The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything.
Join Date:
2/4/2016
Posts:
57
Member Details
I'm seeing sports out there from people getting hundreds of fps, from forums dated back in 2012.
I'm running a 4ghz i7 with an r9 390 with 16 gigs of RAM and even just trying without any mods, no texture pack, no shaders, nothing, I'm getting 34ish fps when chunks are loading. 104 when they're done and I'm not moving.
With a ton of mods, 128x textures and SEUS running, at 24 chunk distance, I'm getting 25 FPS. With no shaders on, I'm getting around 75, both after chunks are stable.
I just installed that processor. It's the same number of threads, but it's 4ghz instead of 3.2. the upgrade caused ZERO difference to performance.
Watching the task manager, no core goes above 40% usage at the peak, and it hovers around 9% across the board when the game is running but idle.
Java is up to date, 64-bit. Graphics drivers were up to date this whole time, but just downgraded to fix an issue with transparent hands/tools while running shaders.
I've gone through every single optifine setting over and over again. I've tried loading with no mods at all. Various different resource packs, no resource packs. I've scanned my PC for malware. I used to remove viruses for a living. I know how to prevent them from happening in the first place and my scan confirm its still clean. I've manually gone through all installed programs to make sure unwanted programs have not snuck their way through.
I should be able to run unmodded Minecraft with default textures at like 500 fps. I should be able to run 128x textures with SEUS at least a stable 45 if not 60 fps compared to the specs from people out there on YouTube with similar setups. Please help. I spent a bunch of money upgrading the processor because everyone talks about how CPU hungry this game can be, but not if it's not using it.
You are VERY mistaken on how FPS is determined. It's mostly based around GPU speed - you can't boost you're FPS by getting a better processor unless the program's render thread is underpacing the GPU. So, on Minecraft, upgrading from a 3.2 GHz to a 4 GHz processor will have NO effect on the FPS at all.
The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything.
Join Date:
2/4/2016
Posts:
57
Member Details
OK, now read the rest of the post. You are VERY mistaken on what the problem is.
And no, not on this game. It's primarily CPU-based. And that wouldn't even matter, being that the game is not utilizing either to its fullest. I should still be getting much, much better performance than that, even before the upgrade. I'm running an AMD R9 390, it should be blowing this game out of the water if it was GPU-based.
OK, now read the rest of the post. You are VERY mistaken on what the problem is.
And no, not on this game. It's primarily CPU-based. And that wouldn't even matter, being that the game is not utilizing either to its fullest. I should still be getting much, much better performance than that, even before the upgrade. I'm running an AMD R9 390, it should be blowing this game out of the water if it was GPU-based.
I DID read the post, and you are still wrong. People can run Minecraft at very high FPS, with shaders and mods, with a 3 GHz CPU. You might not have Minecraft set to the right GPU is all, if your computer has more than one. Trust me, I run Minecraft on a potato and your problem is NOT CPU-based.
I DID read the post, and you are still wrong. People can run Minecraft at very high FPS, with shaders and mods, with a 3 GHz CPU. You might not have Minecraft set to the right GPU is all, if your computer has more than one. Trust me, I run Minecraft on a potato and your problem is NOT CPU-based.
A ) I did not say the problem was CPU based. You'd know that if you read the whole thing.
B ) The fact that people can run it better on a potato THAT DOESN'T EVEN HAVE A GRAPHICS CARD is the problem. THIS setup should be capable of running the game better from absolutely every single angle, from the CPU to the GPU to the memory to the SSD. So SOMETHING is wrong.
And you are still wrong. The shaders utilize the GPU, but a straight up vanilla game, which is mentioned in my post, should be running almost entirely off of a single thread on the CPU. I should be getting like 700 FPS standing still on a vanilla game. I'm getting 104. I refer you, again, to the video I posted of a very similar setup running even more demanding stuff at a much much faster rate. My setup is nearly identical to the setup on the video I posted. The game is not taxing my CPU, GPU hard drive or memory. None of these are the bottleneck.
I appreciate your attempt to help, but it is clear you don't understand the issue and this isn't helping. I know you mean well, I'm not trying to be mean about it, but this is very frustrating and I don't need someone that doesn't know what they're talking about trying to talk down to me. I will wait for someone with a better idea of what the problem is.
