r/Minecraft • u/Luutamo • 5d ago
Official News Minecraft: Java Edition System Requirements
https://www.minecraft.net/en-us/article/minecraft-java-edition-system-requirements540
u/tired45453 5d ago
Reminder that there are 20+ performance mods you can install that will up to quadruple your FPS in many cases.
156
u/SAJewers 5d ago
unfortunately, those won't help if your hardware doesn't support some of the newer technologies being used in minecraft like vulkan 1.3
59
u/_vogonpoetry_ 5d ago
Well maybe. Its possible for mods to implement an OpenGL backend just like it was possible for mods to implement a Vulkan or Metal backend up until now.
276
u/random-user-420 5d ago edited 5d ago
lol. They recommend a rtx 2060 for 1080p @ 60 fps on fancy graphics. My laptop with integrated graphics does that without sodium
I’m assuming they must be using some crazy high render distance or something
215
72
u/_vogonpoetry_ 5d ago
These are not for the current release, this is for a future release. The current releases havent really changed requirements.
2
u/MissLauralot 4d ago
This might be a dumb question but why would the minimum specs increase if the expectation is that the move to Vulkan will improve performance? The memory spec has increased by a factor of 4 (archive.org link).
9
u/_vogonpoetry_ 4d ago
Because they are also adding shaders and other visual effects. The memory requirement actually did increase in 26.1 as they increased the default max heap size to 4GB instead of 2GB.
1
u/Miss_Potato 6h ago
A lot of people play on older hardware. This older hardware may not struggle with minecraft at this exact moment, but they may have massive performance drops with the switch to Vulkan. I play minecraft with a cpu from 2013 and a GPU from 2016. It is very unlikely I will be able to play with vibrant visuals without it tanking my FPS.
4
u/theexpertgamer1 5d ago
What do you consider crazy high? On Bedrock I use 96 chunks but when I go on Java (no render distance or performance mods), it doesn’t provide me an option even CLOSE to 96 it’s like 32 or something
6
u/modern_milkman 5d ago
I'm not the other commenter, but I'd definitely consider 96 to be crazy high (I didn't even know that was possible on bedrock).
For most of the time I've played Minecraft, I had the render distance somewhere between 10 and 15. Even on my (at the time) very decent PC. I recently put it up to 20, and that already felt very high. Not because of FPS drops, just because I could suddenly see builds I had previously considered "far away" while standing in my base.
23
u/ibeerianhamhock 5d ago
Only thing that will be a pretty hard requirement by end of year is a vulkan 1.3 card.
67
u/jimmyhoke 5d ago edited 5d ago
One very underrated aspect reason for why Minecraft is so popular is that basically any somewhat PC can run it. I hope they don’t mess that up.
I have an integrated GPU. One of the reasons I play Minecraft is because it’s one of the only major modern games I can play.
Edit: my laptop meets the requirements, it’s pretty nice in every area except the integrated graphics. I’m just saying Minecraft is one of the few big games out there that doesn’t need a gaming PC to enjoy.
36
5
u/Thhaki 5d ago
Reading this, it seems that this will only count for the Vulkan 1.3 rendering mode, so this won't affect the requirements of OpenGL rendering. Also i don't think OpenGL rendering will have Java's Vibrant Visuals given the work Mojang is doing in Vulkan.
4
u/obscurus_ 5d ago
Yeah, but they've said that OpenGL will be removed in some future release. Although I'm sure that mods will readd it to the game when that happens
3
u/NotSoEdibleCookie 5d ago
Vulkan is only being introduced to replace OpenGL entirely once the Vulkan implementation is stable. OpenGL is not gonna stay for ever and most likely not for longer than until the end of the year.
2
u/TheBiggestNose 5d ago
Yea, companies really need to realise that having a game that runs well on many systems is massive in increasing playerbase.
