CPU Performance Single Threaded, multi Threaded faster cores Whats Better??

[LegendPC]

So about a couple months ago i built myself my first desktop gaming PC, i mostly play FTB, gta V and Bf4, i know FTB and gta V are very CPU Intensive Games. So for a processor i picked the i5 4460
and i have a r7 370 for a GPU.

An i5 is no slouch when it comes to playing FTB but ever since my world has gotten bigger my fps have started to drop which is to be expected and i understand that the game requires more power to run but i didn't think that my fps would be dropping down in the 60Fps range when i first started the world i was in the 120-150fps Range i didn't think that there would be that much of a drop over time.

The reason why i started this thread is because i would like to know if anyone has tested is it better to have a quad core CPU with 4 cores/threads with an average clock speed 3.2ghz to 3.6 depending on what CPU (i5) or is more threads needed so something with hyper threading like an i7 needed to see major FPS increase in Feed the beast. or is it a matter of better clock speed per core= higher FPS

For Example for Intel

i3 6100 2 cores/4 threads at 3.7GHZ
i5 6400 4 cores/4 threads at 2.7GHZ turbo to 3.3

would the i3 be faster than the i5

or comparing to AMD would

A Fx8320 with 8 cores/8 threads Overclocked to 4.5GHZ be faster than both of the Intels???

or are the newer architecture Intels cores better performers because the tend to be stronger than AMD

If someone Could please help me understand with FTB what factors make FTB run better??, That would be great. I originally wanted to get a 8350 or 8320 but was having a hard time finding a decent mobo


if any extra info is needed on system specs or game specs jut let me Know

Thanks For any Reply's

 

[Techly88]

Why not check what "hitting the fans" on your PC while playing the game and then just upgrade from there?

Generally any Quad core CPU will do you well assuming it a more up to date generation and running over 3Ghz.

 

[Hambeau]

What @Techly88 said.

Generally speaking, clock speed will gain better performance in Minecraft than the number of cores, unless you are into advanced OS tweaking and have an OS capable of splitting the cores to separate tasks (running the OS with most while dedicating a core or two to the application).

The reason Multi-core CPUs aren't important to Minecraft itself is that the code isn't written to take advantage of the feature. Heck, just recently they started using multi-threaded code for things like dedicating a thread to alternate dimensions. This is different from the other games you mentioned which are written using optimized engines such as Unreal 4.

As far as a good AMD mainboard I use a first generation ASUS Sabertooth 990FX with my 4GHz 8350. I won't upgrade again until I can get a MB that supports more USB 3 ports than older versions, and DDR4.

 

[LegendPC]

Why not check what "hitting the fans" on your PC while playing the game and then just upgrade from there?

Generally any Quad core CPU will do you well assuming it a more up to date generation and running over 3Ghz.

I definitely think that i am just hitting the limitations of the processor it runs anywhere between 65- 90% when playing on the direwolf20 1.7 pack and is the same on the infinity evolved pack.

i just didn't think that the fps would drop that much, But thanks a lot for your reply

 

[LegendPC]

What @Techly88 said.

Generally speaking, clock speed will gain better performance in Minecraft than the number of cores, unless you are into advanced OS tweaking and have an OS capable of splitting the cores to separate tasks (running the OS with most while dedicating a core or two to the application).

The reason Multi-core CPUs aren't important to Minecraft itself is that the code isn't written to take advantage of the feature. Heck, just recently they started using multi-threaded code for things like dedicating a thread to alternate dimensions. This is different from the other games you mentioned which are written using optimized engines such as Unreal 4.

As far as a good AMD mainboard I use a first generation ASUS Sabertooth 990FX with my 4GHz 8350. I won't upgrade again until I can get a MB that supports more USB 3 ports than older versions, and DDR4.

How does FTB run with the 8350 because i do know that it really does compete with the i5's especially when overclocked??

 

[GreenZombie]

First, create a dedicated server for minecraft, copy your save game to it and connect to it.

A dedicated server, WILL ensure that at least two different cores are in use - because there will be two processes: One process will be dealing with ticks, the other with rendering. This will ensure that your FPS drops are actually FPS drops, and not slow TPS impacting performance overall.

This will mean your PC needs to have at least double the amount of RAM as both the client, and server, will have the same or similar -Xmx allocations.