A ) I did not say the problem was CPU based. You'd know that if you read the whole thing.
B ) The fact that people can run it better on a potato THAT DOESN'T EVEN HAVE A GRAPHICS CARD is the problem. THIS setup should be capable of running the game better from absolutely every single angle, from the CPU to the GPU to the memory to the SSD. So SOMETHING is wrong.
And you are still wrong. The shaders utilize the GPU, but a straight up vanilla game, which is mentioned in my post, should be running almost entirely off of a single thread on the CPU. I should be getting like 700 FPS standing still on a vanilla game. I'm getting 104. I refer you, again, to the video I posted of a very similar setup running even more demanding stuff at a much much faster rate. My setup is nearly identical to the setup on the video I posted. The game is not taxing my CPU, GPU hard drive or memory. None of these are the bottleneck.
I appreciate your attempt to help, but it is clear you don't understand the issue and this isn't helping. I know you mean well, I'm not trying to be mean about it, but this is very frustrating and I don't need someone that doesn't know what they're talking about trying to talk down to me. I will wait for someone with a better idea of what the problem is.
A. You IMPLIED it was due to low CPU usage, as that is the only stat you gave.
B. Minecraft can't run without a GPU (not the java version at least), as it requires OpenGL. You probably meant on integrated graphics - may I point out in my last post I said minecraft MAY be running on the wrong GPU if you have 2 - it likes to default to integrated graphics where available.
The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything.
Join Date:
2/4/2016
Posts:
57
Member Details
I felt, and still feel like you read part of it, thought I was a dummy and skimmed the rest. I even understand the impulse, I've been on the internet. Please understand I'm already super frustrated with the situation. I'll move on from that, though, because you didn't know.
My specs are nearly identical to the person who posted the nice looking video above. Same processor, AMD equivalent graphics card (only mine is higher rated and has 8gigs of dedicated ram), 16 gigs of high end ram, SSD. I believe we can all agree the performance should be better.
I will look into whether or not it's trying to use integrated graphics. If that does it, I will personally hug you until you suffocate.
Well, you're safe. That doesn't seem to be it. I went through the BIOS. It's set to PCI Express. Unless there's more to it than that. But I went through all the AMD software looking for anything to do with it, nada. And, when I run a scanner to measure the GPU load, which is only recognizing the r9 390, the game does cause it to react.
It starts getting little spikes about a second long, up to about 25% on the loading screen, will hit 100 a few times very very briefly once the menu loads up, back down to nothing while the "building terrain" screen does its thing. Game starts showing up and loading chunks. Still very quick spikes, but we are occasionally scraping the top of the graph. Average GPU load while wiggling the mouse around to looking all directions occasionally, and letting it sit for a bit, while the world is fully loaded is 56%, though it does keep spiking very briefly to 100% The CPU continues to feel barely inconvenienced.
If it's relevant, just before this world, I did set up a server on this same of with most of the same mods. While running both the server and the game from the same PC, I noticed significant drops in FPS. Predictable since my PC was doing more work. But since the GPU shouldn't be at all concerned with the software, it was evidence to me that the CPU was the bottleneck. This was further reinforced by my Oculus software saying that the processor was the weak link there as well.
There should have been some difference. At least some. That there isn't is a sign that this game has never been set right on this PC. Because it's not using up all of anything. Nothing is holding it back.
Well, you're safe. That doesn't seem to be it. I went through the BIOS. It's set to PCI Express. Unless there's more to it than that. But I went through all the AMD software looking for anything to do with it, nada. And, when I run a scanner to measure the GPU load, which is only recognizing the r9 390, the game does cause it to react.
It starts getting little spikes about a second long, up to about 25% on the loading screen, will hit 100 a few times very very briefly once the menu loads up, back down to nothing while the "building terrain" screen does its thing. Game starts showing up and loading chunks. Still very quick spikes, but we are occasionally scraping the top of the graph. Average GPU load while wiggling the mouse around to looking all directions occasionally, and letting it sit for a bit, while the world is fully loaded is 56%, though it does keep spiking very briefly to 100% The CPU continues to feel barely inconvenienced.
If it's relevant, just before this world, I did set up a server on this same of with most of the same mods. While running both the server and the game from the same PC, I noticed significant drops in FPS. Predictable since my PC was doing more work. But since the GPU shouldn't be at all concerned with the software, it was evidence to me that the CPU was the bottleneck. This was further reinforced by my Oculus software saying that the processor was the weak link there as well.
