It's specifically graphics cards that are really going up in price though (other hardware parts are actually really accessible and cheap for what they are), so it's not as simple as silicon shortages, and there's a myriad of reasons for why graphics cards in particular are expensive, but it would be beyond the scope of such a thread to dig into it.
The main statement I wanted to make was that your reaction probably came from the fact that the majority of Minecraft's user base is on hardware that's less capable, so they are going to have a certain skew as to how they label the performance of the game with shaders and when something is echoed enough, it leaves an impression, but in reality you don't need a lot of graphics hardware for shaders. Obviously if you want to play at increased settings, resolution, render distances, or with the more demanding (path traced) shaders there will be increased requirements, but just running them modestly doesn't need a whole lot. My old GTX 1060 ran the majority of them fine, and even graphics performance twice as high is basically entry level now. You really don't need a whole lot. It's just a lot of users probably have that little to begin with.
I'm aware, a friend is using a GTX 1660 to run shaders with Minecraft Java edition on his own PC and it works without stuttering for him. This does demonstrate that light traced shaders can be done even on moderately powerful hardware, it doesn't have to be high end, as many people would assume. Not even my PC is high end, and I am using more powerful graphics hardware currently than him. A starting point for high end would be something with an Nvidia RTX 4070 or equivalent AMD GPU, even then, if the CPU isn't good enough there will be bottlenecks, severe ones.
My point of my statement is that shaders do run well on moderately powerful PC's, and if people don't set their expectations too high,
if they use a 1080p monitor and not a 4k one, they can get away with using shaders in Minecraft without a fuss, on my PC with a 1440p monitor,
I'm able to average about 60-70fps using a shader mod that does have raytracing, and only dips below that when visiting a trading hall, which indicates a CPU problem, not a GPU one. In any case, the trading hall is outside the chunk simulation zone of the castle, so the castle is unaffected by this and I can get good performance even during thunderstorms, and when Phantoms spawn and come to attack.
The main statement I wanted to make was that your reaction probably came from the fact that the majority of Minecraft's user base is on hardware that's less capable, so they are going to have a certain skew as to how they label the performance of the game with shaders and when something is echoed enough, it leaves an impression, but in reality you don't need a lot of graphics hardware for shaders.
Even without shaders it is apparent that a lot of players find the performance of modern versions to be inadequate to say the least, never mind your personal experience (and I believe this is just vanilla 1.6.4, etc you are comparing to), I keep getting posts like this about how TMCW performs compared to modern versions, or other mods with a similar feature set:
TMCWv5.10 is a completely different story.
I maxed out the graphical settings (with fast render on, everything else on fancy/highest) and i got a maximum of 185fps in a freshly generated world.
I then lowered to my usual settings (12chunks, fast render on, everything on fast) and i got a maximum of 251fps on that same world!!!
If we take that my Minecraft 1.20 fps were 15, it would mean that TMCWv5.10 in my hardware is multiplying the performance 15 times compared to 1.20.
The legacy of having started playing on a computer which was absolutely devastated by newer versions (so much this is a major reason I never updated; "why not just mod the caves, biomes, etc to be like 1.6.4?", and I did indeed make mods for those at the time. Because I got like 15 FPS with severe lag spikes and stuttering and while some somehow find that to be playable I certainly don't). Even people with higher-end hardware suffer:
(as I replied to them I simply cannot even begin to fathom how one would need 26 GB(!!!) to run any number of mods, or what sort of programming practices would be that utterly wasteful. I'll note again that I haven't done anything "miraculous" to make TMCW so lightweight for the amount of content it adds, simply that you don't need much resources to add new blocks, mobs, biomes, etc compared to having to store millions of blocks (ideally as arrays of block IDs, not objects!), independently of the number of unique variants (up to 4096) so all that really matters is render distance/world height and I once played with a "triple height" (1.5x the depth of 1.18) mod on hardware that would be nearly 20 years old by now; vanilla vs double height (same as 1.18) on "Far" without Optifine or any other optimizations, can't even say if the FPS is any different from these, I know I didn't notice a difference when actually playing)
Even without shaders it is apparent that a lot of players find the performance of modern versions to be inadequate to say the least...
Which is besides the point since it was specifically the additional impact of shaders that I was referring to? So why does it seem like you are you adding meaning to my words that I did not put behind them?
Complaints about performance aren't exclusive to now. People have been complaining about Minecraft's performance since it existed. Modern versions get more complaints because that's what the overwhelming majority of people play and because expectations are way higher now. I've tried to explain this to you; to explain why "volume of complaints" alone isn't a good substitute for actual performance results, and to explain that variables matter. You can not ignore them, yet you often do.
The very testimonial you are referring to is a good example of this (but you left those other parts out). That person claims "performance was always a problem"; they even claim to have been having lower performance on older versions in their own time, and that later they were getting better performance on (then) modern versions, but that it was still unsatisfactory. Does that not seem to echo something I often state which is "modern versions perform better on period appropriate hardware than older versions did on their period appropriate hardware, but expectations are higher now" to you?
That person is also using a laptop, so extra care needs taken when accepting performance results from them since thermal and power limit factors may be at play. Since they seems to be saying they have to underclock to prevent this, I'd say that's in play here? So that would be a device side issue, and therefore these performance results aren't too meaningful. I'm very happy that person found an answer in your mod though (because that's what matters).
The Ryzen 5 3500U is not a moderately fast CPU anymore (but if that purchase was made in 2021, that was pandemic times so things were tough and I get that). It's a Zen+ generation (which is what the Ryzen 2000 series is, despite the name, because AMD's been awful at their mobile naming consistency), which is like... Intel Skylake-level of performance I think? No, I'm not calling it's awful; I'm just adding context. It's five years old and merely matched stuff that existed years before, and it's a slower variant of that level of performance on top of that. Year of release means nothing; I knew that when I bought a 2013 laptop and its CPU was slower than my Core 2 Duo. Add on to this that the "U" class CPUs from both Intel and AMD are "ultra low voltage" and not meant for high performance or gaming but for low wattage (hence the 15W). So the fact that it's not blowing performance away, especially in a CPU heavy game in particular, is not especially unheard of.
