pixels across and 32 pixels down. And so on.
The amount of pixels on the face of the block. For example, a 32x32 block would have 16 pixels across and 16 pixels down. a 64x64 block would have 32 pixels across and 32 pixels down. And so on.
Oh, okay thank you very much! So is my computer not being able to efficiently run anything higher than a 16x16 pack something that getting a better graphics card could fix?
No - u can't fix this with some changes in your graphics settings.
Minecraft didn't use 32x32 and 64x64.
You can fix this , with the Patcher for HD-TexturePacks
(Didn't have Link :-( sry )
Just look in the forum for this :smile.gif:
Yeah, I've used the patcher before....the texture pack itself always works but it lags so bad its not even funny if i try anything over 16x16....I figure this is probably due to my computer's crappy graphics and I was wondering if there was any way other way to use a decent pack without getting a new computer XD
Oh, okay thank you very much! So is my computer not being able to efficiently run anything higher than a 16x16 pack something that getting a better graphics card could fix?
You're telling me.
16x16 = 16 pixels per column or row on a block. Low lag.
32x32 = Same as 16 but with 32 pixels instead. I bit higher lag.
64x64 = Same as 16 but with 64 pixels instead. Fair amount of lag.
128x128 = Same as 16 but with 128 pixels instead. High amount of lag for a weaker computer.
256x256 = Same as 16 but with 256 pixels instead. Massive lag. My Quad Core i7 can't handle this.
512x512 = Same as 16 but with 512 pixels instead. This is like Real Life on HD Pills. So much lag, it makes super computers run out of RAM. Only one computer is known to run this with more than 1 FPS. Chuck Norris' computer.
Yeah, I've used the patcher before....the texture pack itself always works but it lags so bad its not even funny if i try anything over 16x16....I figure this is probably due to my computer's crappy graphics and I was wondering if there was any way other way to use a decent pack without getting a new computer XD
I suggest the Painterly Pack for a slow computer. Customizer, 16x16, and looks great. If you want NO lag, I suggest Gabelam's 4x4 or another 2x2. It's actually 16x16 made to look smaller, but still reduces lag a lot. Not MCPatcher required, yet recommended for custom water, lava, and portals.
256x256 = Same as 16 but with 256 pixels instead. Massive lag. My Quad Core i7 can't handle this.
You do realize that the cpu has very little to do with Minecraft performance? Im not saying it means nothing, but an i3 with 12GB RAM beats a i7 990x with 4GB RAM.
16x16 means there are 16 pixels per texture, 32x32 means there are 32 texture per block, The higher the number, the more it may lower your framerate. Also HD Patcher is for, 32x + I think? So yeah. hope this helped =].
16x16 means there are 16 pixels per texture, 32x32 means there are 32 texture per block, The higher the number, the more it may lower your framerate. Also HD Patcher is for, 32x + I think? So yeah. hope this helped =].
16 pixels per SIDE!
if it was 16 pixels per texture, itd be a 4x4 pack.
16x16 packs have 256 pixels per block
Oh, okay thank you very much! So is my computer not being able to efficiently run anything higher than a 16x16 pack something that getting a better graphics card could fix?
Yeah, I've used the patcher before....the texture pack itself always works but it lags so bad its not even funny if i try anything over 16x16....I figure this is probably due to my computer's crappy graphics and I was wondering if there was any way other way to use a decent pack without getting a new computer XD
Minecraft currently doesn't support higher res texture packs so to fix the problem, the MC Patcher was created. http://www.minecraftforum.net/topic/232701-611-update173-compatible-mcpatcher-hd-fix-210-02/
You're telling me.
16x16 = 16 pixels per column or row on a block. Low lag.
32x32 = Same as 16 but with 32 pixels instead. I bit higher lag.
64x64 = Same as 16 but with 64 pixels instead. Fair amount of lag.
128x128 = Same as 16 but with 128 pixels instead. High amount of lag for a weaker computer.
256x256 = Same as 16 but with 256 pixels instead. Massive lag. My Quad Core i7 can't handle this.
512x512 = Same as 16 but with 512 pixels instead. This is like Real Life on HD Pills. So much lag, it makes super computers run out of RAM. Only one computer is known to run this with more than 1 FPS. Chuck Norris' computer.
I suggest the Painterly Pack for a slow computer. Customizer, 16x16, and looks great. If you want NO lag, I suggest Gabelam's 4x4 or another 2x2. It's actually 16x16 made to look smaller, but still reduces lag a lot. Not MCPatcher required, yet recommended for custom water, lava, and portals.
You do realize that the cpu has very little to do with Minecraft performance? Im not saying it means nothing, but an i3 with 12GB RAM beats a i7 990x with 4GB RAM.
Checkmythread. Self-advertising! :biggrin.gif:
No, please, no. You have just created 5 new simple pack threads.
And I need not say any further, as this threads question has already been answered.
16 pixels per SIDE!
if it was 16 pixels per texture, itd be a 4x4 pack.
16x16 packs have 256 pixels per block
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Retired Staff"This may hurt a little, but it's something you'll get used to...."