my suspicion is that one of the major changes in 1.8 (using multitexturing) depends more on the video card.
This means that people with shitty GL_ARB_MULTITEXTURE hardware implementations have either visual artifacts or a much slower framerate, which explains a lot of the complaints about 1.8 that I do not identify with, since my video card isn't on the Windows 98 Hardware compatibility list.
Nope. Mine is fine too. I get 400FPS now on full settings (playing SMP that is hosted on another computer in my apartment).
I'd suggest altering your video card settings to cap the fps at the hardwares max frequency. When I'm running minecraft it would be over 300fps most of the time and the fan speed on the GPU would pick up. That kind of stress was pointless, since the monitor is only going to hit 60Hz.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
More Ocean Life: Kelp, Coral, Crabs and Jellyfish; Coconut Palm trees for beaches and islands. Terrain Generation Changes: Which biomes and world-building features are most in need of change?
AMD Athlon 64 bit XP Pro
2800+
1.81 GHz
1.00GB Ram
I believe I have a Radeon video card, too. I'm running at an unsteady 16-45fps on SSP and anywhere from 25-60fps on SMP.
I used to be at least 50-100fps in 1.6 and 1.73, so I took a large drop. I shouldn't have to spend any more than the $350 I had into custom building this machine a few years ago. This machine runs faster than my parent's brand new Vista, and at over 3 years old, this computer is faster than most if not all stock computers, so I can only imagine what less fortunate players are experiencing.
I do plan though sometime to waste some more money on a Win7 and hopefully around 4GB of ram, a nice 4k+ processor and perhaps go quad-core and put it together myself, but don't have the time nor money at the moment.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Full-time Male nursing student, part-time runner, and casual gamer.
went from about 2-15 with massive lag spikes every few seconds to 60 consistently, very rarely dropping to as low as 56, but usually steady, best update ever for me x]
This is on my laptop, desktop hasn't downloaded it yet. lol
--
-Edit:
- And this is with all settings maxed, that 15 was with everything as low as it'd go and still inconsistent.
Wish mine was that good. I get like 13 fps with settings on low and view distance on short. Before I wwould get like 5-7 fps with those settings.
I am getting way better framerates as well, but I am STILL GETTING LSOD OMGGG... I fixed it in 1.7.3 with optifine and changing the autosave thing to every 3 mins, but now, optifine is outdated, and MC is unplayable for me :/. I really wish there was another fix to this...
the screenshots are invalid. In the first one you are looking outside which means the game is rendering more pieces. In the second one you are looking out a window at another building. Less rendering.
I have tested both 1.7.3 and 1.8.1 on the same PC with the same scene and same settings....max. I get about 190 in 1.7 and 170 in 1.8. I used FRAPS and got an average from 90 seconds of data. PC. It was on peaceful mod so no mobs. It was an outdoor scene. I'll have to post pics. It can also depend on your video card because some video cards handle opengl better than others.
IM having SERIOUS issues with 1.8 since it came out. I first played it trying to LAN with a friend, where the both of us have rather high spec PC's and cable internet, and its just -nuts- even in single player.
I dont know how most of you are getting BETTER FPS - my problem is that my single-player world will average around 150FPS, and every 10 seconds will stop entirely and cut to almost 0 fps and then 'recover' for another 10 seconds, and repeat. The same thing happens in the multiplayers but less frequently, except it makes up for that in the insane latency delays I get whenever I join the server or die and respawn. I dont even know what the hell happened to cause this amount of problems between 1.7 and 1.8...
When I look at task manager and even giving it full priority, I notice that it chews almost up to 1gb of ram and constantly uses around 25% CPU. Is this right? I run an overclocked quadcore with 3gb of ram (had more, but was faulty) and two 8800GT's in SLi... I could use less resources running Crysis...
Its completely unplayable and I dislike it enough to want to ditch Minecraft entirely for now, as much as I would like to explore the new stuff in adventure update, its just effed. In 1.7 everything was perfectly fine. Ive reinstalled Minecraft a couple of times, with no change. What do I do? I think the latter rules out that 1.8 is the issue and not my internet or computer, both of which are well beyond what minecraft needs to run.
IM having SERIOUS issues with 1.8 since it came out. I first played it trying to LAN with a friend, where the both of us have rather high spec PC's and cable internet, and its just -nuts- even in single player.
check your video card drivers. Make sure you are up to date, especially with two cards. There have been problems in the past with two cards and opengl. Opengl is not directX. it doesn't really benefit from multiple cards. The ram might be an issue. You could always try using the 64bit version of java and allowing the game to use more than 1gig of ram. Don't set the priority up too high from normal. That can possibly have a negative effect given java uses the OS as its backbone and if you set the game to high priority then the OS lacks in priority and you could lose performance. If you do set the priority higher, try playing the game using only one of the cores. The system will let the OS use the other cores and your game priority on that one core.