I'm not sure why you're even making an example of that though? You know as well as I do that "maximum frame rate" means little. If they were only getting 15 FPS at a maximum in some modern version, when a Core 2 Duo gets many hundreds, then it's clear there's something more going on. Something like, you know... thermal throttling might really explain this?
But in the end, the person's problem was seemingly resolved, ironically, by throwing hardware at things that exceeded what existed in the time of those versions. The same "throwing hardware at the problem" approach that you seem to come down on me for even implying.
I'm still not sure what any of this even has to do with the original subject of "shaders might not always be as demanding as you might think" though?
Which is besides the point since it was specifically the additional impact of shaders that I was referring to? So why does it seem like you are you adding meaning to my words that I did not put behind them?
Complaints about performance aren't exclusive to now. People have been complaining about Minecraft's performance since it existed. Modern versions get more complaints because that's what the overwhelming majority of people play and because expectations are way higher now. I've tried to explain this to you; to explain why "volume of complaints" alone isn't a good substitute for actual performance results, and to explain that variables matter. You can not ignore them, yet you often do.
The very testimonial you are referring to is a good example of this (but you left those other parts out). That person claims "performance was always a problem"; they even claim to have been having lower performance on older versions in their own time, and that later they were getting better performance on (then) modern versions, but that it was still unsatisfactory. Does that not seem to echo something I often state which is "modern versions perform better on period appropriate hardware than older versions did on their period appropriate hardware, but expectations are higher now" to you?
That person is also using a laptop, so extra care needs taken when accepting performance results from them since thermal and power limit factors may be at play. Since they seems to be saying they have to underclock to prevent this, I'd say that's in play here? So that would be a device side issue, and therefore these performance results aren't too meaningful. I'm very happy that person found an answer in your mod though (because that's what matters).
The Ryzen 5 3500U is not a moderately fast CPU anymore (but if that purchase was made in 2021, that was pandemic times so things were tough and I get that). It's a Zen+ generation (which is what the Ryzen 2000 series is, despite the name, because AMD's been awful at their mobile naming consistency), which is like... Intel Skylake-level of performance I think? No, I'm not calling it's awful; I'm just adding context. It's five years old and merely matched stuff that existed years before, and it's a slower variant of that level of performance on top of that. Year of release means nothing; I knew that when I bought a 2013 laptop and its CPU was slower than my Core 2 Duo. Add on to this that the "U" class CPUs from both Intel and AMD are "ultra low voltage" and not meant for high performance or gaming but for low wattage (hence the 15W). So the fact that it's not blowing performance away, especially in a CPU heavy game in particular, is not especially unheard of.
I'm not sure why you're even making an example of that though? You know as well as I do that "maximum frame rate" means little. If they were only getting 15 FPS at a maximum in some modern version, when a Core 2 Duo gets many hundreds, then it's clear there's something more going on. Something like, you know... thermal throttling might really explain this?
But in the end, the person's problem was seemingly resolved, ironically, by throwing hardware at things that exceeded what existed in the time of those versions. The same "throwing hardware at the problem" approach that you seem to come down on me for even implying.
I'm still not sure what any of this even has to do with the original subject of "shaders might not always be as demanding as you might think" though?
we can't keep throwing more hardware at the problem though, at some point developers need to be asked to work with the constraints of existing hardware.
Hardware can only get so powerful, and generally higher performance hardware of the same generation has higher energy requirements.
As you mentioned, thermal and current limits are the main reasons why laptops can never be as powerful as their desktop counterparts.
I have a cooling pad for my laptop which can help reduce throttling problems, but if I were decide to try to do gaming on my laptop, which is extremely old now and whether or not such an outdated model would adequately run Minecraft Java 1.19, even with Optifine and no shaders, is questionable, it'll work for basic things, can still be used for web browsing and music, but attempting to run Minecraft on it now is probably pushing it as it uses an i5 7200U processor, a dual core with 16gb RAM. The memory is enough but the processor capabilities are limited.
I do see potential in low wattage hardware as time goes on though, I will be honest and I'd like gaming systems to be both more affordable and eco friendly, the throw away mentality people have isn't doing us any favours, and I think it's more sensible that this behaviour is discouraged in favour of a more sustainable future. I do want people to have access to computers, even if they're on low incomes, but it is also important that products be designed to last as well as be high performing.
Not every gaming PC needs to have a 500 watt power supply minimum in order to run reliably,
but there are some video cards, especially on AMD's side, that recommend PSU ratings of over 600w,
which in my opinion is not a good measure of efficiency, and judging by the recent benchmarks between 6700xt and
7700xt, they don't seem to be pushing the envelope in performance to justify this either.
I'm not suggesting we throw hardware at the problem. The good thing is, we don't need to. Minecraft doesn't need exotic hardware to play well. You only need to upgrade if you personally want some degree of higher performance and/or settings. And if you do, that's your own prerogative.
I just found it odd that the discussion wasn't even about the broader subject of performance (you just made a remark of "I'm surprised how well shaders can perform" and I followed up with "mhm, they can need surprisingly little at times because things get exaggerated"), and that was that, yet it got turned into a "there's performance issues with modern versions". Then an example was brought up to contrast the performance issues new versions have that old versions supposedly didn't... while missing that the example given was literally one of someone who had bad performance on old versions with hardware in their time, and needed to "throw hardware at the situation" to resolve it.
I do see potential in low wattage hardware as time goes on though, I will be honest and I'd like gaming systems to be both more affordable and eco friendly, the throw away mentality people have isn't doing us any favours, and I think it's more sensible that this behaviour is discouraged in favour of a more sustainable future. I do want people to have access to computers, even if they're on low incomes, but it is also important that products be designed to last as well as be high performing.