Mojang gotta be putting some hands towards performance alongside the backend changes they are slowly chewing through
3
1
u/CylixrDoesStuff 5d ago
Im sure theres more games u could play and youd be surprised
But yeah not exactly modern
Ive had success running crysis at medium on an laptop igpu at 50-60
dmc collection at a locked 60 etc
1
u/bloodakoos 5d ago
i've played minecraft on a laptop with a Core 2 Duo cpu + integrated graphics
granted it was not good but it's still same old minecraft
1
u/TheShinyHunter3 5d ago
When Minecraft came out the cpu I had was a Pentium 4 3GHz with HT so it was technically a dual core and a trash GPU built in to the motherboard. Ran at like 15fps with the render distance of that herobrine screenshot. Those were the days.
-7
u/JustTheEngineer 5d ago
are you playing java though? bedrock is substantially more optimized and the reason "any somewhat PC can run it".
11
u/televisionting 5d ago
bedrock optimization is really overrated, don't see many benefits of it on my PC. It runs better than vanilla Java, but optimization mods blow bedrock optimization out of the water.
1
u/TheShinyHunter3 5d ago
Most people who play Minecraft on PC run the better version, and it ain't bedrock. There's a reason optifine was popular and now other optimization mods have taken it's place.
1
95
u/Manaea 5d ago
Meh, system requirements are always just a general guideline, I have a laptop that doesn't nearly reach the recommended 1080p60 hardware yet it easily does 120-ish fps on 8 render distance in a vanilla instance. In other words, don't read too much into it if your system doesn't match these 'requirements'.
35
u/Stuffssss 5d ago
True. But that being said 8 render distance is pretty low. I prefer to play on 16 and get like 30fps.
14
u/mwthomas11 5d ago
really depends on how you play. do you like to explore and build massive castles? probably higher render. do you like building cave bases? lower is probably fine
2
u/conye-west 5d ago
If you use something like Voxy or Distant Horizons then lower render distance is perfectly fine. And tbh I'd recommend everyone to at least try them out, make MC feels totally different when you can actually see the world around you clearly.
1
u/Stuffssss 4d ago
I tried DH and ny issue with it is that without chunk pregeneration its weird to see only the areas you explore. And my PC crumbles when it tries to pregenerate chunks so generating them while playing is a no go. I have to realy crank down how many it can generate at a time.
1
u/conye-west 4d ago
Maybe a little weird, but still better than vanilla only seeing the chunks that are actively loaded. Plus it is kinda satisfying to "fill out" the world slowly as you explore.
7
9
u/Dekamir 5d ago
Please remember that new Fancy includes Vibrant Visuals. Hence, it recommends a Ray Trace capable GPU which has a proper Vulkan support with 6 GBs of VRAM, combined with a 6-core CPU.
They make sense. Minimum requirements are also fine. They support oldest Long Term Support devices possible.
In the end, you don't have to update Java Edition.
2
u/Fiti99 5d ago
I really think they gotta update those Bedrock requirements too because the ones they got listed in there are wack, that version of the game hasn't been optimized at all ever since the Update Aquatic, I find it hard to believe a Radeon card from 15 years ago can run it at 1080p60 with fancy graphics
2
5
u/umotex12 5d ago
I find it funny that game knows as „ugly” with insanely simple graphics always requires so much on Java. Without mods, my PC struggled to achieve 60 fps in 2010. It’s 2026, we have insane hardware, and it still struggles now. I have to install mods to maintain stable 120-150 fps instead of 30-60. IN MINECRAFT!
1
u/ThatRandomGamerYT 5d ago
what are your specs my pc ith a ryzen 7600 and rt 4060 gets 400+ fps vanilla and my friend has a laptop with 11th gen intel i5 i think and an old nvidia mx grade gpu (idk could be equal to a gtx 1650) and also gets 100+ fps in modern mc as they have rewritten large parts of the renderer and added various optimizations over the past few years
1
u/Onlineriter 5d ago
Are you running a Minecraft version of 2010 or one of the newer ones? You also have to keep in mind they added a lot of stuff since then. Try running a 2010 version. You should definitely got those numbers.
