My problem is that when i use seus shader or other shaders with chroma hills i get only like 55 to 89fps,then sometimes drop to 32 in like 2 second again 60 to 89fps or more.
I use chroma hills and seus shaders,continum and work perfect but that small lag is killing me.
80 GB of RAM is absolutely insane and there is no way the game will ever use that much simply because there is no way it will ever need it - more RAM does not improve performance once you have enough and I don't know why this myth is so persistent - in fact, check this out:
1030 FPS with only 512 MB of memory allocated, of which not even half is used! Even if my largest world, at over 110,000 chunks, was entirely loaded into RAM it would only use around 6-7 GB of memory and the game absolutely does not use extra memory to cache chunks or anything else. In fact, you are just making things worse and I highly doubt the JVM can even handle that much memory without locking up so bad you have to kill the process once a full garbage collection cycle occurs:
Let's give Minecraft 4 GB of RAM to play with. This would need a PC with at least 8 GB RAM (as the real memory usage is almost double the memory visible in Java). If the VM decides to use all the memory, then it will increase the time between the garbage collections (20 sec instead of 4), but it will also increase the garbage collection time by 4, so every 20 seconds there will be one massive lag spike.
Likewise, in this post somebody compared the performance with 512 MB-4 GB allocated and found that FPS steadily decreased with each doubling - even going from 512MB to 1 GB had a negative impact:
Also, I highly doubt anybody can run a full 2048x texture pack, at least not with any degree of performance, given that no GPU has enough VRAM and/or maximum texture size to handle it (in fact, my GPU has a max total texture size of only 16384x16384, meaning that it can handle just 16 2048x textures since they are all stitched together into a single giant atlas. Given that 1.16 creates a 1024x1024 atlas for blocks alone (4 MB at 32 bits per pixel) a 2048x pack would need 131072x131072, requiring 64 GB of VRAM and that's not even including mipmaps which will increase it further). At the very least, the GPU will have to swap to main memory, which is incredibly bad for performance (much like having to swap to disk when out of system RAM, the bottleneck here being the data bus between the GPU and system RAM). I also doubt you'd even notice the difference past, say, 256x unless you were right up against a wall (or when the width of a block in screen pixels is more than the resolution of the texture pack).
Like TheMasterCaver said, more RAM does not equal more FPS.
EDIT: Just saw the video that you posted. Definitely turn down your render distance. 64 chunks with shaders is very taxing, even with powerful GPUs. You open the F3 debug screen a few times throughout the video, and you can see that your memory usage is only between 3-4GBs. Allocating 80GBs is extremely overkill and won't help your frame rate. Also, you shouldn't allocate more than half of your system's RAM to one process. So the most memory that you should ever give one program on your PC is 64GB.
You have to realize that Minecraft is a very poorly optimized game written in a language not made for games. Those other games that you mentioned such as Fortnite are made in proper gaming engines made to get everything out of your PC's specs, which is not the case with Minecraft.
I remove nvidia overlays,i put distanc render to 36 and my fps is now more stable,with chroma hills and seus shaders.But with stratum2048 is realy great and boom just blocked the game after five second dont know why need to test again.
Like TheMasterCaver said, more RAM does not equal more FPS.
EDIT: Just saw the video that you posted. Definitely turn down your render distance. 64 chunks with shaders is very taxing, even with powerful GPUs. You open the F3 debug screen a few times throughout the video, and you can see that your memory usage is only between 3-4GBs. Allocating 80GBs is extremely overkill and won't help your frame rate. Also, you shouldn't allocate more than half of your system's RAM to one process. So the most memory that you should ever give one program on your PC is 64GB.
You have to realize that Minecraft is a very poorly optimized game written in a language not made for games. Those other games that you mentioned such as Fortnite are made in proper gaming engines made to get everything out of your PC's specs, which is not the case with Minecraft.
Thanks man and thanks for first guy,yes other game is optimized so i use render distanc 36 that help me with fps and almost no lag.I cant belive that this game use such big ram and gpu damn...
You gotta be kidding me! You have allocated 102400MB (102.4GB) allocated!
Allocate less memory to Minecraft, try -Xmx4G in your JVM arguments.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Say something silly, Laugh 'til it hurts, Take a risk, Sing out loud, Rock the boat, Shake things up, Flirt with disaster, Buy something frivolous, Color outside the lines, Cause a scene, Order dessert, Make waves, Get carried away, Have a great day!
For instance, if you set 80GB of heap, you have a whopping 16GB of “new” heap area (20 percent). With this configuration, the internal Garbage Collection of Java is scanning 20GB every time, and you probably have a lot of 50ms pauses every time it's run. Also other parameters may have to be adjusted if you go far beyond the 4-8GB max heap range.
On the other side you could try to go the whole step and change you JVM to the latest OpenJDK8 and switch to the Shenandoah garbage collection which is enabled this way (but I don't know if it's supported by the vanilla JVM that ships with minecraft):
I successfully tested this path for modded minecraft with packages up to 8GB of recommended RAM (heap size), so it's basically safe. Unfortunately I understand that you are running Windows, so I can't help you how to setup a new JVM and use it in minecraft (there are plenty of docs I cannot test so I can't recommend one over another).