And we've been closer to that then ever in the last decades, largely due to hardware having slowed down in advancement compared to before (though it's picked back up a bit since). If you want to see rapid obsolescence, you would have to look back to those times like in the late 1990s and early 2000s. You could see software come out and have a minimum requirement of something that was only two or three years old. Developers of the time quite literally were of a "throw future hardware at the problem" mindset because things advanced so fast they could get away with it to a degree. The people complaining "I might have to upgrade once a decade" and have their hardware remain very usable for so long don't know how good they have it.
The problem with wishing stuff lasted forever is that it goes against the advancement of hardware. You can't have both. As long as faster hardware is released, then the older hardware will increasingly fall behind in performance. Eventually, either due to people wanting more performance, or old hardware breaking down and losing support, people move on to newer and faster hardware. As a result, people developing software tend to target that "average point". So if you stick to the same hardware long enough, you'll find yourself at the tail end of that window and struggling to get good support and performance. That's... just how it goes. Asking the wider world to just stop moving on is not going to happen.
The good thing is, programs and accessibility to some level of technology (laptops or phones), be it free or just very low cost stuff, exist more than ever. But fast hardware is still a luxury.
Not every gaming PC needs to have a 500 watt power supply minimum in order to run reliably,
Most gaming or typical desktop workloads won't be consuming 500W+ anyway unless you're running the highest tier parts in a generation and doing numerous and/or highly threaded demanding tasks.
It's especially out of hand with Intel's CPUs (consuming like four times the wattage of AMD's X3D's and still just losing out to them in gaming performance), but it's basically an across the board trend. GPUs have been going up too, and that's with all three brands. It's only this latest generation that nVidia has gotten a bit better (last generation AMD was slightly better, so the RTX 30 series stuff nVidia still sells isn't great either). But while AMD is behind in efficiency vis-a-vis when comparing at a given performance level, Vidia's performance also tops out higher than AMD's, so their higher tier stuff isn't exactly going to be sipping power or anything.
I completed the HS Rail line from my base to the Woodland Mansion, and timed how long it takes to get there, just over 4½ minutes. I also moved all of the Rolling Machines I had set up as they were too close to my Immersive Engineering Crusher and there was no room for more of them. Those got located to the NW corner of the roof top of the base, the entire west side of which had been extended another 10m. I added another 9 of them, then moved the Chutes over as well, placing 3 on each machine. Those were later automated using Exporters and some redstone control using RF Tools Redstone Transmitters and Receivers. These are a lot like the old Wireless Redstone mod that Chickenbones made. You click with a transmitter on a receiver to set the channel. I used these extensively in both Stoneblock and Direwolf20 1.12.2.
Next I started getting into one of the old classic mods, IC2. This is the experimental version, but I do believe machines still explode if overpowered. I also found out that an earlier bug when using EMC to duplicate copper cables still exists, but that I can still duplicate the plates and tools (Forge Hammer and Cutter) to make them. I made a total of 5 Geothermal Generators at 20 EU/t each. For power storage I am using the tier 2 CESU. Any tier 1 machines I connect to this will need at least 1 transformer upgrade in them or they will explode. This block stores 300K EU and transfers 128 EU/t. The other storage blocks are the tier 1 Bat Box, which stores 40K and outputs at 32, the tier 3 MFE, which outputs at 512 and stores 4M EU, and the tier 4 MFSU, which outputs 2048 and stores 40M EU. For circuits I found I can use Mekanism Basic Control Circuits, which I have a machine set up for making.
In addition to the transformer upgrades, I will need to make upgrades for overclocking, energy storage, ejector and pulling.
I completed the HS Rail line from my base to the Woodland Mansion, and timed how long it takes to get there, just over 4½ minutes. I also moved all of the Rolling Machines I had set up as they were too close to my Immersive Engineering Crusher and there was no room for more of them. Those got located to the NW corner of the roof top of the base, the entire west side of which had been extended another 10m. I added another 9 of them, then moved the Chutes over as well, placing 3 on each machine. Those were later automated using Exporters and some redstone control using RF Tools Redstone Transmitters and Receivers. These are a lot like the old Wireless Redstone mod that Chickenbones made. You click with a transmitter on a receiver to set the channel. I used these extensively in both Stoneblock and Direwolf20 1.12.2.
This calls for some pics!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Geographicraft (formerly Climate Control) - Control climate, ocean, and land sizes; stop chunk walls; put modded biomes into Default worlds, and more!
RTG plus - All the beautiful terrain of RTG, plus varied and beautiful trees and forests.
Better Forests Varied and beautiful trees and forests, in modern Minecraft.
I've been looking for trail ruins, pillager outposts and pyramids to loot for armor trims and pottery shards because I am building this little basement beauty to display all the rare and expensive stuff I have been finding.
Nice, that's something I'll never have for my builds on my own 1.19.1 server, but what I can do with treasure room designs is put netherite gear or at least diamond armour on armour stands in a room with netherbricks or something like it for decoration. Purpur blocks is another option for decor.
I do like the pottery and armour trims on your world.
I've been raiding End Cities with a friend on my Minecraft server and bagged another 2 stacks and 19 Shulker Shells, our second expedition on this world we're on, I am thinking of going back in next week after a break for more loot, whether with him or in solo. He doesn't like the End dimension as much as I do, in fact I'm the only person on the server who actually likes spending a long time in there. If nobody else joins me for the expedition and chooses to remain in Overworld instead, fine by me.
I'm good at raiding End Ships and I have enough confidence to go back in there on my own anyway after a break.
The extra Shulker Shells would be useful for a city build later on, but I will need to bring in some potion brewing equipment,
as one Shulker Box of Slow Falling will not be enough for the entire trip if I spend up to a week in there. Some of my Shulkers will be going toward the castle build as well, but it's not just shells I'm after, I want more Dragon Heads and getting more Elytras wouldn't hurt either, as some Elytras could be trophy items hung up on display behind glass. The extra End banners would be useful too.