What type of CPU do you have? Ram specs (800mghz or 1033 or what?) maybe defray your hard drive could help given a fragmented hard drive loads data much slower. what is your OS? Win7 has a feature like a MAC where it constantly defrags at a specific time you set. What graphics cards are you running?
Your fps are abnormally high in comparison to my specs, I used to get somewhere in the region of 300+ fps on previous minecraft versions. Since the new update, it's decreased to more than half of what is used to be.
Specs:
CPU: Intel i7 quad core @3ghz
Memory: 1TB
GPU: NVIDEA GeForce GTS450
OS: Windows 7 x64 bit
whoa whoa whoa, how do you have 1tb of ram? Or by memory do you mean hard drive space?
You have a Intel i7? I have a 6 year old 4 core AMD 3.2 processor and I get the same FPS. Then again, AMD has traditionally been better at handling games than intel. It isn't about the specs or heavy hardware you have. Most of the recent CPU and Video card hardware is based on what is best for DIRECTX because most games use it. Minecraft uses opengl which is a little old now. Also, quad core has no effect on the game because the game only utilizes one core of the CPU. Try updating your java to 64bit. That might give the FPS back. Maybe even try turning off advanced opengl. It is a little odd that your FPS would be halved. Could be the fact that the test scenes for FPS are totally different.
Your fps are abnormally high in comparison to my specs, I used to get somewhere in the region of 300+ fps on previous minecraft versions. Since the new update, it's decreased to more than half of what is used to be.
Before (prior to 1.7.3):
After (1.8):
OH the real reason for the FPS difference is obvious. In the first image with 300+ fps there are no chunks being updated. In the other image, you are updating over 100 chunks. That is the reason right there. or at least part of the reason.
check your video card drivers. Make sure you are up to date, especially with two cards. There have been problems in the past with two cards and opengl. Opengl is not directX. it doesn't really benefit from multiple cards. The ram might be an issue. You could always try using the 64bit version of java and allowing the game to use more than 1gig of ram. Don't set the priority up too high from normal. That can possibly have a negative effect given java uses the OS as its backbone and if you set the game to high priority then the OS lacks in priority and you could lose performance. If you do set the priority higher, try playing the game using only one of the cores. The system will let the OS use the other cores and your game priority on that one core.
What type of CPU do you have? Ram specs (800mghz or 1033 or what?) maybe defray your hard drive could help given a fragmented hard drive loads data much slower. what is your OS? Win7 has a feature like a MAC where it constantly defrags at a specific time you set. What graphics cards are you running?
I Run 64 bit windows and the 64 bit java already, and set the game up with xmx 2048 xms 1024 to give it plenty of headroom (because somehow its a resource churner).
I dont need to change the priorities really, its just that I have covered that base and made minimal difference anyway.
My CPU is a Quad 9450 @ 3466Mhz, Windows 7 64 bit, and my graphics cards are nVidia 8800GT's which are factory overclocked.
Updating the graphics cards drivers now to see if it will magically fix everything
I had approximately 200% FPS DECREASE with 1.8 vs 1.7. However after applying the HD Texture patch and using the 64x texture pack I've used since I started playing, it's back to 1.7 level of performance. Don't really think it's the textures themselves but I think it has something to do with whatever the patcher changes to make the game support higher res textures.
i can run 70 fps on normal render distance
-fast graphics(i dont see an difference between fast and fancy)
-smooth lighting off(i dont see a difference nor care)
-once optifine comes out i will run better :smile.gif:
I had approximately 200% FPS DECREASE with 1.8 vs 1.7. However after applying the HD Texture patch and using the 64x texture pack I've used since I started playing, it's back to 1.7 level of performance. Don't really think it's the textures themselves but I think it has something to do with whatever the patcher changes to make the game support higher res textures.
it could very well be the 64bit textures. It sounds weird but video cards move more data faster and less data slower. That is a general concept. A 64bit CPU moves 64bit data faster than 16bit data. Opengl is a weird creature.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumThis means that people with shitty GL_ARB_MULTITEXTURE hardware implementations have either visual artifacts or a much slower framerate, which explains a lot of the complaints about 1.8 that I do not identify with, since my video card isn't on the Windows 98 Hardware compatibility list.
I'd suggest altering your video card settings to cap the fps at the hardwares max frequency. When I'm running minecraft it would be over 300fps most of the time and the fan speed on the GPU would pick up. That kind of stress was pointless, since the monitor is only going to hit 60Hz.
Terrain Generation Changes: Which biomes and world-building features are most in need of change?
2800+
1.81 GHz
1.00GB Ram
I believe I have a Radeon video card, too. I'm running at an unsteady 16-45fps on SSP and anywhere from 25-60fps on SMP.