There should have been some difference. At least some. That there isn't is a sign that this game has never been set right on this PC. Because it's not using up all of anything. Nothing is holding it back.
The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything.
Join Date:
2/4/2016
Posts:
57
Member Details
I checked the heat. CPU cores floating around 95°, GPU maxed out at 96°.
Went through what I could for that link. It was looking like nothing would apply because none of the options they were talking about were showing up. I checked the device manager and the only graphics card is the main card. I don't think it's trying to insert any on board graphics. I think we hit a dead end.
I checked the heat. CPU cores floating around 95°, GPU maxed out at 96°.
Went through what I could for that link. It was looking like nothing would apply because none of the options they were talking about were showing up. I checked the device manager and the only graphics card is the main card. I don't think it's trying to insert any on board graphics. I think we hit a dead end.
It's definitely overheating throttling. (reference: http://www.buildcomputers.net/cpu-temperature.html)
You need to get some sort of better cooling system, like a better fan, better heat sinks, liquid cooling system, ect.
I'm seeing sports out there from people getting hundreds of fps, from forums dated back in 2012.
I'm running a 4ghz i7 with an r9 390 with 16 gigs of RAM and even just trying without any mods, no texture pack, no shaders, nothing, I'm getting 34ish fps when chunks are loading. 104 when they're done and I'm not moving.
With a ton of mods, 128x textures and SEUS running, at 24 chunk distance, I'm getting 25 FPS. With no shaders on, I'm getting around 75, both after chunks are stable.
I just installed that processor. It's the same number of threads, but it's 4ghz instead of 3.2. the upgrade caused ZERO difference to performance.
Watching the task manager, no core goes above 40% usage at the peak, and it hovers around 9% across the board when the game is running but idle.
Java is up to date, 64-bit. Graphics drivers were up to date this whole time, but just downgraded to fix an issue with transparent hands/tools while running shaders.
I've gone through every single optifine setting over and over again. I've tried loading with no mods at all. Various different resource packs, no resource packs. I've scanned my PC for malware. I used to remove viruses for a living. I know how to prevent them from happening in the first place and my scan confirm its still clean. I've manually gone through all installed programs to make sure unwanted programs have not snuck their way through.
I should be able to run unmodded Minecraft with default textures at like 500 fps. I should be able to run 128x textures with SEUS at least a stable 45 if not 60 fps compared to the specs from people out there on YouTube with similar setups. Please help. I spent a bunch of money upgrading the processor because everyone talks about how CPU hungry this game can be, but not if it's not using it.
This is a similarly specced PC (same processor, AMD equivalent graphics card) running 256x textures and SEUS ultra w/ DoF. With FRAPS.
I sit on 15-25 FPS with 128x and no recording software.
You are VERY mistaken on how FPS is determined. It's mostly based around GPU speed - you can't boost you're FPS by getting a better processor unless the program's render thread is underpacing the GPU. So, on Minecraft, upgrading from a 3.2 GHz to a 4 GHz processor will have NO effect on the FPS at all.
Creator of Metroid Cubed 3, a Metroid-themed mod! Become a donator today!
OK, now read the rest of the post. You are VERY mistaken on what the problem is.
And no, not on this game. It's primarily CPU-based. And that wouldn't even matter, being that the game is not utilizing either to its fullest. I should still be getting much, much better performance than that, even before the upgrade. I'm running an AMD R9 390, it should be blowing this game out of the water if it was GPU-based.
I DID read the post, and you are still wrong. People can run Minecraft at very high FPS, with shaders and mods, with a 3 GHz CPU. You might not have Minecraft set to the right GPU is all, if your computer has more than one. Trust me, I run Minecraft on a potato and your problem is NOT CPU-based.
Creator of Metroid Cubed 3, a Metroid-themed mod! Become a donator today!
A ) I did not say the problem was CPU based. You'd know that if you read the whole thing.
B ) The fact that people can run it better on a potato THAT DOESN'T EVEN HAVE A GRAPHICS CARD is the problem. THIS setup should be capable of running the game better from absolutely every single angle, from the CPU to the GPU to the memory to the SSD. So SOMETHING is wrong.