Went looking for armor trims, the count is 4 pillager outposts raided and one mansion burned to the ground and I have zero armor trims to show for it. All I got out of it was one of the new wolf types and two sets of dog armor.
I am not looking forward to breeding and raising cartographers to find mansions in the hope that one of the chests will spawn an armor trim. And don't even get me started on having to find an ancient city and escaping from that place alive.
Went looking for armor trims, the count is 4 pillager outposts raided and one mansion burned to the ground and I have zero armor trims to show for it. All I got out of it was one of the new wolf types and two sets of dog armor.
I am not looking forward to breeding and raising cartographers to find mansions in the hope that one of the chests will spawn an armor trim. And don't even get me started on having to find an ancient city and escaping from that place alive.
I raided a Woodland Mansion with a friend last week, I plan on doing another some point, but not just for the Totems, I'd like to clear it out so he has his own personal base for storage and what have you, I do advise him installing different amenities like an ender chest, a bed, crafting table and furnaces so he can live out there for long periods if he needs to as well.
So on the 5th day in the End expedition, seeking out End cities which I had already raided numerous of them, this happens, misadventure, death by falling out of the world while attempting to Ender Pearl to a different island.
Oh well, I had stored most of my items in the Ender Chest by that time
But I lost a set of enchanted Iron Armour, a Sword, a Diamond Pickaxe, a Bow, a totem of undying, and nearly half a stack of Ender Chests plus 37 levels.
I should have bridged out to this island as it was simply too far for the Ender Pearl to work, then again, had the Ender Chest penalized players for dying by erasing Ender Chest items with the Inventory, I would've bridged out to all of the islands, not just some of them. I would not have risked it with the Ender Pearls except for use with Ender Portals and saving myself from Fall Damage, those type of situations, anything post exploration would be stored in regular chests.
No one is perfect though, and this is only my second death on this world so far.
I did lose expensive gear in inventory, but I'm glad all of the Shulker Shells, Dragon Heads and Elytras I had worked hard for
were safe. It's not like a hardcore world where everything would've been gone with the first mistake.
I find it funny that I sometimes got called "hardcore" by you before and yet I have like... pedestrian and casual levels of some of the resources you're showing there. Just goes to show we all have our things that might make us seem "hardcore" if looked at by itself, but otherwise we might not be. if anything I'd say you're more hardcore than me, but you find death to be a bigger interruption than me because of that, and that's why you find my tolerance to that punishment as "hardcore"?
Seriously though, there's more shulker shells in that single chest than I've collectively gathered... ever. And by a lot. I don't think I've ever collected more than a stack or two of them total. I've never needed more than that. I just need enough that an ender chest can hold them and I've only collected them across three worlds.
I presume you're gathering these for some other reason? Like for other players?
I find it funny that I sometimes got called "hardcore" by you before and yet I have like... pedestrian and casual levels of some of the resources you're showing there. Just goes to show we all have our things that might make us seem "hardcore" if looked at by itself, but otherwise we might not be. if anything I'd say you're more hardcore than me, but you find death to be a bigger interruption than me because of that, and that's why you find my tolerance to that punishment as "hardcore"?
Seriously though, there's more shulker shells in that single chest than I've collectively gathered... ever. And by a lot. I don't think I've ever collected more than a stack or two of them total. I've never needed more than that. I just need enough that an ender chest can hold them and I've only collected them across three worlds.
I presume you're gathering these for some other reason? Like for other players?
Correct, some of these shells were for other players. But the remaining 4 stacks and 57 shulker shells were for myself and my projects. I only need the 1 stack and 57 shells for the Castle I mentioned before on this thread. The remaining 3 stacks are spares and miscellaneous items for other builds, or even if I don't use the extras for builds necessarily, I can use them to expand storage capacity of two barrels and have the remainder as backpacks so to speak, as they can expand storage capacity by 27 times.
I had been on multiple End Expeditions to get these, not just one, I did about 3 with friends a while back, 2 of them were with a 2nd player, the most recent and fourth expedition is by myself in End. Before I went in on my own, I had 2 stacks and 7 Shulker Shells from previous expeditions, so in my solo End city raids I managed to grab an additional 7 stacks and something Shulker Shells, which don't get me wrong, is quite a lot, but I added these to my stockpile of gear I had before I went in. It paid off though, as I had remembered to store each and every item in Ender Chest before mishandling an Ender Pearl throw.
So on the 5th day in the End expedition, seeking out End cities which I had already raided numerous of them, this happens, misadventure, death by falling out of the world while attempting to Ender Pearl to a different island.
Oh well, I had stored most of my items in the Ender Chest by that time
But I lost a set of enchanted Iron Armour, a Sword, a Diamond Pickaxe, a Bow, a totem of undying, and nearly half a stack of Ender Chests plus 37 levels.
I should have bridged out to this island as it was simply too far for the Ender Pearl to work, then again, had the Ender Chest penalized players for dying by erasing Ender Chest items with the Inventory, I would've bridged out to all of the islands, not just some of them. I would not have risked it with the Ender Pearls except for use with Ender Portals and saving myself from Fall Damage, those type of situations, anything post exploration would be stored in regular chests.
No one is perfect though, and this is only my second death on this world so far.
I did lose expensive gear in inventory, but I'm glad all of the Shulker Shells, Dragon Heads and Elytras I had worked hard for
were safe. It's not like a hardcore world where everything would've been gone with the first mistake.
That's unfortunate. An elytra and some fireworks would have been life saving here. I rarely try to pearl across islands that far apart as I've also died multiple times this same way.
I'm curious why you brought that many ender chests though. Did you not have Silk Touch on your pickaxe?
That's unfortunate. An elytra and some fireworks would have been life saving here. I rarely try to pearl across islands that far apart as I've also died multiple times this same way.
