metalchic

After reinstalling Windows 7 64bit, and the Intel 9.17.10.4229 drivers Tekkit Legends loads fine on the same computer. I hate for this to be the solution but what else can you do?

Brughhhhhhhh.... Ok well i will poke around the driver archives and try some stuff tonight and report back if i get it working before i lose my patience and nuke the windows 10 and reinstall 7. Chief resource to assist in this: http://www.intel.com/support/graphics/sb/CS-020667.htm Ok here's what i have found so far: Intel HD Graphics Driver # | ZIP # | Release Date | Pass/Fail 9.17.10.4229 | Win64_152824 | 5.26.2015 | Fail 9.17.10.4101 | Win64_152823 | 1.30.2015 | Fail 9.17.10.3517 | Win64_152822 | 3.20.2014 | Fail 9.17.10.3347 | Win64_152820 | 1.29.2014 | Fail 9.17.10.2828 | Acer Source | 7.31.2012 | Fail 8.15.10.2342 | Acer Source | 3.25.2011 | Fail Now from poking around, according to the reddit thread the working driver is 10.18.15.4256 so based on the how to identify graphics drivers article i should then be using 9.17.10.4256 however the 9.17.10 driver does not go past Build 4229. Looking around at some other drivers reveals that none of the Windows 8 (not 8.1) drivers go past Build 4229! In fact Sandy Bridge drivers arent avalible for Windows 8.1 64bit and the 32bit drivers are also Build 4229! The Intel driver version 10.18.10.4276 would not force install either. And the Ivy Bridge drivers for Windows 8 (non 8.1) are not available past Build 4229 as well. Unless Intel releases drivers for Sandy Bridge chips newer than Build 4229 or Microsoft solves whatever problem is causing this it looks like we simply wont be able to run any sort of modded Minecraft under Windows 10 period.

Yes i have the pixel format not accelerated problem. No don't bother linking me to that reddit thread I've already seen it. I have tried installing and reinstalling the drivers from Microsoft, Intel, where ever else i could find them. I've tried disabling the driver through windows update so it won't get replaced (this worked on my laptop but not hers.) Ok so we have two laptops here, mine a gateway with a Core i3 3110m cpu and Intel HD 4000 graphics, minecraft runs fine on this after i disabled the windows update driver and installed the Intel one. And then we have her laptop, which has a Core i5 2430m cpu with Intel HD 3000 graphics. Minecraft will technically run on here but only the vanilla version, with just a single mod installed it chokes and throws a pixel format not accelerated error at me. But here's the thing that's really getting at me. Everything else runs fine, she plays world of warcraft on there. She played Star was knights of the old republic 2 on there. And it had this same problem with the Intel Celeron b815 cpu I pulled out to replace with the i5 2430m. Vanilla minecraft with 100% no mods will run 1.7.10 or 1.8.8 just fine but as soon as i install one mod like optifine it chokes. This is my last ditch effort to try and get this working, i'm preparing to kick it back from Windows 10 to Windows 7 if we can't figure anything out. Also i figured i would share what resources i have found for solving Windows 10 Intel HD Graphics issues so far. Easiest way to find the latest driver for your laptop: https://downloadcenter.intel.com/download/23162/Intel-HD-Graphics-Drivers-for-Intel-Pentium-Processors-and-Intel-Celeron-Processors That Reddit thread with a possibly related, maybe similar but not quite the same issue i seem to be having here: https://www.reddit.com/r/feedthebeast/comments/3fxgbj/issues_with_modded_minecraft_and_windows_10/ Finding updates, figuring out if the Intel graphics driver is being pushed through windows update, installing it or blocking it tool here: http://forums.mydigitallife.info/threads/64939-Windows-Update-MiniTool A hundred thousand results, a discordant cacophonous chorus of static that roughly says 'i didn't even install a graphics driver and now minecraft doesn't work': https://www.google.com/search?q=minecraft+pixel+format+not+accelerated&oq=Minecraft+pixel+format+not+a&aqs=chrome.0.0j69i57j0l4.4320j0j9&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8

