This setting forces the game to update at least that many chunks per frame; normally it will do at least 1, more if time permits, while setting it to 5 will update at least 5 chunks even if there isn't enough time, so you'll get lag spikes (assuming that there are that many chunks needing updates, at some point chunk updates will be limited by the number available, for example, at a view distance of 10 you are loading a 1x21 chunk wide strip at a time as you move around; "chunk updates" actually refers to 16x16x16 sections so the real number is closer to 105, assuming an average height of 5 sections, so to render them within 1 second you need 105 chunk updates per second, which is the number displayed in F3).
You may instead want to enable "dynamic updates", which will multiply chunk updates per frame by 3 when you are standing still (either way, I've never had issues with leaving chunk updates at 1 and dynamic updates off; other changes Optifine makes to chunk rendering fixes issues that vanilla has with slow or delayed rendering. Note that I'm referring to 1.6.4 and there have been many changes to the game engine since then; also, not all chunk rendering issues are due to slow updates; vanilla 1.6.4 has an issue where chunks may never render until you walk into them and I recall 1.8+ having an issue where large areas would randomly turn invisible as I flew around).
This setting forces the game to update at least that many chunks per frame; normally it will do at least 1, more if time permits, while setting it to 5 will update at least 5 chunks even if there isn't enough time, so you'll get lag spikes (assuming that there are that many chunks needing updates, at some point chunk updates will be limited by the number available, for example, at a view distance of 10 you are loading a 1x21 chunk wide strip at a time as you move around; "chunk updates" actually refers to 16x16x16 sections so the real number is closer to 105, assuming an average height of 5 sections, so to render them within 1 second you need 105 chunk updates per second, which is the number displayed in F3).
You may instead want to enable "dynamic updates", which will multiply chunk updates per frame by 3 when you are standing still (either way, I've never had issues with leaving chunk updates at 1 and dynamic updates off; other changes Optifine makes to chunk rendering fixes issues that vanilla has with slow or delayed rendering. Note that I'm referring to 1.6.4 and there have been many changes to the game engine since then; also, not all chunk rendering issues are due to slow updates; vanilla 1.6.4 has an issue where chunks may never render until you walk into them and I recall 1.8+ having an issue where large areas would randomly turn invisible as I flew around).
Thank you. It was easy to understand the difference.
I play minecraft 1.15.2 with optifine. But I still have slow rendering. Is this because I have a low spec labtop?(Celeron)
I heard about minecraft uses hard drive to render. I have an SSD but it’s still slow.
Thank you. It was easy to understand the difference.
I play minecraft 1.15.2 with optifine. But I still have slow rendering. Is this because I have a low spec labtop?(Celeron)
I heard about minecraft uses hard drive to render. I have an SSD but it’s still slow.
The performance of Minecraft is almost entirely up to the CPU and GPU, especially the former (somebody tested this and found little difference even between a standard hard drive and a RAM disk, the fastest possible form of "storage" since everything is already loaded in memory. Even for just loading chunks from disk there is a whole lot more than just disk I/O; the data has to be uncompressed and placed in the appropriate data structures, and likewise generating new chunks is entirely CPU-bound).
Most likely, it is due to having a "low spec" computer (you don't say what you have); modern versions of Minecraft are extremely resource-demanding (mostly because Mojang writes such bad code):
Note that they do not say what sort of performance you'll get but I'd say even the recommended isn't enough for 1.15 given all the reports of performance issues, even for people with high-end hardware (e.g. RTX 2080 Super), worse, they may just write off reports of performance issues in 1.15 as "buy a new computer" (which is what they did for 1.8).
The performance of Minecraft is almost entirely up to the CPU and GPU, especially the former (somebody tested this and found little difference even between a standard hard drive and a RAM disk, the fastest possible form of "storage" since everything is already loaded in memory. Even for just loading chunks from disk there is a whole lot more than just disk I/O; the data has to be uncompressed and placed in the appropriate data structures, and likewise generating new chunks is entirely CPU-bound).
Most likely, it is due to having a "low spec" computer (you don't say what you have); modern versions of Minecraft are extremely resource-demanding (mostly because Mojang writes such bad code):
Note that they do not say what sort of performance you'll get but I'd say even the recommended isn't enough for 1.15 given all the reports of performance issues, even for people with high-end hardware (e.g. RTX 2080 Super), worse, they may just write off reports of performance issues in 1.15 as "buy a new computer" (which is what they did for 1.8).
I understand now...
I think my pc is too low spec (Celeron).
I changed my JVM arguments and it runs better now.
so if I have a chance to buy a new pc, should I buy I pc that has much more high end cpu then the minimum requirements of minecraft?
Does increasing “chunk updates” increases Chunk update? I can’t see any differences between 1 and 5.
the only difference is it lags at 5.
i have a low spec pc but minecraft runs well with optifine.
This setting forces the game to update at least that many chunks per frame; normally it will do at least 1, more if time permits, while setting it to 5 will update at least 5 chunks even if there isn't enough time, so you'll get lag spikes (assuming that there are that many chunks needing updates, at some point chunk updates will be limited by the number available, for example, at a view distance of 10 you are loading a 1x21 chunk wide strip at a time as you move around; "chunk updates" actually refers to 16x16x16 sections so the real number is closer to 105, assuming an average height of 5 sections, so to render them within 1 second you need 105 chunk updates per second, which is the number displayed in F3).
You may instead want to enable "dynamic updates", which will multiply chunk updates per frame by 3 when you are standing still (either way, I've never had issues with leaving chunk updates at 1 and dynamic updates off; other changes Optifine makes to chunk rendering fixes issues that vanilla has with slow or delayed rendering. Note that I'm referring to 1.6.4 and there have been many changes to the game engine since then; also, not all chunk rendering issues are due to slow updates; vanilla 1.6.4 has an issue where chunks may never render until you walk into them and I recall 1.8+ having an issue where large areas would randomly turn invisible as I flew around).
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?
Thank you. It was easy to understand the difference.
I play minecraft 1.15.2 with optifine. But I still have slow rendering. Is this because I have a low spec labtop?(Celeron)
I heard about minecraft uses hard drive to render. I have an SSD but it’s still slow.
The performance of Minecraft is almost entirely up to the CPU and GPU, especially the former (somebody tested this and found little difference even between a standard hard drive and a RAM disk, the fastest possible form of "storage" since everything is already loaded in memory. Even for just loading chunks from disk there is a whole lot more than just disk I/O; the data has to be uncompressed and placed in the appropriate data structures, and likewise generating new chunks is entirely CPU-bound).
Most likely, it is due to having a "low spec" computer (you don't say what you have); modern versions of Minecraft are extremely resource-demanding (mostly because Mojang writes such bad code):
https://help.minecraft.net/hc/en-us/articles/360035131371-Minecraft-Java-Edition-system-requirements-
Note that they do not say what sort of performance you'll get but I'd say even the recommended isn't enough for 1.15 given all the reports of performance issues, even for people with high-end hardware (e.g. RTX 2080 Super), worse, they may just write off reports of performance issues in 1.15 as "buy a new computer" (which is what they did for 1.8).
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?
I understand now...
I think my pc is too low spec (Celeron).
I changed my JVM arguments and it runs better now.
so if I have a chance to buy a new pc, should I buy I pc that has much more high end cpu then the minimum requirements of minecraft?
I’m planning to buy a new MacBook Air soon...