I'm curious why you brought that many ender chests though. Did you not have Silk Touch on your pickaxe?
Actually I only brought 2 Ender Chests to start off with, the other ones were looted from End Cities, but I guess I probably should have stashed the majority of them in the Ender Chest itself after all, as that's nearly 4 stacks of obsidian worth of gear and half a stack of eye of ender down the pan.
I had no Creeper farm, getting enough gunpowder for fireworks would've been too much of a hassle to bother with, so I didn't bring an Enchanted Elytra with me. I had some practice on a test world with an Elytra, I know how to use one, but without fireworks, flight is impossible in vanilla SMP.
I guess it was foolish to not have the Fireworks ready before this trip, but it's too late for that now, as I said before though, if the Ender Chest didn't protect gear upon dying, I would have been more cautious and just bridged out to every island instead.
I wasn't too bothered about the possibility of losing my inventory, I gained more than I lost, so it's whatever,
but I am disappointed about the 37 levels gone, as I needed those for enchanting Wither boss gear later on.
Hello, I thought I'd post some things from my survival world. Between each picture, I will give a little description!
Today, I worked on the path to my church-y building - which I made yesterday. See below!
I'm going to tweak the path and the colors as I acquire more blocks. As you'll see closer in the next picture, the path is made up of cobble, gravel, and dirt. It was important to me to make sure no two blocks repeated very often. Repeats aren't too bad, but having a lot of similar colored blocks, I found it to add layers to the visuals. LOTS OF GREY, I KNOW!
However, here's a picture of the chuch-y building that houses my enchanting setup. I like how it turned out and my latest additions include: glow lichen and polished tuff. The lichen and tuff both give a green/blue hue to the grey, making it stand out more.
Here's another angle!
I admit that it can be an eyesore for the lack of color. As I said before, I like to add colors and more blocks to my older builds as I get them so even I expect it to change over time. I may add darker stones to the roof trim for more definition, but the strong stone feel is something I like. Also also, if ya check under the bushes, you can see I put rooted dirt as if there are *duh* roots. I only put them in the center bush, leaving coarse dirt for the other bush bases. When deciding what becomes mossy I kinda thought: close to grass = mossy; close to bush = mossy; close to a mossy block = mossy.
Lastly, I'm including my little homestead logged in the valley. It is so much prettier than the church, and their differences are what I appreciate.
Not the best angle, but it captures the rest of my property well. As you can see, I made the path wind down rather than super straight. Obviously, this picture can't capture it all perfectly but it gets the point across. As for my home, the small hut on the left was the initial one. That shed includes oak wood, planks, stripped oak wood, and spruce wood. The patchiness on the roof was my attempt at giving a more 'lived-in' or 'put-together' home.
On the right of the small hut sits my new home. This home uses the same blocks as the hut but in a more 'standard way'. The roof is all spruce, the windows are white glass panes on the top, full blocks on the bottom, and there's a basement too!
I don't want to ramble and just wanted to share what I've done so far with just anyone - replies or not! I'll improve my screenshot abilities as I go on because tbh some of these don't capture the builds well. Or, I need to build better. Either way, thanks for reading, and would love any constructive input/thoughts!
Quick edit: here's my farm featured in the last picture.
For some reason, the pictures don't work, but the attachments are there so I'm presuming they are the same pictures.
If there's one thing I don't do well, it's a more natural or random look. All of my stuff is pretty... structured and systematic in design I guess. I've wanted to try and break from that at times, but I'm also happy with how I do it.
I had no Creeper farm, getting enough gunpowder for fireworks would've been too much of a hassle to bother with, so I didn't bring an Enchanted Elytra with me. I had some practice on a test world with an Elytra, I know how to use one, but without fireworks, flight is impossible in vanilla SMP.
I guess it was foolish to not have the Fireworks ready before this trip, but it's too late for that now, as I said before though, if the Ender Chest didn't protect gear upon dying, I would have been more cautious and just bridged out to every island instead.
Wait, what!?
I was already impressed seeing how much shulkers you got, but... you did all that without any elytra!? Yeah, I'd have given up long before that. Traversing the end without elytra is something I can only tolerate for so long. It's fun and challenging to do it to earn your first one, but I'd never do it that much.
I'm aware, a friend is using a GTX 1660 to run shaders with Minecraft Java edition on his own PC and it works without stuttering for him. This does demonstrate that light traced shaders can be done even on moderately powerful hardware, it doesn't have to be high end, as many people would assume. Not even my PC is high end, and I am using more powerful graphics hardware currently than him. A starting point for high end would be something with an Nvidia RTX 4070 or equivalent AMD GPU, even then, if the CPU isn't good enough there will be bottlenecks, severe ones.
My point of my statement is that shaders do run well on moderately powerful PC's, and if people don't set their expectations too high,
if they use a 1080p monitor and not a 4k one, they can get away with using shaders in Minecraft without a fuss, on my PC with a 1440p monitor,
I'm able to average about 60-70fps using a shader mod that does have raytracing, and only dips below that when visiting a trading hall, which indicates a CPU problem, not a GPU one. In any case, the trading hall is outside the chunk simulation zone of the castle, so the castle is unaffected by this and I can get good performance even during thunderstorms, and when Phantoms spawn and come to attack.
Even without shaders it is apparent that a lot of players find the performance of modern versions to be inadequate to say the least, never mind your personal experience (and I believe this is just vanilla 1.6.4, etc you are comparing to), I keep getting posts like this about how TMCW performs compared to modern versions, or other mods with a similar feature set:
The legacy of having started playing on a computer which was absolutely devastated by newer versions (so much this is a major reason I never updated; "why not just mod the caves, biomes, etc to be like 1.6.4?", and I did indeed make mods for those at the time. Because I got like 15 FPS with severe lag spikes and stuttering and while some somehow find that to be playable I certainly don't). Even people with higher-end hardware suffer:
https://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft/discussion/3200878-how-many-ram-should-be-enough-for-1100-mods
(as I replied to them I simply cannot even begin to fathom how one would need 26 GB(!!!) to run any number of mods, or what sort of programming practices would be that utterly wasteful. I'll note again that I haven't done anything "miraculous" to make TMCW so lightweight for the amount of content it adds, simply that you don't need much resources to add new blocks, mobs, biomes, etc compared to having to store millions of blocks (ideally as arrays of block IDs, not objects!), independently of the number of unique variants (up to 4096) so all that really matters is render distance/world height and I once played with a "triple height" (1.5x the depth of 1.18) mod on hardware that would be nearly 20 years old by now; vanilla vs double height (same as 1.18) on "Far" without Optifine or any other optimizations, can't even say if the FPS is any different from these, I know I didn't notice a difference when actually playing)
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?
Which is besides the point since it was specifically the additional impact of shaders that I was referring to? So why does it seem like you are you adding meaning to my words that I did not put behind them?
Complaints about performance aren't exclusive to now. People have been complaining about Minecraft's performance since it existed. Modern versions get more complaints because that's what the overwhelming majority of people play and because expectations are way higher now. I've tried to explain this to you; to explain why "volume of complaints" alone isn't a good substitute for actual performance results, and to explain that variables matter. You can not ignore them, yet you often do.
The very testimonial you are referring to is a good example of this (but you left those other parts out). That person claims "performance was always a problem"; they even claim to have been having lower performance on older versions in their own time, and that later they were getting better performance on (then) modern versions, but that it was still unsatisfactory. Does that not seem to echo something I often state which is "modern versions perform better on period appropriate hardware than older versions did on their period appropriate hardware, but expectations are higher now" to you?
That person is also using a laptop, so extra care needs taken when accepting performance results from them since thermal and power limit factors may be at play. Since they seems to be saying they have to underclock to prevent this, I'd say that's in play here? So that would be a device side issue, and therefore these performance results aren't too meaningful. I'm very happy that person found an answer in your mod though (because that's what matters).
The Ryzen 5 3500U is not a moderately fast CPU anymore (but if that purchase was made in 2021, that was pandemic times so things were tough and I get that). It's a Zen+ generation (which is what the Ryzen 2000 series is, despite the name, because AMD's been awful at their mobile naming consistency), which is like... Intel Skylake-level of performance I think? No, I'm not calling it's awful; I'm just adding context. It's five years old and merely matched stuff that existed years before, and it's a slower variant of that level of performance on top of that. Year of release means nothing; I knew that when I bought a 2013 laptop and its CPU was slower than my Core 2 Duo. Add on to this that the "U" class CPUs from both Intel and AMD are "ultra low voltage" and not meant for high performance or gaming but for low wattage (hence the 15W). So the fact that it's not blowing performance away, especially in a CPU heavy game in particular, is not especially unheard of.
I'm not sure why you're even making an example of that though? You know as well as I do that "maximum frame rate" means little. If they were only getting 15 FPS at a maximum in some modern version, when a Core 2 Duo gets many hundreds, then it's clear there's something more going on. Something like, you know... thermal throttling might really explain this?
But in the end, the person's problem was seemingly resolved, ironically, by throwing hardware at things that exceeded what existed in the time of those versions. The same "throwing hardware at the problem" approach that you seem to come down on me for even implying.
I'm still not sure what any of this even has to do with the original subject of "shaders might not always be as demanding as you might think" though?
we can't keep throwing more hardware at the problem though, at some point developers need to be asked to work with the constraints of existing hardware.
Hardware can only get so powerful, and generally higher performance hardware of the same generation has higher energy requirements.
As you mentioned, thermal and current limits are the main reasons why laptops can never be as powerful as their desktop counterparts.
I have a cooling pad for my laptop which can help reduce throttling problems, but if I were decide to try to do gaming on my laptop, which is extremely old now and whether or not such an outdated model would adequately run Minecraft Java 1.19, even with Optifine and no shaders, is questionable, it'll work for basic things, can still be used for web browsing and music, but attempting to run Minecraft on it now is probably pushing it as it uses an i5 7200U processor, a dual core with 16gb RAM. The memory is enough but the processor capabilities are limited.
I do see potential in low wattage hardware as time goes on though, I will be honest and I'd like gaming systems to be both more affordable and eco friendly, the throw away mentality people have isn't doing us any favours, and I think it's more sensible that this behaviour is discouraged in favour of a more sustainable future. I do want people to have access to computers, even if they're on low incomes, but it is also important that products be designed to last as well as be high performing.
Not every gaming PC needs to have a 500 watt power supply minimum in order to run reliably,
but there are some video cards, especially on AMD's side, that recommend PSU ratings of over 600w,
which in my opinion is not a good measure of efficiency, and judging by the recent benchmarks between 6700xt and
7700xt, they don't seem to be pushing the envelope in performance to justify this either.
I'm not suggesting we throw hardware at the problem. The good thing is, we don't need to. Minecraft doesn't need exotic hardware to play well. You only need to upgrade if you personally want some degree of higher performance and/or settings. And if you do, that's your own prerogative.
I just found it odd that the discussion wasn't even about the broader subject of performance (you just made a remark of "I'm surprised how well shaders can perform" and I followed up with "mhm, they can need surprisingly little at times because things get exaggerated"), and that was that, yet it got turned into a "there's performance issues with modern versions". Then an example was brought up to contrast the performance issues new versions have that old versions supposedly didn't... while missing that the example given was literally one of someone who had bad performance on old versions with hardware in their time, and needed to "throw hardware at the situation" to resolve it.