This has more to do with Latency in modern systems than with the data width and transmission speed. PCIe is a fairly high latency connection, that's why SLI and CrossFire cards connect to each other through a specially designed interface. I just helped my friend assemble his new computer replacing the Pentium 4 HT 3.4GHz with DDR2 667 Ram computer with a Core i3 550 3.5GHz dual core and 8GB DDR3 1333 ram and the minecraft performance is just absolutely night and day even tho hes still using a GeForce 9600GSO (128bit) graphics card. I have another computer with a Pentium E2220 2.4GHz dual core cpu and Dual Channel DDR2 800 ram that i can benchmark minecraft on using a number of different cards to see just what kind of impact the graphics card has (Avalible for testing include a Geforce 8400 GS 512mb, 7600 GS 512mb, 9600 GSO either 512mb of 768mb cant remember, 6200 Turbocache 32mb might not still work, Radeon HD 3450 256mb, Quadro FX 3700 512mb and possibly a a Radeon x300 128mb if i can find it.)

do you mean like the communication with system memory and communication across the PCIe bus? or do you mean the communication backbone for independent computing node in computer clusters? or both for that matter i suppose. And hte idea of measuring minecraft i think i left out is to apply pressure to the system in an unusual manner.

fjkahsiwfhasdilfasdoiejwfhwsdifuashdfiusdhfaksjwefdlsfjf i spent way to long writing and rewriting this post. a hobby of mine is to trash pick old computers and put them together in unintended ways and I've been looking into minecraft as one of the various tools i use to measure the performance of such computers. so i can further push them in directions science was not meant to go (cough cough P90 paired up with a GeForce FX 5950 cough cough)

thats the thing, this is a learning experiment not for the betterment of my minecraft desktop experience, my desktop computer has a Core 2 Duo E7500 cpu overclocked to 3.6GHz that pushes minecraft around at over 150fps. Just about everything i know about computers is self taught. I'm trying to further my understanding of how this stuff works, i was made painfully aware that i didn't know enough last time i started to try and learn programming. It also furthers my understanding of how to problem solve these issues in the future by better knowing what why and where slowdowns occur with minecraft to try and help alleviate these kinds of problems in the future. i cant tell if I'm making any kind of sense here. multiple cores would definitely help this multitasking but you wouldn't get more performance from minecraft, just less slowdown.

ok so i setup the Pentium 4 computer with a different Pentium 4, its setup like this: Pentium 4 2GHz 400MHz FSB 512kb L2 Cache mPGA478 4GB DDR400 ram (under clocked to DDR266 with 1.33 memory divider) nVidia GeForce4 Ti 4600-8x 128MB AGP 8x Soyo SY-PI875P DRAGON 2 Platinum Edition motherboard (quite the relic i know) HP OEM WiFi card of inconsequence PCI Primary hard drive is UltraATA/133 connected to the soyo's integrated highpoint IDE raid card OS is Ubuntu 12.04 LTS I used a couple of different drivers the default driver that comes with Ubuntu i believe its called nouveau only provides 2D acceleration for nVidia cards upon starting minecraft with this driver i got blasted with a load of artifacts under the buttons on the title screen and less than 1fps. I replaced this driver with nVidia's official driver for GeForce4 in Linux version 96.43.23. I setup technic pack to run through magic launcher and added optifine multithreaded (the same setup i use on my desktop computer) unfortunately my first test world dropped me into a jungle (idk if they are for you but even my desktop is draged down to 70~ fps in jungles) so i skiped the regular map test and did a flatland map test where i managed to get this picture: ( did nothing i hope the insert image resizes it :S ) looking at nothing it could get up to 60fps but i don't think that's a fair test, the jungle terrain could get up to 24-30 fps also but that brings me to my final thought here. the actual chunk loading seems to be whats messing up the framerates. Pressing esc causes the chunks in view to load much faster and would bring up the framerate in the jungle until i started moving and it needed to load more chunks. I think in this situation it might be more on the CPU because its not just loading and rendering the chunks but also generating them at this time. (i just tested this by loading an existing map that my desktop had already generated out to extreme view distance and the loading was not any faster.) So this is confusing as the framerate is only slightly lower than the 3.2GHz Pentium 4 with the same specs on the rest of the computer, do you think its because the 3.2GHz is only mildly more powerful than the 2GHz version or because of something else? (i feel like I'm missing something i wanted to say here...)