And you are still wrong. The shaders utilize the GPU, but a straight up vanilla game, which is mentioned in my post, should be running almost entirely off of a single thread on the CPU. I should be getting like 700 FPS standing still on a vanilla game. I'm getting 104. I refer you, again, to the video I posted of a very similar setup running even more demanding stuff at a much much faster rate. My setup is nearly identical to the setup on the video I posted. The game is not taxing my CPU, GPU hard drive or memory. None of these are the bottleneck.
I appreciate your attempt to help, but it is clear you don't understand the issue and this isn't helping. I know you mean well, I'm not trying to be mean about it, but this is very frustrating and I don't need someone that doesn't know what they're talking about trying to talk down to me. I will wait for someone with a better idea of what the problem is.
A. You IMPLIED it was due to low CPU usage, as that is the only stat you gave.
B. Minecraft can't run without a GPU (not the java version at least), as it requires OpenGL. You probably meant on integrated graphics - may I point out in my last post I said minecraft MAY be running on the wrong GPU if you have 2 - it likes to default to integrated graphics where available.
Creator of Metroid Cubed 3, a Metroid-themed mod! Become a donator today!
I felt, and still feel like you read part of it, thought I was a dummy and skimmed the rest. I even understand the impulse, I've been on the internet. Please understand I'm already super frustrated with the situation. I'll move on from that, though, because you didn't know.
My specs are nearly identical to the person who posted the nice looking video above. Same processor, AMD equivalent graphics card (only mine is higher rated and has 8gigs of dedicated ram), 16 gigs of high end ram, SSD. I believe we can all agree the performance should be better.
I will look into whether or not it's trying to use integrated graphics. If that does it, I will personally hug you until you suffocate.
Please don't, I kinda like breathing.
Creator of Metroid Cubed 3, a Metroid-themed mod! Become a donator today!
Well, you're safe. That doesn't seem to be it. I went through the BIOS. It's set to PCI Express. Unless there's more to it than that. But I went through all the AMD software looking for anything to do with it, nada. And, when I run a scanner to measure the GPU load, which is only recognizing the r9 390, the game does cause it to react.
It starts getting little spikes about a second long, up to about 25% on the loading screen, will hit 100 a few times very very briefly once the menu loads up, back down to nothing while the "building terrain" screen does its thing. Game starts showing up and loading chunks. Still very quick spikes, but we are occasionally scraping the top of the graph. Average GPU load while wiggling the mouse around to looking all directions occasionally, and letting it sit for a bit, while the world is fully loaded is 56%, though it does keep spiking very briefly to 100% The CPU continues to feel barely inconvenienced.
If it's relevant, just before this world, I did set up a server on this same of with most of the same mods. While running both the server and the game from the same PC, I noticed significant drops in FPS. Predictable since my PC was doing more work. But since the GPU shouldn't be at all concerned with the software, it was evidence to me that the CPU was the bottleneck. This was further reinforced by my Oculus software saying that the processor was the weak link there as well.
There should have been some difference. At least some. That there isn't is a sign that this game has never been set right on this PC. Because it's not using up all of anything. Nothing is holding it back.
this may be a long shot, but how good is you're computer's cooling system? You may be seeing CPU throttling caused by near-overheating the CPU. Same with GPU.
Also, the whole "graphics card being used" is NOT just in the BIOS, try looking at this thread: https://www.reddit.com/r/techsupport/comments/2fxpxx/minecraft_uses_intel_hd_instead_of_nvidia_gpu/
Creator of Metroid Cubed 3, a Metroid-themed mod! Become a donator today!
I checked the heat. CPU cores floating around 95°, GPU maxed out at 96°.
Went through what I could for that link. It was looking like nothing would apply because none of the options they were talking about were showing up. I checked the device manager and the only graphics card is the main card. I don't think it's trying to insert any on board graphics. I think we hit a dead end.
It's definitely
overheatingthrottling. (reference: http://www.buildcomputers.net/cpu-temperature.html)You need to get some sort of better cooling system, like a better fan, better heat sinks, liquid cooling system, ect.
Creator of Metroid Cubed 3, a Metroid-themed mod! Become a donator today!
OK, now we're onto something. I'll look into my options.
Thank you.
That was it! New CPU fan was blocked by its own cables. Fixed that, runs at 60 fps at 24 chunk draw distance, my god, it's beautiful.