[1.19.4] Shader Performances
As I've come to note, Iris seems to have some if not most shaders perform worse.
Example, Complementary Reimagined!
- Runs at 180 - 210 on Optifine.
- Runs at 140 - 160 on Sodium/Iris
It's a strange thing, As Sodium gives more vanilla FPS as a whole. What all could be happening here?
AMD Ryzen 7 5800X
AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT
24GB 3200 DDR4 [4 ALLOCATED]
67 Replies
There are other optimization mods that can improve framerates, namely lithium and starlight. Install those first for a fair performance comparison, since sodium only improves rendering performance and optifine tries to do everything.
Otherwise make sure you're actually using the same settings (both in video settings and in the shader pack settings)
If that doesn't work I can only say: every hardware configuration is different and some perform better with optifine, most perform better with iris. It's important to try both and figure out which one runs better on a given system
That's weird tho, I had a 5800X/6700XT and 32 GB 3600 MHz for a while and iris performed way better, so it can't be the hardware that doesn't work well with iris
Hrm
Well if you could send F3 screenshots that could help
But one thing I could think of is that Optifine loads chunks a lot slower, so it might not have reached your target render distance while Iris did
This is BSL
why are you not using vsync
and you're getting 144+fps and saying it's laggy
they didn't say it's laggy... and the comparison is with one shaderpack...
it's definitely maxing out your GPU, so I'm not sure why optifine would perform better. Did you test both in the same scene and same version?
Did you try again after installing starlight and lithium?
Starlight in particular, its not needed anymore in 1.20 but if youre still on 1.19.4 it makes a noticeable difference with the lighting system
Lithium will probably improve cpu performance more than anything so it likely wouldnt affect your current problem
definitely try with starlight, and perhaps also have a go with immediatelyfast
@Deleted User
I utilize lithium and starlight*
It's probably just a hardware thing
One moment
perhaps, though the hardware itself shouldnt have any issues especially if its working in optifine
i also use complementary reimagined primarily, which if any other performance related mods other than optifine are you using?
I can test it on my system as well and see if the performance is any different
Using default optifine [since 1.20 doesnt have a forge version yet] and sodium with lithium and immediatelyfast
BSL is EXTREMELY prominent
Depending on scenario at least
which version of BSL? The latest?
Im starting to consider it may be more scenario based
Having switched to 1.20 has seemingly put iris [reimagined] above optifine in more situations compared to .4
well, you can test it
generate a new world with a preset seed
spawn in, dont move and just check framerate
do the same on both optifine/sodium installs and wait a minute or two for average fps to stabilize
Well I do already have a completely empty world
Optifine
Sodium
Oh hang on
Mismatched the packs
There
Not too different
Likely not even noticeable
this looks like within variance
?
quite similar, and GPU utilization makes sense as wel
basically no difference, fps fluctuates a little all the time
188fps @ 98%
177fps @ 91%
looks like just fluctuation
if the difference is noticeable, I would recommend perhaps capping your fps lower at something like 150 which both installs can hit consistently
Mhm
I leave it uncapped for tests just for an easier look at difference
I cap it to like 120 - 140 normally
What I'm trying to do is see what works better as a whole
Heres the interesting part, Aka BSL
30 Difference
I cant tell if it means much in the end, Though
Its more like a future proofing thing
are you sure your settings are the same? in teh second screenshot there, the leaves on the tree are rendered completely different and the houses in the distance as well
oh yeah, i forgor optifine does that stuff automatically
that might explain the difference yeah
im such a goober
Kinda strange though, Optifine is using the see thru leaves while sodium is not for instance
Honestly It might not even matter
I think optifine gives more frames with shaders and whatnot due to how it deals with chunks and all that, But sodium gives more overall performance
perhaps
im testing at the moment as well with a simple scene
Spawned in mangrove, new world
Optifine about 110 FPS
Sodium about 160
Comp Reimagined
Optifine may work better short term but its probably worse long term
certainly they will perform similarly well, but very differnt in different situations
BSL just as prominent in the mangrove setting,
190 on sodium
100 on Opti
i will try bsl as well
DEAR GOD YOUR FPS.
HOLY SHIT.
WITH A FUCKING 3090?
keep in mind the scene
im staring at some grass and dirt blocks
yeah
to keep varience like trees and distant rendering down
next ill try BSL
and then a different scene with trees
300 vs 400 fps
however default rendering settings is clearly completely different
i think the optifine pre-packaged settings are a lot more aggressive with culling and render distance
Yeah
The thing is without shaders Sodium's performance tends to exceed it
Its a little funky thats for sure
with similar looking render distance
same fps
How'd you achieve that?
i just lowered the render distance from the default 12 down to 6
left and right of the screen the bamboo you can see derenders the same distance
im loading into optifine to check just in case
optifine default render distance is 8 chunks
however, if you compare it visually to the sodium/fabric screenshot
the render distance on optifine at 8 chunks, and the render distance at 6 chunks on sodium/fabric
they look the same
Strange
I normally run 12 chunks cause its a sweet spot sorta
Example as to without shaders
Optifine is about 400 - 500 within the mangrove itself
Sodium is 900 - 1000
sure, ill try that too
This tells me
That Sodium's render should be 2 below the desired on opti?
yes
if 12 on optifine
10 on sodium
See thats where it shines best
lol idk how people say 1.8.9 runs better
these screenshots are with both versions running at the same time
including the shaders one
ofc tabbed out reduces fps but still
So all of it is just situational as sheit
Plus Iris is technically 'different'
Even in other tests ive seen some shaders drop below
Its obvious sodium gives better fps, thats already been WAY proven
just something with how shaders are treated + settings i guess
isn't it known that optifine "lies" about render distance?
in this case it seems optifine's "12" is actually 10.
Yeah because optifine is rendering like half the chunks in that example
look at the top left C counter
Summary of the whole thread: Seems that Optifine just has shorter render distance
optifine uses an absurdly aggressive fog culling algorithm that also hides visible chunks
and you can actually make it render those chunks by zooming onto them, significantly lowering performance
Presumed so