sorry i have a terrible habit of smashing my questions together in a horrific manner, you answered the GMA950 question, so ultimately for everything the GMA950 can do a faster cpu and ram will improve the laptop's performance likely to be significant due to upping the FSB, ram speed and core clock speed. the second question was about my GeForce GTX 550 Ti 1gb, in my desktop computer. it has dedicated 1gb of vram separate from the 4gb of system memory. does this card having more vram help could minecraft benefit from more vram or is it texture pack dependent? or is it completely irreverent and my E7500 with 4gb of ram at 1333 fsb doing all the work and my video card is doing absolutely nothing?

hmm so that means the Pentium 4 HT at 3.2GHz with a 2x400mhz data bus to the DDR400 dual channel ram had a significant advantage over the Pentium T2060 with its 1.6GHz core 533mhz bus speed and dual channel DDR2 533? augh im having a hard time keeping these FSB numbers straight, is it 2x533 (for 1066 effective) or is it 2x266 (for 533 effective) becasue i know the Pentium 4 HT lists its speed as 3.2/512/800/1.4 but the T2060 lists as 1.6/1M/533/1.3 does this mean that technically the T2060 has a slower bus than the Pentium 4? I mean i guess i could see that with the second channel in the dual channel ram setup being delegated more towards the shared GMA950 video memory... Augh i thought i had this figured out now im not sure, and then also if i upgrade to a Core 2 Duo T5600 1.83GHz dual core what impact might that have on the system, with DDR2 667 ram and also since part of the GMA950's shaders are handled in software a more powerful cpu would result in higher performance across the board? And since minecraft being more CPU bound the CPU would be a more influential upgrade anyway because of the way this is handled? But minecraft wont function without 3D acceleration (attempting to run Minecraft in opensuse without the i915 derivatives video package generated a 'no suitable renderer found' error same as trying to run in windows with just the Standard graphics adapter driver) according to error messages and now I'm more confused than ever on another question is this an apropriate place to discuss this or do i need to shut up?

that would definitely allow it to run on the rage 128 then... but then why does minecraft run so well on the Pentium 4 but not so well on the Pentium T2060 in my laptop? unless the GMA950 supports just enough opengl to dick it up, but also then where does the supposed v1.5 opengl the geforce4 ti supports stand?

from a bit of searching around its my understanding that vannila minecraft requires OpenGL 1.1 to just run, to this end i had it running on a Pentium 4 HT 3.2GHz with a GeForce4 Ti 4600 8x and am considering setting that computer back up so i can go for the Rage 128 Pro. got about 30 fps with technic under opensuse 11 i belive i was using the legacy non-oss driver. also it ran world of warcraft. no it did not make toast.

i see it now, it was broken earlier showing like all the letters up and down on those buttons so i couldent read any of them at the time i posted. i;m just gonna go tho i dont want to cause any more problems

i cant find a section for posting issues with the forum itself and since it doesnt directly relate to the game i suppose that would mean i goes here? anyway i'm having a problem with the game so i tried to post a picture of said problems (no its not the 'blocks dont render' issue) on the Technic Bug Forum when i noticed somthing at the bottom of the screen. i cant post in the technic bug forum. is this specific (i've been blocked from posting in the bug forum or not enough post count) or just a bug with the transfer from the old forums?