Please stick to the question at hand, not how minecraft is coded and how it handles things, post if you can help the OP with what they asked, not by waffling on about how the game uses the resources its given
Was I not sticking to the topic? I replied directly to something that someone else said. This "waffling on about how the game uses its resources" was literally relevant here. If you're going to call someone out for being off topic, and then sprinkle a light insult in while you're at it (thanks, by the way), at least be sure you're right before you belittle their attempt to help someone else, because that's all I was ever trying to do! Being insulted, singled out, and censored for just trying to help someone sure feels nice. If a little bit of elaboration bothers you enough to do that and delete my post, sorry?
It's also a bit insulting to have been singled out when many of the replies have done what I did and addressed how Minecraft can't be forced to make use of excessive RAM. Even if I elaborated a bit (which I don't think warrants censoring an entire post for being off topic, irrelevant, or unhelpful anyway), I am HARDLY the only one who did this here.
There are a lot of people that come by inquiring about Minecraft performance related things, such as why they get stutters on their high end PC, or how to allocate 80 GB of RAM to Minecraft, and a plethora of other things, and these are absolutely the sort of times and places where explaining how Minecraft (and Java) reacts is relevant, because some of them aren't inherent performance problems, per se, but come from a lack of understanding on how Minecraft behaves. Stuff like that IS answering the question. It's helping the OP with information. I get it; some of us elaborate, and some of us say the same things we've said elsewhere. So what? Some are more to the point. Collectively, we increase helping others and we all do it our own way, but if I'm going to be insulted and then censored for doing nothing wrong and only trying to help someone, with the WORST of my crime being "I might elaborate a bit" when I'm not even the only one who is like that, then this forum is no longer a place I will invest any time into.
@OP, sorry for any issues while attempting to help you. Ultimately, I hope you get the enjoyment you seek from the game.
-Xmx80G -XX:+UnlockExperimentalVMOptions -XX:+UseG1GC -XX:G1NewSizePercent=20 -XX:G1ReservePercent=20 -XX:MaxGCPauseMillis=50 -XX:G1HeapRegionSize=32M
My spec is i9 16 core
128gb ram
rtx2080ti
My problem is that when i use seus shader or other shaders with chroma hills i get only like 55 to 89fps,then sometimes drop to 32 in like 2 second again 60 to 89fps or more.
I use chroma hills and seus shaders,continum and work perfect but that small lag is killing me.
What i do wrong or what need to do.
something like this on reddit.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Minecraft/comments/2fbyso/lagspikes_when_moving_around_no_lag_when_standing/
Only stratum 2048 give me 60 gb ram usage all other is 20 to 30max,but i want use it 80 just to have no lag.
What i do wrong or how to reduce small lagspike.
I use obs and geforce overlays hm..Discord is on google chrome and thats all that i have
80 GB of RAM is absolutely insane and there is no way the game will ever use that much simply because there is no way it will ever need it - more RAM does not improve performance once you have enough and I don't know why this myth is so persistent - in fact, check this out:
1030 FPS with only 512 MB of memory allocated, of which not even half is used! Even if my largest world, at over 110,000 chunks, was entirely loaded into RAM it would only use around 6-7 GB of memory and the game absolutely does not use extra memory to cache chunks or anything else. In fact, you are just making things worse and I highly doubt the JVM can even handle that much memory without locking up so bad you have to kill the process once a full garbage collection cycle occurs:
Likewise, in this post somebody compared the performance with 512 MB-4 GB allocated and found that FPS steadily decreased with each doubling - even going from 512MB to 1 GB had a negative impact:
https://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft-editions/minecraft-xbox-360-edition/mcx360-discussion/2513182-why-the-console-editions-is-the-forgotten-dinosaur?comment=22 (512 MB = 144 FPS, 1 GB = 137 FPS, 2 GB = 130 FPS, 4 GB = 123 FPS; "The game functions perfectly fine with 512MB allocated, the exact same as 4GB allocated. There's no difference because the game isn't actually using any more RAM" [512 MB probably isn't enough for the latest versions, which are much more memory hungry, though this was still 1.8, the single worst update in terms of memory allocation and GC churn])
Also, I highly doubt anybody can run a full 2048x texture pack, at least not with any degree of performance, given that no GPU has enough VRAM and/or maximum texture size to handle it (in fact, my GPU has a max total texture size of only 16384x16384, meaning that it can handle just 16 2048x textures since they are all stitched together into a single giant atlas. Given that 1.16 creates a 1024x1024 atlas for blocks alone (4 MB at 32 bits per pixel) a 2048x pack would need 131072x131072, requiring 64 GB of VRAM and that's not even including mipmaps which will increase it further). At the very least, the GPU will have to swap to main memory, which is incredibly bad for performance (much like having to swap to disk when out of system RAM, the bottleneck here being the data bus between the GPU and system RAM). I also doubt you'd even notice the difference past, say, 256x unless you were right up against a wall (or when the width of a block in screen pixels is more than the resolution of the texture pack).