If your FPS is still impacted close your browser. On my system at least having Chrome open can push minecraft down to 5fps or so. Perhaps I shouldn't have those Imgur tabs open. If its still impacted, then your problem is likely too many tile entities. Minecraft is somewhat hobbled by being written in Java but it does an awesome job of batching up the terrain and drawing all the solid blocks around you with a minimal number of draw calls. However, tile eneties are in base minecraft expected to be rare, but machines, conduits, carpenters blocks etc are all rendered individually. It really doesn't matter how powerful your GPU or CPU, you will diminish your FPS by deploying too many tile entities in your build.

If the server indicates your TPS is too low, your problem is likely too many entities: mobs, dropped items etc. Mob spawners, villager generators, some thaumcraft mechanics especially paired with chunk loaders can all cause literally 10s of thousands of entities to be added to the world over time which will kill the servers performance. You need to find them and remove them. Of course, sometimes its something very simple: A player created a sheep farm with pens, with a mere 10 sheep in a crowded room the sheep AI was constantly trying to deal with sheep that were colliding but couldn't path to open space and the TPS was murdered.

 

[Hambeau]

How does FTB run with the 8350 because i do know that it really does compete with the i5's especially when overclocked??

I can't compare to Intel chips because the only ones I've used recently are an Atom in the Netbook I got for free from Microsoft for being a contributing beta tester, and the Pentium 133 I used 20 years or so and proved to myself that the extra cost isn't worthwhile to me.

Also, my system hasn't had a real upgrade in several years, since I put the 8350 in... My video card is a PNY Geforce GT610, because it was cheap when my old card choked after 5 years.

Still, I can't complain. I get between 60-200 FPS (200 on Vanilla, of course) depending on mod load.

 

[LegendPC]

First, create a dedicated server for minecraft, copy your save game to it and connect to it.

A dedicated server, WILL ensure that at least two different cores are in use - because there will be two processes: One process will be dealing with ticks, the other with rendering. This will ensure that your FPS drops are actually FPS drops, and not slow TPS impacting performance overall.

This will mean your PC needs to have at least double the amount of RAM as both the client, and server, will have the same or similar -Xmx allocations.

If your FPS is still impacted close your browser. On my system at least having Chrome open can push minecraft down to 5fps or so. Perhaps I shouldn't have those Imgur tabs open. If its still impacted, then your problem is likely too many tile entities. Minecraft is somewhat hobbled by being written in Java but it does an awesome job of batching up the terrain and drawing all the solid blocks around you with a minimal number of draw calls. However, tile eneties are in base minecraft expected to be rare, but machines, conduits, carpenters blocks etc are all rendered individually. It really doesn't matter how powerful your GPU or CPU, you will diminish your FPS by deploying too many tile entities in your build.

If the server indicates your TPS is too low, your problem is likely too many entities: mobs, dropped items etc. Mob spawners, villager generators, some thaumcraft mechanics especially paired with chunk loaders can all cause literally 10s of thousands of entities to be added to the world over time which will kill the servers performance. You need to find them and remove them. Of course, sometimes its something very simple: A player created a sheep farm with pens, with a mere 10 sheep in a crowded room the sheep AI was constantly trying to deal with sheep that were colliding but couldn't path to open space and the TPS was murdered.

Thanks For your Reply Chris, i have been doing a bit of testing myself and it is exactly what you said have a lot of machines and entities i made a backup of my world and removed some things that i thought might of been causing low fps turns out that a multi stacked farm building that i created using mine factory reloaded harvesters and planters that consisted of 4 max farms all together, (21x21 blocks each) the constant changes in the plants that i had, carrots potatoes wheat and the tree farm on the top was causing majority of the lag. by removing that it seems that it has definitely resolved some of the load and my fps has increased. especially in my base area. An i even tested loading up my world on lan as my brother has a i5 6500 in his build which i had only built recently so when he was getting the same results i new something was hammering the game i originally thought it was a pump that i had in the nether getting lava for me but i had switched it out for a ender thermic pump a long time ago because i know they can affect performance a lot as well. but thanks alot

 

[LegendPC]

I can't compare to Intel chips because the only ones I've used recently are an Atom in the Netbook I got for free from Microsoft for being a contributing beta tester, and the Pentium 133 I used 20 years or so and proved to myself that the extra cost isn't worthwhile to me.

Also, my system hasn't had a real upgrade in several years, since I put the 8350 in... My video card is a PNY Geforce GT610, because it was cheap when my old card choked after 5 years.

Still, I can't complain. I get between 60-200 FPS (200 on Vanilla, of course) depending on mod load.

