So minecraft is now what we have always wanted MULTI-THREADED! And my personal wish that it only renders what you see for less lag too. Also what do you think of the new rendering system and multithreaded loading? Does any one have problems with VOB? And what way should mojang mess with time and space next?
In what little I've tried of it so far, chunks load faster, but the game otherwise performs worse for me with VBO than it did with the old Advanced OpenGL. Even with Advanced OpenGL (which was still in 14w29c), it performed worse for me than 1.7.10 does.
The game seems much smoother in performance, and it runs fast for a Java game. The ultimate frame booster would be a rewrite that would remove Java from the game entirely, but I'm guessing it's nearly impossible to do. That would mean redoing just about everything, a feat easiest to do by Mojang itself. Although I have no programming experience, it's kind of common sense.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Be sure to quote my post if you want me to respond.
The game seems much smoother in performance, and it runs fast for a Java game. The ultimate frame booster would be a rewrite that would remove Java from the game entirely, but I'm guessing it's nearly impossible to do. That would mean redoing just about everything, a feat easiest to do by Mojang itself. Although I have no programming experience, it's kind of common sense.
Removing Java? The game is built on java and libraries for it. You're right it would need a total rewrite if it was to be done in another language. However, you're wrong that switching out of Java would suddenly provide benefits. Java isn't any performance different from many other language for the most part. It clocks in a couple microseconds behind some languages such as C++, but it's fine. The issue is the overall engine needs performance increases and optimizations. Leaving it in Java will be just fine. Java has its benefits, anyways.
So is there any word on the tick or mob AI being multithreaded because that would make the game less laggy in many cases (night, lots of redstone, mob grinders, animal farms, ect)
So is there any word on the tick or mob AI being multithreaded because that would make the game less laggy in many cases (night, lots of redstone, mob grinders, animal farms, ect)
Just a day or so ago Dinnerbone was saying he wanted to thread mob pathfinding, so that is probably next.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
Is there any news at all of making minecraft's plugin api available anytime soon because it seems far ahead of us right now with the amount of time that's passed... anyway is there a possibilty that minecraft will be optimized for 4 or maybe even more cores in the future? That would be an awesome thing because right now I "think" it is only using 2 cores and is definetly not optimized yet which is because it is a snapshot but if the game was split accross 4 cores (which I think is the common amount of cores in most computers now) it would be so much faster even in situations were you were playing in a modpack with lots of other things going on. Speaking of modpacks it would be very cool if with the plugin api that the mods would have there own thread to help with the general lag of mods in general. "In the near future minecraft will be octa-threaded!...... I hope" -Me
Is there any news at all of making minecraft's plugin api available anytime soon because it seems far ahead of us right now with the amount of time that's passed... anyway is there a possibilty that minecraft will be optimized for 4 or maybe even more cores in the future? That would be an awesome thing because right now I "think" it is only using 2 cores and is definetly not optimized yet which is because it is a snapshot but if the game was split accross 4 cores (which I think is the common amount of cores in most computers now) it would be so much faster even in situations were you were playing in a modpack with lots of other things going on. Speaking of modpacks it would be very cool if with the plugin api that the mods would have there own thread to help with the general lag of mods in general. "In the near future minecraft will be octa-threaded!...... I hope" -Me
Hopefully the multicore will happen. I'm surprised that Dinnerbone hasn't worked on plugin API since his work on bukkit. Still, if they haven't added it yet, I highly doubt it will ever be a feature.
Removing Java? The game is built on java and libraries for it. You're right it would need a total rewrite if it was to be done in another language. However, you're wrong that switching out of Java would suddenly provide benefits. Java isn't any performance different from many other language for the most part. It clocks in a couple microseconds behind some languages such as C++, but it's fine. The issue is the overall engine needs performance increases and optimizations. Leaving it in Java will be just fine. Java has its benefits, anyways.
Interesting that games like Battlefield, Portal, ect. can run fine on computers that get 20 frames. I always thought that was the main reason Minecraft lagged so much. Why is it so CPU intensive?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Be sure to quote my post if you want me to respond.
