Java Arguments

[TonyLiberatto 364]

What would be the best java arguments to maximise FPS on my system?

I want to use Shaders and 256 texturepack.

That's the specs for my computer:

OS:                     Windows 8.1

Processor:          AMD FX-8350 8 core 4.3GHz

Ram:                   16GB

VideoCard:          GeForce GTX 760 2048MB DDR5

 

Using Optifine 1.6.4 HD U c9

 

Using MultiMC to load minecraft.

[Kittychanley 1,002]

Although this may seem counter-intuitive, try downgrading to standard version of Optifine. In many cases, optifine will actually cause more lag than it solves.

[TonyLiberatto 364]

Thanks kitty what about the arguments? Do you think I should change something?

I usually use Ultra because of the multicore option but I will try standard.

[Kittychanley 1,002]

There's actually such a thing as allocating too much memory when it comes to java. 4 Min and 8 Max seems ridiculously high to me. I would set it to 1 and 4 and try with the shaders. Then you could try 2 and 6 and see if it improves or not. Make sure to adjust your NewSize accordingly. You can also try using this argument too:

 

-XX:ParallelGCThreads=8

 

it should be set to the number of cores your processor has.

[TonyLiberatto 364]

No mods other them TFC and Optifine 1.6.4 HD C9

Reduced memory to min 1GB max 4GB  new size 256MB

This is my FPS:I cannot use a texture pack or shaders. any help is appreciated.

[Kittychanley 1,002]

Wow, that's worse FPS than I get while recording.. and I play on a potato.

 

Double check that you're using the latest 64-bit version of java 7 and that you have any and all other versions uninstalled. Don't use java 8, it doesn't work with Minecraft 1.6.4.

Also double check that all of your video card drivers and stuff is up to date.

 

Edit: Also try uninstalling optifine altogether so that you can compare if it makes any sort of difference.

[TonyLiberatto 364]

Uninstalled all version of Java from computer installed latest 64 bit java         jre-7u67-windows-x64

Nvidia driver 340.52

 

Same result

That's on single player with out any other mods or texture packs

[Kittychanley 1,002]

Edit: Also try uninstalling optifine altogether so that you can compare if it makes any sort of difference.

[dutchraptor 20]

Try play minecraft 1.8 vanilla and see how the fps compares. Now JVM arguments, just clean as it comes.

[Kittychanley 1,002]

Try play minecraft 1.8 vanilla and see how the fps compares. Now JVM arguments, just clean as it comes.

 

You would be comparing apples to oranges at that point. Modded 1.6.4 and vanilla 1.8 might as well be two completely different games at this point in terms of performance, because so much has been rewritten. And doing so would have absolutely no benefit because the only way to get performance equal to that of vanilla 1.8 is to wait around for the next 6+ months for TFC to release on 1.8.

[Terex 108]

How many chunks are rendered? I cannot play on max render distance of 16 chunks. I usually play with 6 chunks render distance and get about 30 fps on average. My laptop is so much worse than that PC. You should get more than 100 fps easy.

 

Should there be so much processing power dedicated to ticks (17%)? I can't remember, but it looks like a lot. 

[BadLeo 2]

I'm sorry to ask such a basic question, but if your system has more than one GPU, are you absolutely sure you're running minecraft with the best one?I get about 40fps, running TFC, OptiFine Ultra, JourneyMap and Smart Movement, and my system is lower than yours: i5 2450 4 cores processor, 6gb RAM, SSHD 5400rpm, GeForce 540M GPU (it's a notebook), Win7 x64. I dedicate only 1Gb to Java, it works like a charm. Well, a little lag spike while loading MOAR chunks, but nothing serious.I think you might want to mess around on the Minecraft performance sttings, under video settings, and see what helps you. Mine, just for reference, is set as:

 

Smoth FPS: OFF   Smoth World: OFF

Load Far: OFF             Preloaded Chunks: 2

Chunk Updates per Frame: 1 Dynamic Updates: ON

Fast Math: ON   Lazy Chunk Loading: OFF

 

 

Setting the Lagometer and the Debug Profilerm under 'other' settings tab, to OFF, might help to get a bit more FPS, too. Also, reduce your distance render. Mine is set to 'Normal + 64.'

 

Edit: I'm sorry, your main question was about Java arguments, but I simply know nothing about it. I just feel thta, with your specs, you shouldn't depend that much on arguments to get a decent performance. Something might not be quite right.

[abdyman 14]

I have a ton of mods and getting 70-100+ fps depending on the area.

i have similar specs to yours, just slightly better.

 

these are the arguements im using

 

-Xmn1G -Xms4G -Xmx4G -XX:NewSize=512M -d64  -XX:+AggressiveOpts -XX:ParallelGCThreads=4

 

i recently added the threads that i got from this post, and i found 4 to work better then 8,

i have and i7 3770k

gtx 770

16gb ram @ like 2100

 

the biggest thing i would say, is the minecraft is more about single thread performance which intel dominates amd in, however your fps should still not be that low

[TonyLiberatto 364]

I disable optifine and got 100 FPS. Thanks Kitty

Now I just have to figure why since with my PC I should be able to use Optifine.

I deleted optifine options and  enable it now is just a question of figuring the right settings.

I saved money for a year to buy this computer. I really thought I would be able to use optifine on max settings and a 256 texturepack.

[Trulhammaren 5]

IIRC The Lagometer is typically a major culprit, I think the other big one is in the Other tab....whatever that tab is called. Can't remember exactly what it is at the moment. Basically you want all the Other tab to be on fastest if I'm remembering correctly, then you just kinda fiddle with the other things one at a time.

[TonyLiberatto 364]

Got it working. After resetting Optifine I had to fiddle with it but I was able to have 128 texture pack and SEUS shaders.

Loved the effect but in the end I went back to default texture.

It was beautiful but I could not recognize any of the materials. 

I kept Shaders and have between 70 and 90 FPS all the time.

 

Thanks to all. especially Kitty. 

[dutchraptor 20]

You would be comparing apples to oranges at that point. Modded 1.6.4 and vanilla 1.8 might as well be two completely different games at this point in terms of performance, because so much has been rewritten. And doing so would have absolutely no benefit because the only way to get performance equal to that of vanilla 1.8 is to wait around for the next 6+ months for TFC to release on 1.8.

Calm down there kitty, just cancelling out potential problems. A lot of people on mac's got a big performance dips on 1.6.4.