Yeah 60 fps is still very playable just i thought that if it keeps dropping it will eventually become unplayable, like my old laptop 30fps at tops on lowest settings. im willing to keep my system as it is for at least another 3 years unless something dies on me, finger's crossed

 

[Wagon153]

How does FTB run with the 8350 because i do know that it really does compete with the i5's especially when overclocked??

Not quite. Even when clocked up to 4.5ghz, a FX-9590 can't best a i7 underclocked to 2.5ghz. At best, you could expect the same performance in FTB you'd get with a first gen i5(such as an i5-760). Even a Pentium G3258 mops the floor with the FX chips in terms of single threaded performance.

That said, I am not saying AMD chips are bad for Minecraft. I ran with an athlon 860k for a while, and it was quite a trooper in modded minecraft(roughly same single threaded performance as an FX-8320/8350). It's just, Intel rocks their world. Going for an 8320 would be a sizeable downgrade not just for MInecraft, but for almost all the other games you mentioned.

Have you tried dropping your render distance a bit? That should give you a sizeable FPS boost. And if you are in 1.7, make sure you are using fastcraft.

 

[Hambeau]

Not quite. Even when clocked up to 4.5ghz, a FX-9590 can't best a i7 underclocked to 2.5ghz. At best, you could expect the same performance in FTB you'd get with a first gen i5(such as an i5-760). Even a Pentium G3258 mops the floor with the FX chips in terms of single threaded performance.

That said, I am not saying AMD chips are bad for Minecraft. I ran with an athlon 860k for a while, and it was quite a trooper in modded minecraft(roughly same single threaded performance as an FX-8320/8350). It's just, Intel rocks their world. Going for an 8320 would be a sizeable downgrade not just for MInecraft, but for almost all the other games you mentioned.

Have you tried dropping your render distance a bit? That should give you a sizeable FPS boost. And if you are in 1.7, make sure you are using fastcraft.

This is most likely true... top-end Intel appears to out-perform top-end AMD... for now. Recent announcements at Intel seem to indicate that they are concentrating more on lower power chips for devices, locking down clock speeds on mid-level chips and charging a premium for high end CPUs in the future.

However, I will take a $200 AMD CPU over a $200 Intel CPU any day.

 

[KingTriaxx]

What kind of RAM does your system have and what's allocated to FTB? The processor might be trying to shuffle things around the RAM as one or the other demands more than it's getting/you have.

As for processors, it doesn't really make much difference AMD vs Intel. Yes, there are people that will squeal about 10FPS. Loudly, and so consistently, you'll start to believe anything but a bleeding edge Intel is so much aluminum foil. It's complete nonsense. Look at that link for a moment though. The top processor cramming 10 more FPS on? That's a thousand dollar processor. It's closest AMD competitor? The one only 10 FPS behind it? $200. So yeah, clearly those ten FPS are worth the price of an entire additional computer.

Of course the next Intel on the list is only about a hundred dollars more than the AMD, and does get better FPS, but you'll never stop getting people waving that 10 FPS in your face.

AMD overclocks better unless you pay extra. Intel loves to sell models you can't over clock, where you can overclock any AMD. But for your theoretical overclocking, the FX-9590 already runs 4.7Ghz so it doesn't have to be overclocked to meet what you're after.

Now, all that said... can your monitor even display better than 60FPS? Can you tell the difference without an FPS counter? I don't start to see a difference until the count drops below 20FPS, but perhaps that's just me. 60FPS is probably a lot more than Minecraft needs since it's not a twitch shooter. Still, RAM might be more at issue than your processor.

 

[LegendPC]

Not quite. Even when clocked up to 4.5ghz, a FX-9590 can't best a i7 underclocked to 2.5ghz. At best, you could expect the same performance in FTB you'd get with a first gen i5(such as an i5-760). Even a Pentium G3258 mops the floor with the FX chips in terms of single threaded performance.

That said, I am not saying AMD chips are bad for Minecraft. I ran with an athlon 860k for a while, and it was quite a trooper in modded minecraft(roughly same single threaded performance as an FX-8320/8350). It's just, Intel rocks their world. Going for an 8320 would be a sizeable downgrade not just for MInecraft, but for almost all the other games you mentioned.

Have you tried dropping your render distance a bit? That should give you a sizeable FPS boost. And if you are in 1.7, make sure you are using fastcraft.

