So I'm planning on building myself a new rig with an i3-4330 and a GTX 750, and 8 gigs of RAM. Do you guys think this'll be enough to run most if not all FTB modpacks with 40-50 FPS?
New Rig (Can it play FTB?)
- Thread starter ElectricWaffle
- Start date
-
The FTB Forum is now read-only, and is here as an archive. To participate in our community discussions, please join our Discord! https://ftb.team/discord
Honestly, if you can manage it, aim for one of the i5's. The i3's are... underpowered to put it nicely.
I'm running FTB on a Intel Core 2 Viiv. I do have a GTX-560Ti video card, so that has made a difference. You might have an issue with a full machine room running with Monster, but everything else should be ok. Even on this several year old machine, I haven't hit over 30% on the processor utilization. I'm on the MF2 pack myself, so DW20 and Monster will likely end up a bit heavier processor usage end game.
Perhaps wait another paycheck and use that to upgrade? It's really worth it not to skimp on the CPU, which is what you're doing with an i3.
and to be honest, unless all of the applications you use are multithreaded you won't see much improvement between the two. negligible at best. you will get more longevity out of the i5, though, as things are trending more towards multithreading.
your specs listed will run monster/direwolf/bnb beautifully; they're marginally better than the machine running it next to me at 45fps.
Last edited:
Everything's great aside from the i3. But even with the i3 you should still be able to play all of the packs.
I recently built a mini server using an i3-4340. It's a great processor - don't dismiss it just because it's an i3. It is faster in single-threaded applications than some i5's, and remember that Minecraft is currently a single-threaded application. I would refer you to this graph, keeping in mind the i3 is significantly less expensive than the processors that edge it out by a few tenths of a percent: http://www.cpu-world.com/benchmarks/Intel/Core_i3-4340_single.html
Edit: Woops, you said i3-4330. Still, I'm sure it's not far below a 4340.
Edit: Woops, you said i3-4330. Still, I'm sure it's not far below a 4340.
this. 1000x this. and the only way it can take advantage of multi cores is by using optifine, which isn't ideal sometimes.
in addition to his graphs, i refer you to my own.
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/singleThread.html
the i3 4330 @ 3.5ghz scored 40 points lower than the i5 4570 @ 3.2ghz on their benchmark. that little of a difference is negligible on paper, and even less noticeable realtime.
it doesn't become worth the jump unless you are building a machine to take advantage of multithreaded applications, such as photoshop or other rendering applications (audio, video or otherwise).
inb4 "but 64 bit java..." we only use 64 bit java so you can address enough ram to not make java choke.
Wouldn't you see some benefit to two cores with single player since it is technically running a server behind the scenes?
no, because the underlying processes are still single threaded.
the code itself cannot utilize all cores (while java itself can utilize like 80, it's mojang/minecraft that is behind here). it can get added, hack style with optifine, but that's it for now.
and tbh, that's all i expect to see from minecraft. they tried a rewrite of the code for native multithreaded support. all they got was some optimizations.
Actually, it's better to use an i5 and 4 or 6 GB of RAM than an i3 and 8 GB of RAM. I'm not saying the i3 is bad, but if you want to play 190 mods, I would go for i5 and 4 GB of RAM (that's what I have and I play 189 mods with all the graphics maxed out at 120-160 fps on the surface and 150-250 underground.
I would disagree. If you have 189 mods, you're going to need RAM badly. And an i5 with comparable single-threaded performance would cost more than another 4 GB of RAM.
Which may sound great, but you would need a monitor capable of displaying all those frames. A 60Hz monitor will show 60 frames and a 120Hz monitor will show 120 frames. Any frames beyond that will be discarded by the GPU.
Well, I have a 4 GB RAM PC, and I can run 189 at 150 fps[DOUBLEPOST=1394344683][/DOUBLEPOST]
That's not my point, though. I was just trying to say that an i5 and 4 GB of RAM is more than enough to run 190 mods.
The Core i5 only brings more cores to the table. An increase of cores, which cannot benefit Minecraft, is about as useful as a frame rate that is way higher than a monitor can display.
Last edited: