[MC-11875] 1.5 HD Textures: Very poor performance with 32x packs and up.

NB: This is not a duplicate of this issue as I am experiencing a significant performance drop with all HD packs, 32x and up.
—

I am the author of Defscape, a 16x, 32x and 64x texture pack.

Having used 1.5 for quite some time while texturing, I've noticed that native HD texture performance is very poor.

Changing settings doesn't seem to affect my FPS, although V-sync on tends to lower my frames.

The following results use the settings:

Distance: Normal
Graphics: Fancy
Smooth lighting: On/Maximum (there is no difference in performance between minimum/maximum)

13w12~

Default: 40-50 FPS (70 FPS looking at the sky - 75 FPS looking at the ground)
16x: 35-50 FPS (60 FPS looking at the sky - 65 FPS looking at the ground)
32x: 25-45 FPS (45 FPS looking at the sky - 50 FPS looking at the ground)
64x: 10-20 FPS (20 FPS looking at the sky - 30 FPS looking at the ground)

Note: Although slightly smoother, frames are generally stuttery and unsmooth, no matter the figure in f3.

1.5:

Default: 25-40 FPS (120 FPS looking at the sky)
16x: 20-35 FPS (70 FPS looking at the sky)
32x: 15-30 FPS (50 FPS looking at the sky)
64x: 10-20 FPS (20 FPS looking at the sky)

Note: All frames are generally stuttery and unsmooth, no matter the figure in f3.

1.4.7:

Default: 35-60 FPS (200 FPS looking at the sky)
16x: 35-60 FPS (200 FPS looking at the sky)
32x: 35-60 FPS (180 FPS looking at the sky)
64x: 35-60 FPS (180 FPS looking at the sky)

Note: All frames are smooth.

1.5 & Optifine:

Default: 60-100 FPS (240 FPS looking at the sky - 120 FPS looking at the ground)
16x: 60-100 FPS (220 FPS looking at the sky - 120 FPS looking at the ground)
32x: 60-100 FPS (210 FPS looking at the sky - 115 FPS looking at the ground)
64x: 60-100 FPS (210 FPS looking at the sky - 115 FPS looking at the ground)

At the moment, the only way 1.5 is playable for me is by using Optifine which seems to fix all the lag-enducing issues that have been introduced between 1.4.7 and 1.5.

That said, having to use a third party modification obviously isn't ideal and shouldn't be a prerequisite for smooth choppy-less gameplay with HD texture packs.

If you wish to test this yourself, here are the different Defscape resolutions:

Mediafire:

Defscape 16x 1.5
Defscape 32x 1.5
Defscape 64x 1.5

Thanks.

Related issues

is duplicated by

MC-8598 Extreme lag/game freeze on snapshot with HD texturepack

MC-11885 HD graphics are miserably slow

MC-12328 Texture pack fps bug

MC-12409 Lag in 13w12~ and 1.5 - Not present in 1.4.7, constant lag, huge spikes in FPS and inability to record gameplay

MC-13197 FPS still lower when using high res packs

relates to

MC-11595 1.5 HD Texture pack stitched images greater than 2048 resolution result in massive performance drop.

MC-13206 Minecraft is recreating textures every single frame and/or tick, which causes immense performance penalties when the textures are high res

Attachments

Comments

migrated 2013-03-15T00:48:34Z

[media][media]

dirk (switched to Minetest) 2013-03-15T16:11:31Z

I can confirm that. I have a frame drop of around 70 percent with identical settings on same hardware.

Aaron Franke 2013-03-19T23:47:39Z

HD packs obviously would lag more than default packs, as there are less pixels to render when you go down resolutions. Only use HD packs if you know your computer can handle them, your performance on the default texturepack tells me you do not have the best setup out there.

dirk (switched to Minetest) 2013-03-20T03:25:52Z

1.5: 20 FPS looking at the sky
1.4.7: 180 FPS looking at the sky

I don’t think that has anything to do with performance or hardware issues, Aaron. They just messed 1.5 up (and kind of “fixed” it in 1.5.1-pre).

@d3fin3d have you tried the 1.5.1-pre snapshot?

gehef 2013-03-21T20:35:01Z

Same here : i was using the BDCraft texture pack in 128x128 in 1.4.7 and it was running very smoothly, without any framerate problem.

Now in 1.5.1, I updated the texture pack to have the one compatible with 1.5, and I hardly get more than 15 FPS which is truly unplayable.