Hopefully the multicore will happen. I'm surprised that Dinnerbone hasn't worked on plugin API since his work on bukkit. Still, if they haven't added it yet, I highly doubt it will ever be a feature.
Interesting that games like Battlefield, Portal, ect. can run fine on computers that get 20 frames. I always thought that was the main reason Minecraft lagged so much. Why is it so CPU intensive?
Part of the reason is the nature of the game is so completely different. Part of the reason is the lack of optimization.
Update 14w31a just came out and it said the the mod ai is now threaded along with bug fixes rabbits making sounds and a bunch of new optimization! Oh and the sun is no longer made of cheese
This is my favorite update since I started playing in earlier alpha! I've got a beast of a PC, GTX 770 etc, cost ~£1000, and yet minecraft refused to hit more than 30 FPS if I was lucky. Maybe it's my weak CPU or something, idk, but with this update, I've had a framerate increase of
1217%!!
So, I'm pretty happy! Back to attempting to make redstone computers
Edit:
As a general rule, games with randomly generated terrains etc have a MUCH harder job (Esp. CPU wise) than games like Battlefield. The reason is, for example: If you were to have a map in battlefield, that map would (Barely) change. This means they can do optimizations like combining meshes, baking (That is, saving the lighting state) the lights, and placing pathfinding meshes (So, entities don't need to use up a large chunk of time trying to path find, they use the paths that are already available)
A bad cpu + a really good gpu using VBO would increase your performance loads because VBO takes stress off the cpu and dumps a lot on the gpu. So if you pared your parts together well than not much extra fps but if you bought a gpu way better than your cpu you would see big improvements. Look up VBO some guy on this forum (can't remember his name or the article) went into to the subject of VBO very deeply I just summed up a 1000 word post into a few sentences
Why am I still getting horrible chunk-loading errors in 14w31a? When the chunk-loading works, yeah, it's really fast and I love it.
But... that's when it works. Does anyone else have large areas where chunks just won't seem to load or they take forever to "fill in"? I started a new world this morning, went into creative mode and flew around. At some point, I flew out over the area that wasn't loading and turned around. Quite a sight seeing the world looking like someone just cleaved half of it clean away...
I know it has nothing to do with threading... but it has everything to do with enjoying the game. I laughed at it for a while, then got so fed up at how long the chunks were taking, I shut it all down out of aggravation.
Edit: I should add my CPU is an i7-3770K @ 3.50GHz (never bothered to mess with overclocking) with 32GB of RAM and an Nvidia GTX 690. It's possible I've got a setting terribly wrong but it sure isn't my hardware.
The latest snapshot still runs like older snapshots, before the recent optimizations, around 20-30 FPS if standing still and big drops if I turn around or move. It also still has the 1.7+ "lag spike of death" which makes FPS looks much worse (see this post for details; pausing the game and leaving it while doing something else can make it magically go away with triple the FPS when it does, though in the snapshots, not 1.7.x, there is still a huge FPS drop when moving or turning).
That is, here are screenshots (after I got rid of the LSOD problem) before and after turning; it seems that chunk updates shoot up whenever I turn, like the game no longer caches rendered chunks and instead updates them on the fly, and chunk updates have a much bigger performance impact than older versions; even on 2 chunk render distance there is a noticeable decrease in FPS/stuttering (NB: also has no effect on the LSOD issue, nor do any other settings, except lowering the FPS limit, but has to be set to unacceptably low levels as it just hides the issue with general low FPS):
Before turning:
After turning around in a full circle:
That wouldn't actually be so bad it it wasn't for how unstable the FPS is during that time (limiting FPS to 30 in 1.6-1.7 still looks pretty smooth to me; 40-50 is completely smooth - assuming of course it is stable; when running in fullscreen (1024x768, yes, I still have an old 4:3 monitor) FPS is about 20% lower (80 FPS in the first example; for the underground example below it drops to about 100, so less of of a difference between above/underground) with no difference in turning/moving lag; when running at high render distances in older versions I sometimes get lag when turning around with a lot of stuff on the screen in windowed mode but not fullscreen).
If they would just fix those issues 1.8 would be the best performing version for me, especially with the FPS In get underground (although fullscreen erases most of the difference from aboveground, unlike older versions), where I spend most of my time (perhaps Optifine can do what Mojang still can't - although it does nothing for the LSOD issue, which has nothing to do with autosaving as Optifine claims and occurs as a function of the number of frames rendered; higher FPS = more frequent):
It is also worth noting that in older versions Advanced OpenGL, which is no longer available, doubles my FPS, especially underground where big cave systems cause lag (similar to the turning lag mentioned) when it is off. Otherwise, the second biggest factor is having leaves on Fast/Fancy (Optifine can selectively set stuff to Fast/Fancy; only leaves have a noticeable performance impact and only in jungles/forests; that said, I prefer true Fast because it removes the darkening around the sides of the screen in dark areas).
A bad cpu + a really good gpu using VBO would increase your performance loads because VBO takes stress off the cpu and dumps a lot on the gpu.
While that may be technically how it's working, in practice, I yet seem to have results that don't make sense then.
I have a laptop with a Core i3 4010U (1.7GHz) and the integrated graphics, which are the HD 4400. I would imagine that the graphics are the glaring bottleneck there. Yet, with VBO turned on, my frame rate increases.
On my desktop, I have a Core i5 2500K (4.0GHz) and a GeForce GTX 560 Ti. With VBO turned on, my frame rate decreases (I did also have Advanced OpenGL turned on with VBO so I'm not sure if that's something that could effect anything). The graphics card is aged, but it's not slow, especially for something like Minecraft, and even if we do want to assume it's the weak link, how would Minecraft be bottlenecked by it, but not by an Intel HD 4400?
In any situation, 1.7.10 runs better for me on both of those PCs (I haven't tried the most recent snapshot though).
Edit: In the recent snapshot, VBO being on now seems to help slightly at higher render distances (like 28) compared to being off, and perform similarly whether it's on or off at a medium render distances (like 16).
so far from what I've heard people are either having extreme fps boosts with this snapshot, difficulty rendering, or negative fps :LI just hope I get extreme fps boosts. I am on vacation without my laptop so the anticipation is killing me xD
On an AMD A8 3500M quadcore with a Radeon 6620G, 1.7.10 with fancy settings gets me up to an average of 20 - 30 fps, and turning everything all the way down gets to only 60 - 70fps. In 1.8 Snapshot 14w33c, turning VBO on with fancy graphics gets me about 40 - 60fps and on "fast" and turning everything all the way down gets me up 150 - 200 fps.
Now I'm just curious what Optifine will be able to add on to this once its released and developed enough for mods such as shaders, and if the performance there will be better in this version than the previous.
"Programmers never repeat themselves. They loop."
So they're basically doing what OptiFine does (albeit much faster, it seems).
I thought there was also talking about having each dimension run on it's own thread too? (seems like it'd benefit servers more.)
I believe this is already done.
"Programmers never repeat themselves. They loop."
Be sure to quote my post if you want me to respond.
Removing Java? The game is built on java and libraries for it. You're right it would need a total rewrite if it was to be done in another language. However, you're wrong that switching out of Java would suddenly provide benefits. Java isn't any performance different from many other language for the most part. It clocks in a couple microseconds behind some languages such as C++, but it's fine. The issue is the overall engine needs performance increases and optimizations. Leaving it in Java will be just fine. Java has its benefits, anyways.
"Programmers never repeat themselves. They loop."
Just a day or so ago Dinnerbone was saying he wanted to thread mob pathfinding, so that is probably next.
Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!
http://www.minecraftforum.net/forums/minecraft-discussion/suggestions/2775557-guidelines-for-the-suggestions-forum
Hopefully the multicore will happen. I'm surprised that Dinnerbone hasn't worked on plugin API since his work on bukkit. Still, if they haven't added it yet, I highly doubt it will ever be a feature.
Interesting that games like Battlefield, Portal, ect. can run fine on computers that get 20 frames. I always thought that was the main reason Minecraft lagged so much. Why is it so CPU intensive?
Be sure to quote my post if you want me to respond.
Part of the reason is the nature of the game is so completely different. Part of the reason is the lack of optimization.
"Programmers never repeat themselves. They loop."
