RAM-128x textures ETC

[Gilliam]

Hi all

Ok so yesterday I got my new PC:
Core I7 Quadcore processor i7-4790k (4.0GHz) 8MB Cache
ASUS Z97-A: ATX USB3.0 SATA 6GB/S SLi XFIRE
32GB KINGSTON HYPER-X FURY DUAL DDR3 1600MHZ
4GB NVIDEA GEFORCE GTX 980
CORSAIR H80i hydro series highperformace CPU cooler
250GB Samsung 840 EVO SSD SATA 6GBS
1TB 3.5" SATA III 6GBS HDD 7200RPM 32MB CACHE
CORSAIR 650W CS SERIES MODULAR 80+GOLD ULTRA QUITE

loaded the FTB launcher-Downloaded Java 7-downloaded SPHAX 128x texture and DIREWOLF20 1.7 patch.

everything loaded fine - in the resource folder I selected both the base and patch files and after a standard minute or so it just reverted back to default textures. It would load the base textures fine and when loading a SP game getting 200+ FPS but would not load the BASE and PATCH file.

Now my limited detective skills has led me down the thought of M/C not having enough RAM allocated to run the thousands of textures needed to I diligently kept allocating enough RAM through the launcher attempting to get the textures working. After getting to 10 GB I got fed up and overkilled to 20GB allocated

Seems to have done the job WITH 128x base pack and 64x patch (with a couple of mods replaced with the 128x version).

BUT surely 20GB is silly ???

I know its not my system as I can run vanilla M/C with ultra SEUS shaders at 60+FPS.

So im at loss so could I please seek some sound advice ?

Many thanks

 

[rhn]

Never allocate more than 4GB. MC cannot handle more(and you should not need it) and will just start "leaking" it(it is not a memory leak as far as I understand it, but it simply cannot unload memory no longer in use as fast as it loads new).

For Minecraft the less memory allocated the better.

 

[Cptqrk]

I see you are using a 1.7 pack. Have you tried java8?

 

[Gilliam]

Didn't think java 8 was compatible with the ftb launcher ?

 

[Cptqrk]

Didn't think java 8 was compatible with the ftb launcher ?

It's a bit of a hit or miss thing.. I've heard Java8 works better, unless it's v.10 or something... I know I read it here somewhere....

 

[rdemay91]

It's a bit of a hit or miss thing.. I've heard Java8 works better, unless it's v.10 or something... I know I read it here somewhere....

Like you said its hit or miss, some people it works fine have no problems. Other seem to never get it to work. I personally use Java 7 not 8 and have no major problems. I tried 8 but after 10 mins of not getting it to work properly I just uninstalled and went back to 7 since it still works for me. Maybe in a while I will try again but actually get it to work who knows.