FTB performance optimization

[VikeStep]

I don't need 60000000 FPS.

you are wrong. Everyone needs 60 million FPS

 

[Ember Quill]

Simple.
Get 1.5.2.
And also use the JVM Argument someone said near your thing.

This. 1.5.2 performance is amazing.

But if you want to keep playing 1.4.7, then just start decreasing graphics settings. Fast instead of Fancy, low view distance, etc. Actually, a lower view distance will help A LOT.

you are wrong. Everyone needs 60 million FPS

I always laugh at the people who insist on ultra-high framerates. Unless you have a really expensive high-framerate monitor, anything above 60 FPS is pointless.

 

[VikeStep]

I always laugh at the people who insist on ultra-high framerates. Unless you have a really expensive high-framerate monitor, anything above 60 FPS is pointless.

i know but if everyone had 60 million FPS, the world would be a better place

 

[JezuitX]

I'm just going to throw this out there for the world....the game looks and plays better when you lock it at 60 FPS. All this "I get steady 120/200/3000 FPS" is a bunch of bunk. Even if you have the mightiest PC in the world with frame rates that high there are going to be times where it's going to dip significantly, and when it does you get a little jitter or screen tear. If you lock the game down to 60 FPS when it does dip a bit to say like 55 or something like that you don't get the same kind of visual hit. I would urge everyone to try the game in V-sync or if you have an nVidia card Adaptive V-sync.

 

[Mjw]

what does chickenchunks even do?

 

[VikeStep]

I'm just going to throw this out there for the world....the game looks and plays better when you lock it at 60 FPS. All this "I get steady 120/200/3000 FPS" is a bunch of bunk. Even if you have the mightiest PC in the world with frame rates that high there are going to be times where it's going to dip significantly, and when it does you get a little jitter or screen tear. If you lock the game down to 60 FPS when it does dip a bit to say like 55 or something like that you don't get the same kind of visual hit. I would urge everyone to try the game in V-sync or if you have an nVidia card Adaptive V-sync.

I know that but If everyone had 60 million FPS there would be no people bragging about how fast their FPS was, there would be no people complaining about bad computers and computers would be cheaper because all computers would run at the same FPS
anyways iirc the most fps that people can start to not see any difference was around 50 fps, even though your monitor may display at 60 or 75Hz doesnt mean your eyes can view it that fast XD

 

[Poppycocks]

I know that but If everyone had 60 million FPS there would be no people bragging about how fast their FPS was, there would be no people complaining about bad computers and computers would be cheaper because all computers would run at the same FPS
anyways iirc the most fps that people can start to not see any difference was around 50 fps, even though your monitor may display at 60 or 75Hz doesnt mean your eyes can view it that fast XD

Oh you mean consoles?

Also, the eye thingie.

It is said that eye does 20 fps. The truth is a bit more complicated, take a 60 Hz monitor and a 120 Hz monitor both running on v-sync side by side. The 60 Hz one will bring tears to your eyes fairly quick , the 120 Hz will seem much much smoother. (which is logical, cause it is).

The problem is that both the brain and the eye are analog in function. It's hard to talk about "frames" when you're actually getting constant input which just changes in magnitude.

The brain's just trying to save energy by taking shortcuts, it can work much faster than it normally runs though. And less flickers it need to ignore is better for it.

 

[Jaagnag]

Simple.
Get 1.5.2.
And also use the JVM Argument someone said near your thing.

No offence but you obviously didn't read my post... i said i'm in the 1.5.2 beta...? why'd you tell me to get 1.5.2 XD

 

[PeggleFrank]

On the 1.4.7 ultimate pack, I get a constant 30-45 FPS. I don't really screw with the java parameters since I haven't seen any proof of them actually helping my framerate.

My settings/specs:

Spoiler

Settings (Optifine)

GENERAL:
Graphics: Fancy
Render Distance: Far (sometimes I do far+64 or far+128 and I can still manage to get decent framerate)
Fog: Off
View Bobbing: ON
Advanced OpenGL: Fancy
Chunk Loading: Default (Multicore would probably help a lot, but I don't have any free cores (or at least when I enable multicore the chunks start flickering))
Fog Start: 0.8
Performance: MaxFPS (No clue why you would need to limit this)
DETAILS:
Clouds/trees/water/grass/rain&snow/droppeditems: Fancy
Depth fog: Off
Sun & Moon: On
Held Item Tooltips: Off
Stars: Off
Cloud height: 100% (they seem unrealistic so close down to the ground)
Sky: On
QUALITY:
Mipmap Level: Max (I get eye strain without this, you can probably do without it)
Anisotropic Filtering: 16 (I get eye strain without this, you can probably do without it)
Better Grass: Fancy
Clear Water: On
Swamp Colors: On
Custom Fonts: On
Connected Textures: Fancy
Custom Sky: On
Natural Textures: Off (makes patterns look random and ugly)
Antialiasing: Off (I haven't seen anything that actually gets improved by this, plus it requires a restart to change it which isn't nice when you're trying to benchmark)
Better Snow: On
Random Mobs: On
Smooth Biomes: On
PERFORMANCE:
Smooth FPS: Off
Load Far: Off (this makes my computer explode for some reason)
Chunk Updates per Frame: 1
Lazy Chunk Loading: Off
Dynamic Updates: Off
Smooth World: Off
Preloaded Chunks: Off
Lagometer: Off
Weather: On
Server Textures: On
Autosave: 30m
Debug Profiler: On
Time: Default
ANIMATIONS:
Everything: On
Particles: All
Default Texture Pack

System specs:
Processor: AMD Phenom(tm) IIX4 940 Processor (4 CPUs), ~3.0GHz
8192MB RAM
NVIDIA GeForce GTS 250
Integrated RAMDAC
1920x1080 32-bit 59Hz

I feel like I'm in the tech support forum now.

 

[whizzball1]

No offence but you obviously didn't read my post... i said i'm in the 1.5.2 beta...? why'd you tell me to get 1.5.2 XD

If you had 1.5.2 you wouldn't have these problems.
Or maybe you haven't inputted the JVM Arguments?

 

[Bigglesworth]

anyways iirc the most fps that people can start to not see any difference was around 50 fps, even though your monitor may display at 60 or 75Hz doesnt mean your eyes can view it that fast XD

For people with average eyesight the returnrate quickly fades after around 120Hz. Also the difference in what is 'felt' in relative smoothness from 60 to 120 is roughly equivalent to 30 to 60. In games with no motion blur (Minecraft) it is quite easy to feel the difference between 60 and 120. Add motion blur and 30 starts to feel just as smooth as 60 without. This is why movies can get away with typically looking like fluid motion using only 24fps and often in bright scenes, if the shutter is set too high and each frame is too crisp, a scene starts to look like a rapid slideshow.

Console games often employ motion blur and maintain 30fps sacrificing framerate to make the game generally look better. A slow-paced game like minecraft can get away with 30 as well, but ask anyone that has played something like Quake III Arena in a tournament like setting and they will tell you that 120hz CRT is vastly preferable over a <75hz LCD (we have 120Hz LCDs now too though poping up).

All in all if youre playing Minecraft at anything over 60Hz, its utterly pointless because of the gametype, not because of anything to do with human limitations. The game is more enjoyable when you limit it between 30 and 60 as you will see far less fluctuation, something far more annoying than a lower consistent one.

There is one, and only one thing that will improve your framerate in FTB Minecraft unless youre using integrated graphics (pick up any $50 GPU on ebay FFS):
The CPU.
If youre not using a very overclocked Phenom II or FX (4.5-5Ghz) you will see your framerate get lower and lower the bigger your base becomes and even a old 460GTX will sit at roughly 10% usage and <25fps. A Phenom II @ 3.8Ghz as a min and an i5 as a recommend CPU for this game if you want closer to 60 min. FTB MC only really uses two threads, so if you have an FX 83xx then 6 cores are going to be wasted. FTB thrives on strong CPU architecture and keeping it updated, not silly things like Java parameters.

 

[pringlegod]

No additional mods

Brightness: 100%
Render distance: normal
Performance: maxFPS
Advanced open GL : on
smooth lighting on

Specifications:
Intel pentium G840 , waiting for an I5 in the post xD
Graphics card: GTX 460 SE

FPS: Stable 207

 

[tehBlobLord]

Ok, i'm managing to get 120+ stable FPS now, with most optifine defaults, except for disabling smooth lighting and connected textures. Howeve there's an update problem of some sort, where any blocks that would break by losing their support, such as torches and weeds, drop the item but aren't actually gone, and also lava and water flow but invisibly.

Do you actually need 120 fps? Sure, in something like Skyrim, that would be nice, but with Minecraft I can play at 30-40 fps quite happily.

 

[pringlegod]

Do you actually need 120 fps? Sure, in something like Skyrim, that would be nice, but with Minecraft I can play at 30-40 fps quite happily.

Minecraft probably runs best at about 50-60 fps i'd say, anything above is just bragging rights.

 

[tehBlobLord]

Minecraft probably runs best at about 50-60 fps i'd say, anything above is just bragging rights.

Well, unfortunately 4-5 year old macs run games as well as GladOS did when she was a potato, and my new computer isn't due for another few weeks, so until then I'm stuck with terrible frames, short render distance, fast graphics and no smooth lighting. If I could get 40 fps with maxed settings I'd be content.

 

[pringlegod]

Well, unfortunately 4-5 year old macs run games as well as GladOS did when she was a potato, and my new computer isn't due for another few weeks, so until then I'm stuck with terrible frames, short render distance, fast graphics and no smooth lighting. If I could get 40 fps with maxed settings I'd be content.

haha Why don't you sell it and buy a PC? I heard macs retain their value for quite some time?

 

[tehBlobLord]

haha Why don't you sell it and buy a PC? I heard macs retain their value for quite some time?

Well, unfortunately 4-5 year old macs run games as well as GladOS did when she was a potato, and my new computer isn't due for another few weeks, so until then I'm stuck with terrible frames, short render distance, fast graphics and no smooth lighting. If I could get 40 fps with maxed settings I'd be content.

I've already ordered a custom-built one, but there have been problems with the order... It's a real headache.

 

[Lathanael]

<snip>

There is one, and only one thing that will improve your framerate in FTB Minecraft unless youre using integrated graphics (pick up any $50 GPU on ebay FFS):
The CPU.
If youre not using a very overclocked Phenom II or FX (4.5-5Ghz) you will see your framerate get lower and lower the bigger your base becomes and even a old 460GTX will sit at roughly 10% usage and <25fps. A Phenom II @ 3.8Ghz as a min and an i5 as a recommend CPU for this game if you want closer to 60 min. FTB MC only really uses two threads, so if you have an FX 83xx then 6 cores are going to be wasted. FTB thrives on strong CPU architecture and keeping it updated, not silly things like Java parameters.

Not entirely true. JVM arguments CAN improve your gameplay experiences and sometimes even FPS. Java running with default settings isn't optimized for specific Apps/systems at all. So adjusting the JVM can improve your overall performance a bit.
But one should not expect increases in performance like when you update from an i3 to an i7 that is true. MC is for the most part crippled by the CPU but you can help your poor CPU a bit.

 

[pringlegod]

I've already ordered a custom-built one, but there have been problems with the order... It's a real headache.

Ordered it online? I hate ordering stuff online but its just more convenient than driving around store to store to find parts, i remember when i first built this maybe 2 years ago from scratch, ordered everything online from different websites and it was a real ball ache.

 

[tehBlobLord]

Ordered it online? I hate ordering stuff online but its just more convenient than driving around store to store to find parts, i remember when i first built this maybe 2 years ago from scratch, ordered everything online from different websites and it was a real ball ache.

Yeah, I find it much easier to choose the parts all from one website. Less choice, but everything is compatible and handled by them.
If you buy an all-in-one computer, especially for gaming, you're guaranteed to get ripped off.