TheMasterCaver's First World - possibly the most caved-out world in Minecraft history - includes world download.
TheMasterCaver's World - my own version of Minecraft largely based on my views of how the game should have evolved since 1.6.4.
Why do I still play in 1.6.4?
Thanks for answer this is my video.
Other game like fortnite,scum, and many other run normal 60 to 120 fps but minecraft i my fav game for relax and realy hate that 1milisecond lag.
Like TheMasterCaver said, more RAM does not equal more FPS.
EDIT: Just saw the video that you posted. Definitely turn down your render distance. 64 chunks with shaders is very taxing, even with powerful GPUs. You open the F3 debug screen a few times throughout the video, and you can see that your memory usage is only between 3-4GBs. Allocating 80GBs is extremely overkill and won't help your frame rate. Also, you shouldn't allocate more than half of your system's RAM to one process. So the most memory that you should ever give one program on your PC is 64GB.
You have to realize that Minecraft is a very poorly optimized game written in a language not made for games. Those other games that you mentioned such as Fortnite are made in proper gaming engines made to get everything out of your PC's specs, which is not the case with Minecraft.
Mapping and Modding rules | Global rules
I remove nvidia overlays,i put distanc render to 36 and my fps is now more stable,with chroma hills and seus shaders.But with stratum2048 is realy great and boom just blocked the game after five second dont know why need to test again.
Thanks man and thanks for first guy,yes other game is optimized so i use render distanc 36 that help me with fps and almost no lag.I cant belive that this game use such big ram and gpu damn...
You gotta be kidding me! You have allocated 102400MB (102.4GB) allocated!
Allocate less memory to Minecraft, try -Xmx4G in your JVM arguments.
I see from the screenshot that you are using no more than 2GB of ram.
First things first, I would try to reduce the allocated memory until you are comfortable that you don't need any more and then see if the FPS improve.
Second, I'm no Java expert but if go beyond “normal” heap sizes, the other options need to be adjusted in significant ways:
-XX:+UseG1GC -XX:G1NewSizePercent=20 -XX:G1ReservePercent=20 -XX:MaxGCPauseMillis=50 -XX:G1HeapRegionSize=32M
For instance, if you set 80GB of heap, you have a whopping 16GB of “new” heap area (20 percent). With this configuration, the internal Garbage Collection of Java is scanning 20GB every time, and you probably have a lot of 50ms pauses every time it's run. Also other parameters may have to be adjusted if you go far beyond the 4-8GB max heap range.
On the other side you could try to go the whole step and change you JVM to the latest OpenJDK8 and switch to the Shenandoah garbage collection which is enabled this way (but I don't know if it's supported by the vanilla JVM that ships with minecraft):
-XX:+UnlockExperimentalVMOptions -XX:+UseShenandoahGC.
I successfully tested this path for modded minecraft with packages up to 8GB of recommended RAM (heap size), so it's basically safe. Unfortunately I understand that you are running Windows, so I can't help you how to setup a new JVM and use it in minecraft (there are plenty of docs I cannot test so I can't recommend one over another).
Was I not sticking to the topic? I replied directly to something that someone else said. This "waffling on about how the game uses its resources" was literally relevant here. If you're going to call someone out for being off topic, and then sprinkle a light insult in while you're at it (thanks, by the way), at least be sure you're right before you belittle their attempt to help someone else, because that's all I was ever trying to do! Being insulted, singled out, and censored for just trying to help someone sure feels nice. If a little bit of elaboration bothers you enough to do that and delete my post, sorry?
It's also a bit insulting to have been singled out when many of the replies have done what I did and addressed how Minecraft can't be forced to make use of excessive RAM. Even if I elaborated a bit (which I don't think warrants censoring an entire post for being off topic, irrelevant, or unhelpful anyway), I am HARDLY the only one who did this here.
There are a lot of people that come by inquiring about Minecraft performance related things, such as why they get stutters on their high end PC, or how to allocate 80 GB of RAM to Minecraft, and a plethora of other things, and these are absolutely the sort of times and places where explaining how Minecraft (and Java) reacts is relevant, because some of them aren't inherent performance problems, per se, but come from a lack of understanding on how Minecraft behaves. Stuff like that IS answering the question. It's helping the OP with information. I get it; some of us elaborate, and some of us say the same things we've said elsewhere. So what? Some are more to the point. Collectively, we increase helping others and we all do it our own way, but if I'm going to be insulted and then censored for doing nothing wrong and only trying to help someone, with the WORST of my crime being "I might elaborate a bit" when I'm not even the only one who is like that, then this forum is no longer a place I will invest any time into.
@OP, sorry for any issues while attempting to help you. Ultimately, I hope you get the enjoyment you seek from the game.