I did drop my render distance from i think it was 12 or 16 i cannot remember exactly but it was up quite high, then i dropped it to 10 and now I'm siting at 8 i installed optifine just for the hell of it, boosted an extra 10 frames even with chunk loading set to multi core (i don't know if that makes a that much of a difference), optfine definitely helped to smooth out the game, and yeah i haven't changed the pack at all i have been using fastcraft.

 

[LegendPC]

What kind of RAM does your system have and what's allocated to FTB? The processor might be trying to shuffle things around the RAM as one or the other demands more than it's getting/you have.

As for processors, it doesn't really make much difference AMD vs Intel. Yes, there are people that will squeal about 10FPS. Loudly, and so consistently, you'll start to believe anything but a bleeding edge Intel is so much aluminum foil. It's complete nonsense. Look at that link for a moment though. The top processor cramming 10 more FPS on? That's a thousand dollar processor. It's closest AMD competitor? The one only 10 FPS behind it? $200. So yeah, clearly those ten FPS are worth the price of an entire additional computer.

Of course the next Intel on the list is only about a hundred dollars more than the AMD, and does get better FPS, but you'll never stop getting people waving that 10 FPS in your face.

AMD overclocks better unless you pay extra. Intel loves to sell models you can't over clock, where you can overclock any AMD. But for your theoretical overclocking, the FX-9590 already runs 4.7Ghz so it doesn't have to be overclocked to meet what you're after.

Now, all that said... can your monitor even display better than 60FPS? Can you tell the difference without an FPS counter? I don't start to see a difference until the count drops below 20FPS, but perhaps that's just me. 60FPS is probably a lot more than Minecraft needs since it's not a twitch shooter. Still, RAM might be more at issue than your processor.

Yeah Amd is very good i just could not find a decent motherboard for overclocking and to stay in my price range As i live in Australia prices for PC parts are a lot more expensive so for me to get a mobo that have 8 phase power delivery or more to support an 8320 or 8350 i was looking at almost $240 for and asus sabertooth r2 or gigabigte 990fx gaming mobo and the another $250 for the 8350 or $220 for 8320 $50 bucks for a cooler master hyper 212x

So all up $540 for a chip Motherboard and cooler
and then ram at the time around $75 for 2x4gb sticks

i had a budget of around $1000-$1100 so what i getting at it was going to cost around $100 more and i didn't think that there would be a huge improvement
so i decieded to just go with the intel.

When it comes to monitors i have a refresh rate of 60 hertz but with minecraft for some reason i can tell when it dips down bellow say into the 50s-55 fps, minecraft is always a lot more jumpy with fps due to it relying on the CPU, where in other games like bf4 45 fps is still very smooth

I have 2x 4gb sticks of Kingston hyperX fury Blue and they in the correct dim slots on the mobo, i have 3gb of ram allocated to ftb

 

[LegendPC]

This is most likely true... top-end Intel appears to out-perform top-end AMD... for now. Recent announcements at Intel seem to indicate that they are concentrating more on lower power chips for devices, locking down clock speeds on mid-level chips and charging a premium for high end CPUs in the future.

However, I will take a $200 AMD CPU over a $200 Intel CPU any day.

In australia where i am it is $240 for a 8350 and then $265 for an i5 6500 and then $500 for an i7 6700k thanks to taxes

 

[KingTriaxx]

Is the launcher set to give Minecraft it's full 4GB of RAM?

 

[LegendPC]

Is the launcher set to give Minecraft it's full 4GB of RAM?

Yes i believe so that minecraft is getting the amount of ram that i allocate because you can see how much you have allocated by hitting f3 while playing

 

[MigukNamja]

In australia where i am it is $240 for a 8350 and then $265 for an i5 6500 and then $500 for an i7 6700k thanks to taxes

i7 5K and 6K series are underwhelming, i.e. worse price-to-performance ratio than 4K series. Sweet spot for Intel is (still) i7 4790(k) or i5 4590.

If you're running a server 24/7, the 4590s is good choice for efficiency, i.e. good performance and low power consumption.

 

[Hambeau]

Is the launcher set to give Minecraft it's full 4GB of RAM?

If you're talking about Curse, then yes... By default it uses Mojang's launcher which installs it's own copy of Java 1.8.0_25, which is in turn preset to 4GB by default. This can be modified using Curse User Settings, of course.

 

[KingTriaxx]

Fair enough, but the FTB launcher has to be set to that I believe. I know mine defaulted to 2GB.