I used to be at least 50-100fps in 1.6 and 1.73, so I took a large drop. I shouldn't have to spend any more than the $350 I had into custom building this machine a few years ago. This machine runs faster than my parent's brand new Vista, and at over 3 years old, this computer is faster than most if not all stock computers, so I can only imagine what less fortunate players are experiencing.
I do plan though sometime to waste some more money on a Win7 and hopefully around 4GB of ram, a nice 4k+ processor and perhaps go quad-core and put it together myself, but don't have the time nor money at the moment.
Wish mine was that good. I get like 13 fps with settings on low and view distance on short. Before I wwould get like 5-7 fps with those settings.
i7 2600K (3.6GHz Quad)
8Gb DDR3 1600
Radeon 6970
Windows 7 Ultimate 64
64bit Java
I'm also running a SSD as my primary drive, but there seems to be no real load on that while playing.
955 BE 3.2ghz processor
Shitty GT430 GPU -- upgrading next month :smile.gif:
7200 RPM HDD
4GB RAM
Win 7 Ult
I have tested both 1.7.3 and 1.8.1 on the same PC with the same scene and same settings....max. I get about 190 in 1.7 and 170 in 1.8. I used FRAPS and got an average from 90 seconds of data. PC. It was on peaceful mod so no mobs. It was an outdoor scene. I'll have to post pics. It can also depend on your video card because some video cards handle opengl better than others.
I dont know how most of you are getting BETTER FPS - my problem is that my single-player world will average around 150FPS, and every 10 seconds will stop entirely and cut to almost 0 fps and then 'recover' for another 10 seconds, and repeat. The same thing happens in the multiplayers but less frequently, except it makes up for that in the insane latency delays I get whenever I join the server or die and respawn. I dont even know what the hell happened to cause this amount of problems between 1.7 and 1.8...
When I look at task manager and even giving it full priority, I notice that it chews almost up to 1gb of ram and constantly uses around 25% CPU. Is this right? I run an overclocked quadcore with 3gb of ram (had more, but was faulty) and two 8800GT's in SLi... I could use less resources running Crysis...
Its completely unplayable and I dislike it enough to want to ditch Minecraft entirely for now, as much as I would like to explore the new stuff in adventure update, its just effed. In 1.7 everything was perfectly fine. Ive reinstalled Minecraft a couple of times, with no change. What do I do? I think the latter rules out that 1.8 is the issue and not my internet or computer, both of which are well beyond what minecraft needs to run.
check your video card drivers. Make sure you are up to date, especially with two cards. There have been problems in the past with two cards and opengl. Opengl is not directX. it doesn't really benefit from multiple cards. The ram might be an issue. You could always try using the 64bit version of java and allowing the game to use more than 1gig of ram. Don't set the priority up too high from normal. That can possibly have a negative effect given java uses the OS as its backbone and if you set the game to high priority then the OS lacks in priority and you could lose performance. If you do set the priority higher, try playing the game using only one of the cores. The system will let the OS use the other cores and your game priority on that one core.
What type of CPU do you have? Ram specs (800mghz or 1033 or what?) maybe defray your hard drive could help given a fragmented hard drive loads data much slower. what is your OS? Win7 has a feature like a MAC where it constantly defrags at a specific time you set. What graphics cards are you running?
whoa whoa whoa, how do you have 1tb of ram? Or by memory do you mean hard drive space?
You have a Intel i7? I have a 6 year old 4 core AMD 3.2 processor and I get the same FPS. Then again, AMD has traditionally been better at handling games than intel. It isn't about the specs or heavy hardware you have. Most of the recent CPU and Video card hardware is based on what is best for DIRECTX because most games use it. Minecraft uses opengl which is a little old now. Also, quad core has no effect on the game because the game only utilizes one core of the CPU. Try updating your java to 64bit. That might give the FPS back. Maybe even try turning off advanced opengl. It is a little odd that your FPS would be halved. Could be the fact that the test scenes for FPS are totally different.
OH the real reason for the FPS difference is obvious. In the first image with 300+ fps there are no chunks being updated. In the other image, you are updating over 100 chunks. That is the reason right there. or at least part of the reason.
I Run 64 bit windows and the 64 bit java already, and set the game up with xmx 2048 xms 1024 to give it plenty of headroom (because somehow its a resource churner).
I dont need to change the priorities really, its just that I have covered that base and made minimal difference anyway.
My CPU is a Quad 9450 @ 3466Mhz, Windows 7 64 bit, and my graphics cards are nVidia 8800GT's which are factory overclocked.
Updating the graphics cards drivers now to see if it will magically fix everything
-fast graphics(i dont see an difference between fast and fancy)
-smooth lighting off(i dont see a difference nor care)
-once optifine comes out i will run better :smile.gif:
it could very well be the 64bit textures. It sounds weird but video cards move more data faster and less data slower. That is a general concept. A 64bit CPU moves 64bit data faster than 16bit data. Opengl is a weird creature.