And we've been closer to that then ever in the last decades, largely due to hardware having slowed down in advancement compared to before (though it's picked back up a bit since). If you want to see rapid obsolescence, you would have to look back to those times like in the late 1990s and early 2000s. You could see software come out and have a minimum requirement of something that was only two or three years old. Developers of the time quite literally were of a "throw future hardware at the problem" mindset because things advanced so fast they could get away with it to a degree. The people complaining "I might have to upgrade once a decade" and have their hardware remain very usable for so long don't know how good they have it.
The problem with wishing stuff lasted forever is that it goes against the advancement of hardware. You can't have both. As long as faster hardware is released, then the older hardware will increasingly fall behind in performance. Eventually, either due to people wanting more performance, or old hardware breaking down and losing support, people move on to newer and faster hardware. As a result, people developing software tend to target that "average point". So if you stick to the same hardware long enough, you'll find yourself at the tail end of that window and struggling to get good support and performance. That's... just how it goes. Asking the wider world to just stop moving on is not going to happen.
The good thing is, programs and accessibility to some level of technology (laptops or phones), be it free or just very low cost stuff, exist more than ever. But fast hardware is still a luxury.
Most gaming or typical desktop workloads won't be consuming 500W+ anyway unless you're running the highest tier parts in a generation and doing numerous and/or highly threaded demanding tasks.
It's especially out of hand with Intel's CPUs (consuming like four times the wattage of AMD's X3D's and still just losing out to them in gaming performance), but it's basically an across the board trend. GPUs have been going up too, and that's with all three brands. It's only this latest generation that nVidia has gotten a bit better (last generation AMD was slightly better, so the RTX 30 series stuff nVidia still sells isn't great either). But while AMD is behind in efficiency vis-a-vis when comparing at a given performance level, Vidia's performance also tops out higher than AMD's, so their higher tier stuff isn't exactly going to be sipping power or anything.
Playing Minecraft with Good ol' pals.
I completed the HS Rail line from my base to the Woodland Mansion, and timed how long it takes to get there, just over 4½ minutes. I also moved all of the Rolling Machines I had set up as they were too close to my Immersive Engineering Crusher and there was no room for more of them. Those got located to the NW corner of the roof top of the base, the entire west side of which had been extended another 10m. I added another 9 of them, then moved the Chutes over as well, placing 3 on each machine. Those were later automated using Exporters and some redstone control using RF Tools Redstone Transmitters and Receivers. These are a lot like the old Wireless Redstone mod that Chickenbones made. You click with a transmitter on a receiver to set the channel. I used these extensively in both Stoneblock and Direwolf20 1.12.2.
Next I started getting into one of the old classic mods, IC2. This is the experimental version, but I do believe machines still explode if overpowered. I also found out that an earlier bug when using EMC to duplicate copper cables still exists, but that I can still duplicate the plates and tools (Forge Hammer and Cutter) to make them. I made a total of 5 Geothermal Generators at 20 EU/t each. For power storage I am using the tier 2 CESU. Any tier 1 machines I connect to this will need at least 1 transformer upgrade in them or they will explode. This block stores 300K EU and transfers 128 EU/t. The other storage blocks are the tier 1 Bat Box, which stores 40K and outputs at 32, the tier 3 MFE, which outputs at 512 and stores 4M EU, and the tier 4 MFSU, which outputs 2048 and stores 40M EU. For circuits I found I can use Mekanism Basic Control Circuits, which I have a machine set up for making.
In addition to the transformer upgrades, I will need to make upgrades for overclocking, energy storage, ejector and pulling.
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumThis calls for some pics!
Geographicraft (formerly Climate Control) - Control climate, ocean, and land sizes; stop chunk walls; put modded biomes into Default worlds, and more!
RTG plus - All the beautiful terrain of RTG, plus varied and beautiful trees and forests.
Better Forests Varied and beautiful trees and forests, in modern Minecraft.
I've been looking for trail ruins, pillager outposts and pyramids to loot for armor trims and pottery shards because I am building this little basement beauty to display all the rare and expensive stuff I have been finding.
Update to the build.
I'm so tired of cleaning out trial ruins.
Nice, that's something I'll never have for my builds on my own 1.19.1 server, but what I can do with treasure room designs is put netherite gear or at least diamond armour on armour stands in a room with netherbricks or something like it for decoration. Purpur blocks is another option for decor.
I do like the pottery and armour trims on your world.
I've been raiding End Cities with a friend on my Minecraft server and bagged another 2 stacks and 19 Shulker Shells, our second expedition on this world we're on, I am thinking of going back in next week after a break for more loot, whether with him or in solo. He doesn't like the End dimension as much as I do, in fact I'm the only person on the server who actually likes spending a long time in there. If nobody else joins me for the expedition and chooses to remain in Overworld instead, fine by me.
I'm good at raiding End Ships and I have enough confidence to go back in there on my own anyway after a break.
The extra Shulker Shells would be useful for a city build later on, but I will need to bring in some potion brewing equipment,
as one Shulker Box of Slow Falling will not be enough for the entire trip if I spend up to a week in there. Some of my Shulkers will be going toward the castle build as well, but it's not just shells I'm after, I want more Dragon Heads and getting more Elytras wouldn't hurt either, as some Elytras could be trophy items hung up on display behind glass. The extra End banners would be useful too.
Went looking for armor trims, the count is 4 pillager outposts raided and one mansion burned to the ground and I have zero armor trims to show for it. All I got out of it was one of the new wolf types and two sets of dog armor.
I am not looking forward to breeding and raising cartographers to find mansions in the hope that one of the chests will spawn an armor trim. And don't even get me started on having to find an ancient city and escaping from that place alive.
I raided a Woodland Mansion with a friend last week, I plan on doing another some point, but not just for the Totems, I'd like to clear it out so he has his own personal base for storage and what have you, I do advise him installing different amenities like an ender chest, a bed, crafting table and furnaces so he can live out there for long periods if he needs to as well.
So on the 5th day in the End expedition, seeking out End cities which I had already raided numerous of them, this happens, misadventure, death by falling out of the world while attempting to Ender Pearl to a different island.