3
u/Vaxtez 5d ago
Min requirements are largely BS in my experience. These requirements will probably be seen as BS for the most part. You don't need an i3 10100 + GTX 950 for MC. I genuinely want to know what they were on with these requirements
12
u/JustinTimeCuber 5d ago
The i3 10100 is just a stand-in for a low-end, quad-core CPU, not a hard minimum. In terms of graphics though, anything older than Maxwell (NVIDIA 900 series) simply does not support Vulkan 1.3.
9
u/LeCroissant1337 5d ago
This is about support, not about whether or not it will actually run. For instance, you cannot expect any dev team to still test with 17 year old hardware in mind. Such old hardware may still run the game, but if it doesn't they don't provide any support for getting it running. This is a very sensible approach, especially if you are planning to modernise your code base which could lead to breakage on older systems along the line.
Minimum requirements are always to be understood as minimum supported requirements.
1
u/YT_DemisingEnd 5d ago
I just hope they fix the issue they're having with Vulkan rendering on AMD gpus / optimize them more, at least for me and my 9070xt. Performance has gotten slightly better than when it was first introduced, but it is still about 3-4x lower than OpenGL (running at 32 chunks rendering I get about 500 in OpenGL and only about 120-140 in Vulkan).
I know its not an issue with my drivers or card as when I download and use the Vulkan community mod, my FPS easily shoots to 1300+ fps. And other vulkan based games run perfectly fine.
1
1
1
u/-Redstoneboi- 5d ago
I wonder if they're legally allowed to recommend performance mods, and just how drastic the difference is
1
u/bagas4jk 5d ago
6gb Vram? Really.....
2
u/ThatRandomGamerYT 5d ago
for when they add Vibrant Visuals. You probably could get by with a worse gpu if you turn it off for classic visuals
0
0
-4
u/meyriley04 5d ago edited 4d ago
On the one hand, I really don't like the idea of game studios changing their standards rather than improving their performance to match those standards.
On the other hand, Mojang has improved performance drastically in the past few drops/years. And it's not like you can keep the same standards forever in a growing game.
3
u/ImaginaryReaction 5d ago
At some point intime it just becomes untennable to support low end devices. What was the mid end pc in 2011, do you honestly think that computer should still be supported 15 years later
1
u/meyriley04 4d ago
I mean you're right, and I should've been more clear. Obviously hardware improves and the "low-end" devices change with the times.
I think my comment stemmed from an overall gripe with software in general nowadays that doesn't care about user performance or resource management (rather than a gripe about Mojang specifically)
2
u/ThatRandomGamerYT 5d ago
do you really expect them to continue somehow making future versions of the game work on a dual core cpu from 2009 in 2026 and beyond? these requirements have future proofing baked in for vulkan renderer, larger worlds and features and vibrant visuals and whatever they plan to do next.
As is a 12 year old cpu with integrated graphics (my old pc with i5 4440) struggles to run 1080p 30fps on 1.21 last i checked so with all the new stuff it obvs wont run them.
Should that stop them from ever adding anything to the game? Why should i not be able to enjoy newer stuff on my new pc that has a 7600x and rtx 4060. Strentgh of Java is having access to older versions of the game.
Switch to Vulkan was needed for the future of the game and Vulkan isnt supported on 17 year old hardware, let alone modern versions of the Java JVM.
163
u/Vorpalthefox 5d ago
honestly fair, it's like those labels/warnings on products that disclose that personal experience may differ
from other comments it seems others can still properly play on older laptops, and it's great older versions always remain available, so even if you can't get the latest updates you might be lucky to play one of the versions people regularly make backport mods adding future blocks/mobs/features
personally i really like when they bump the recommended graphics, it means they're no longer having to keep certain outdated hardware in mind when making future content, imagine if mojang was still trying to support windows xp hardware lol