I tried different versions of the pack (16x, 32X & 128x), the higher the slower, whereas in 1.4.7 there was no such differences in FPS.

Dylan Rivers 2013-04-24T17:37:15Z

with BDcraft 128x: Vanilla 20, Optifine 120. I have the same graphics card.

Erik Broes 2013-04-24T19:44:54Z

My goal this week was fixing those issues. It's not completely (nicely/properly) fixed but we'll have a huge performance improvement planned for 1.5.2.

We'll fix the texture handling properly for 1.6 though, so expect it to be in that soon.

– Edit

We just did something completely unacceptable performance wise but ... well ... we do not really care that much for highres texturepacks which is why we never noticed until it was out 😃

dirk (switched to Minetest) 2013-04-25T04:49:44Z

Now that you officially support them, you SHOULD care 🙂

With 1.5.1 testing with BDcraft 64x I have around 90 to 100 FPS With 128x it drops to around 40-50 FPS.

Erik Broes 2013-04-27T08:05:23Z

Try with the 1.5.2 prerelease.

Also being able to load them is most definitely not 'supporting them'.

Dylan Rivers 2013-04-27T13:54:42Z

Still, moving

Erik Broes 2013-04-27T20:26:55Z

Still, moving — what?

Dylan Rivers 2013-04-27T20:29:54Z

Sorry I thought the screenshots would attach to my comment. Still ~200 fps. Moving, ~10 fps

Erik Broes 2013-04-27T20:32:00Z

Try with the 1.5.2 pre-release please.

Dylan Rivers 2013-04-28T10:30:53Z

Tried with 1.5.2 pre-release. While standing still/going in a straight line it is completely smooth, when I move my cursor left or right it drops to 5 fps.

Dylan Rivers 2013-05-02T18:46:56Z

Fixed for me in latest snapshot

d3fin3d 2013-05-02T18:58:03Z

FPS seems a lot smoother and faster in the latest snapshot.

Apocalypsing 2013-05-07T13:12:11Z

1.5.2 seems to have fixed the issue for me with 64x64 packs, but 128x128 packs and higher still have issues. However I can confirm that the problem has been fixed completely for all texture resolutions in the 13w18 snapshot though, which is good news.

dirk (switched to Minetest) 2013-05-07T15:13:34Z

Whatever they did in 1.5.2 – it fixed nothing for me, I just lost 20-30 percent of my frames per second with identical settings and TP 😞

Erik Broes 2013-05-07T15:50:59Z

There won't be any more changes to this subject in 1.5.x. If with 1.5.2 you still have issues please use the larest snapshot or optifine/hdpatcher/whateverflavor thing if you need.

The latest snapshot shouldn't have these issues, if they do please let us know (or buy better hardware 😉).

dirk (switched to Minetest) 2013-05-07T18:53:46Z

My hardware runs Sauerbraten in 2560x1440 on max details with 200+ FPS while Minecraft with lowest settings is around 70-80 FPS again (was around 100 FPS with 1.5.1)

Erik Broes 2013-05-08T04:23:15Z

This means nothing. Minecrafts is far more demanding than any other game polygon wise. Especially since the full world is modifiable. Comparing it to anything static like Sauerbraten is like comparing apples and creepers.

Also your 70-80 fps is with what version?

dirk (switched to Minetest) 2013-05-08T06:03:23Z

I just checked with 13w18c in fullscreen with 64x texture pack. It’s an improvement to 1.5.2 but still not as good as 1.5.1

Erik Broes 2013-05-09T05:21:27Z

That makes no sense whatsoever. 1.5.1 is the worst version off them all. What sort of system are you using that out of 1.5.1, 1.5.2 and 13w18c you get 1.5.1 running best?

dirk (switched to Minetest) 2013-05-09T07:06:42Z

I don’t know why it makes sense or not, I just report, how my system behaves.

$ uname -rms
Linux 3.8.11-1-ARCH x86_64

$ java -version
java version "1.7.0_21"
OpenJDK Runtime Environment (IcedTea 2.3.9) (ArchLinux build 7.u21_2.3.9-2-x86_64)
OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 23.7-b01, mixed mode)

$ grep 'model name' /proc/cpuinfo |uniq
model name	: Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU     E8400  @ 3.00GHz

$ lspci -s 1:00.0
01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: NVIDIA Corporation G94 [GeForce 9600 GT] (rev a1)