A bad cpu + a really good gpu using VBO would increase your performance loads because VBO takes stress off the cpu and dumps a lot on the gpu. So if you pared your parts together well than not much extra fps but if you bought a gpu way better than your cpu you would see big improvements. Look up VBO some guy on this forum (can't remember his name or the article) went into to the subject of VBO very deeply I just summed up a 1000 word post into a few sentences
But... that's when it works. Does anyone else have large areas where chunks just won't seem to load or they take forever to "fill in"? I started a new world this morning, went into creative mode and flew around. At some point, I flew out over the area that wasn't loading and turned around. Quite a sight seeing the world looking like someone just cleaved half of it clean away...
I know it has nothing to do with threading... but it has everything to do with enjoying the game. I laughed at it for a while, then got so fed up at how long the chunks were taking, I shut it all down out of aggravation.
Edit: I should add my CPU is an i7-3770K @ 3.50GHz (never bothered to mess with overclocking) with 32GB of RAM and an Nvidia GTX 690. It's possible I've got a setting terribly wrong but it sure isn't my hardware.
That is, here are screenshots (after I got rid of the LSOD problem) before and after turning; it seems that chunk updates shoot up whenever I turn, like the game no longer caches rendered chunks and instead updates them on the fly, and chunk updates have a much bigger performance impact than older versions; even on 2 chunk render distance there is a noticeable decrease in FPS/stuttering (NB: also has no effect on the LSOD issue, nor do any other settings, except lowering the FPS limit, but has to be set to unacceptably low levels as it just hides the issue with general low FPS):
After turning around in a full circle:
That wouldn't actually be so bad it it wasn't for how unstable the FPS is during that time (limiting FPS to 30 in 1.6-1.7 still looks pretty smooth to me; 40-50 is completely smooth - assuming of course it is stable; when running in fullscreen (1024x768, yes, I still have an old 4:3 monitor) FPS is about 20% lower (80 FPS in the first example; for the underground example below it drops to about 100, so less of of a difference between above/underground) with no difference in turning/moving lag; when running at high render distances in older versions I sometimes get lag when turning around with a lot of stuff on the screen in windowed mode but not fullscreen).
If they would just fix those issues 1.8 would be the best performing version for me, especially with the FPS In get underground (although fullscreen erases most of the difference from aboveground, unlike older versions), where I spend most of my time (perhaps Optifine can do what Mojang still can't - although it does nothing for the LSOD issue, which has nothing to do with autosaving as Optifine claims and occurs as a function of the number of frames rendered; higher FPS = more frequent):
It is also worth noting that in older versions Advanced OpenGL, which is no longer available, doubles my FPS, especially underground where big cave systems cause lag (similar to the turning lag mentioned) when it is off. Otherwise, the second biggest factor is having leaves on Fast/Fancy (Optifine can selectively set stuff to Fast/Fancy; only leaves have a noticeable performance impact and only in jungles/forests; that said, I prefer true Fast because it removes the darkening around the sides of the screen in dark areas).
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?
While that may be technically how it's working, in practice, I yet seem to have results that don't make sense then.
I have a laptop with a Core i3 4010U (1.7GHz) and the integrated graphics, which are the HD 4400. I would imagine that the graphics are the glaring bottleneck there. Yet, with VBO turned on, my frame rate increases.
On my desktop, I have a Core i5 2500K (4.0GHz) and a GeForce GTX 560 Ti. With VBO turned on, my frame rate decreases (I did also have Advanced OpenGL turned on with VBO so I'm not sure if that's something that could effect anything). The graphics card is aged, but it's not slow, especially for something like Minecraft, and even if we do want to assume it's the weak link, how would Minecraft be bottlenecked by it, but not by an Intel HD 4400?
In any situation, 1.7.10 runs better for me on both of those PCs (I haven't tried the most recent snapshot though).
Edit: In the recent snapshot, VBO being on now seems to help slightly at higher render distances (like 28) compared to being off, and perform similarly whether it's on or off at a medium render distances (like 16).
Now I'm just curious what Optifine will be able to add on to this once its released and developed enough for mods such as shaders, and if the performance there will be better in this version than the previous.