Oh well, I had stored most of my items in the Ender Chest by that time
But I lost a set of enchanted Iron Armour, a Sword, a Diamond Pickaxe, a Bow, a totem of undying, and nearly half a stack of Ender Chests plus 37 levels.
I should have bridged out to this island as it was simply too far for the Ender Pearl to work, then again, had the Ender Chest penalized players for dying by erasing Ender Chest items with the Inventory, I would've bridged out to all of the islands, not just some of them. I would not have risked it with the Ender Pearls except for use with Ender Portals and saving myself from Fall Damage, those type of situations, anything post exploration would be stored in regular chests.
No one is perfect though, and this is only my second death on this world so far.
I did lose expensive gear in inventory, but I'm glad all of the Shulker Shells, Dragon Heads and Elytras I had worked hard for
were safe. It's not like a hardcore world where everything would've been gone with the first mistake.
I find it funny that I sometimes got called "hardcore" by you before and yet I have like... pedestrian and casual levels of some of the resources you're showing there. Just goes to show we all have our things that might make us seem "hardcore" if looked at by itself, but otherwise we might not be. if anything I'd say you're more hardcore than me, but you find death to be a bigger interruption than me because of that, and that's why you find my tolerance to that punishment as "hardcore"?
Seriously though, there's more shulker shells in that single chest than I've collectively gathered... ever. And by a lot. I don't think I've ever collected more than a stack or two of them total. I've never needed more than that. I just need enough that an ender chest can hold them and I've only collected them across three worlds.
I presume you're gathering these for some other reason? Like for other players?
Correct, some of these shells were for other players. But the remaining 4 stacks and 57 shulker shells were for myself and my projects. I only need the 1 stack and 57 shells for the Castle I mentioned before on this thread. The remaining 3 stacks are spares and miscellaneous items for other builds, or even if I don't use the extras for builds necessarily, I can use them to expand storage capacity of two barrels and have the remainder as backpacks so to speak, as they can expand storage capacity by 27 times.
I had been on multiple End Expeditions to get these, not just one, I did about 3 with friends a while back, 2 of them were with a 2nd player, the most recent and fourth expedition is by myself in End. Before I went in on my own, I had 2 stacks and 7 Shulker Shells from previous expeditions, so in my solo End city raids I managed to grab an additional 7 stacks and something Shulker Shells, which don't get me wrong, is quite a lot, but I added these to my stockpile of gear I had before I went in. It paid off though, as I had remembered to store each and every item in Ender Chest before mishandling an Ender Pearl throw.
That's unfortunate. An elytra and some fireworks would have been life saving here. I rarely try to pearl across islands that far apart as I've also died multiple times this same way.
I'm curious why you brought that many ender chests though. Did you not have Silk Touch on your pickaxe?
Actually I only brought 2 Ender Chests to start off with, the other ones were looted from End Cities, but I guess I probably should have stashed the majority of them in the Ender Chest itself after all, as that's nearly 4 stacks of obsidian worth of gear and half a stack of eye of ender down the pan.
I had no Creeper farm, getting enough gunpowder for fireworks would've been too much of a hassle to bother with, so I didn't bring an Enchanted Elytra with me. I had some practice on a test world with an Elytra, I know how to use one, but without fireworks, flight is impossible in vanilla SMP.
I guess it was foolish to not have the Fireworks ready before this trip, but it's too late for that now, as I said before though, if the Ender Chest didn't protect gear upon dying, I would have been more cautious and just bridged out to every island instead.
I wasn't too bothered about the possibility of losing my inventory, I gained more than I lost, so it's whatever,
but I am disappointed about the 37 levels gone, as I needed those for enchanting Wither boss gear later on.
Hello, I thought I'd post some things from my survival world. Between each picture, I will give a little description!
Today, I worked on the path to my church-y building - which I made yesterday. See below!
I'm going to tweak the path and the colors as I acquire more blocks. As you'll see closer in the next picture, the path is made up of cobble, gravel, and dirt. It was important to me to make sure no two blocks repeated very often. Repeats aren't too bad, but having a lot of similar colored blocks, I found it to add layers to the visuals. LOTS OF GREY, I KNOW!
However, here's a picture of the chuch-y building that houses my enchanting setup. I like how it turned out and my latest additions include: glow lichen and polished tuff. The lichen and tuff both give a green/blue hue to the grey, making it stand out more.
Lastly, I'm including my little homestead logged in the valley. It is so much prettier than the church, and their differences are what I appreciate.
Not the best angle, but it captures the rest of my property well. As you can see, I made the path wind down rather than super straight. Obviously, this picture can't capture it all perfectly but it gets the point across. As for my home, the small hut on the left was the initial one. That shed includes oak wood, planks, stripped oak wood, and spruce wood. The patchiness on the roof was my attempt at giving a more 'lived-in' or 'put-together' home.
On the right of the small hut sits my new home. This home uses the same blocks as the hut but in a more 'standard way'. The roof is all spruce, the windows are white glass panes on the top, full blocks on the bottom, and there's a basement too!
I don't want to ramble and just wanted to share what I've done so far with just anyone - replies or not! I'll improve my screenshot abilities as I go on because tbh some of these don't capture the builds well. Or, I need to build better. Either way, thanks for reading, and would love any constructive input/thoughts!
Quick edit: here's my farm featured in the last picture.
For some reason, the pictures don't work, but the attachments are there so I'm presuming they are the same pictures.
If there's one thing I don't do well, it's a more natural or random look. All of my stuff is pretty... structured and systematic in design I guess. I've wanted to try and break from that at times, but I'm also happy with how I do it.
Wait, what!?
I was already impressed seeing how much shulkers you got, but... you did all that without any elytra!? Yeah, I'd have given up long before that. Traversing the end without elytra is something I can only tolerate for so long. It's fun and challenging to do it to earn your first one, but I'd never do it that much.