I've got a question about your kernel, is it patched with the RT-patch? I know that RT causes more stable fps but a lot higher cpu load.
> Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 03:36:10 -0700 > From: je...@opendreams.net > To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com > CC: sai...@specialattack.net > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] cpu on i7 920 > > > Looks fine, don't mess with it. > > generic-receive-offload would be good if you were doing 10G networking, > but otherwise forget about it. > > Make sure that your RAM is in the right slots as recommended by Tyan. > That can slow things down sometimes but I would not expect that to cause > such significant problems. > > I have no clue. Grab an old cruddy desktop, set it up on your home > network, do a quickplay qualified server, and then watch how it runs. > Use the same OS and versions you are using on your server and then start > twiddling. You only need about a 2Mbps upstream rate for a 24-player > server. > > I would blame software way before I started blaming hardware. > > Actually, I'd blame something you did unknowingly, first, but just > because I'm a BOFH. > > People like to throw switches in the desperate hope that one of them was > put there by system developers specifically just to slow things down, > like a turbo switch on an old 486DX. > > "Surely, my sheer desire to make things go faster and by randomly > throwing every bios setting, recompiling my kernel with obscure realtime > patches I found, enabling weird sysctrl parameters, and buying a Bigfoot > gaming NIC will make things go faster!" > > And that's why we have fps_max 1000 and 100PPS update/cmd rates on servers. > > I really have no idea what I'm talking about. I've only been messing > with srcds servers for the last nine months or so. > > Then again... Seagate did ship me all of those SATA 300 drives with the > 150-limiting jumpers on by default. > > > > Saint K. wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I am getting these values returned, not entirely sure what I am looking at; > > > > mrblonde:~# ethtool -k eth0 > > Offload parameters for eth0: > > rx-checksumming: on > > tx-checksumming: on > > scatter-gather: on > > tcp-segmentation-offload: off > > udp-fragmentation-offload: off > > generic-segmentation-offload: on > > generic-receive-offload: off > > large-receive-offload: off > > ntuple-filters: off > > receive-hashing: off > > > > > > Does this appear to be good? I've checked the chipset specs and it supports > > checksum offloading. > > > > Saint K. > > ________________________________________ > > From: hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com > > [hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Andrew Armitage > > [and...@thirdlife.org] > > Sent: 25 July 2011 10:36 > > To: hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com > > Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] cpu on i7 920 > > > > I wouldn't expect problems with. But I happily admit to being no expert. > > > > Try ethtool -k<interface> and see what's what? > > > > A > > > > On 25/07/2011 08:42, Saint K. wrote: > >> The servers are build on Tyan Tempest i5400 motherboards, based on > >> the Intel 5400B chipset platform, the Gbit nic's used on this board > >> are Intel 82563EB chips. > >> > >> I've never really figured the load could be related to the networking > >> chip as our throughput tests never really show any issues when tested > >> (with all sorts of packet sizes, tcp/udp) > >> > >> Saint K. ________________________________________ From: > >> hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com > >> [hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Andrew > >> Armitage [and...@thirdlife.org] Sent: 25 July 2011 09:36 To: > >> hlds_linux@list.valvesoftware.com Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] cpu on i7 > >> 920 > >> > >> Maybe the issue is the network hardware? HLDS is very network > >> intensive. > >> > >> I believe that some cards support checksum offloading and some > >> don't. > >> > >> A > >> > >> On 25/07/2011 07:28, Saint K. wrote: > >>> What I am still not getting is that our Xeon E5420's are doing > >>> like 70-80% load on a single core for 24 players, and our Xeon > >>> E5410's 90%+, where you say your older 4600+ does 70%. > >>> > >>> Tried all sorts of different kernels out there. > >>> > >>> Is there perhaps certain BIOS settings which could benefit when > >>> running gameservers on them? > >>> > >>> Ours surely should perform much better then that? > >>> > >>> Saint K. ________________________________________ From: > >>> hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com > >>> [hlds_linux-boun...@list.valvesoftware.com] On Behalf Of Jesse > >>> Molina [je...@opendreams.net] Sent: 25 July 2011 05:15 To: > >>> Half-Life dedicated Linux server mailing list Subject: Re: > >>> [hlds_linux] cpu on i7 920 > >>> > >>> I have a AMD Phenom x6 1055T doing multiple servers at the same > >>> time. TF2 causes the active core to go to 100% for about two > >>> seconds during map changes, but otherwise I've never seen it go > >>> that high for extended periods of time. Average during full > >>> 24-player usage is about 40%. > >>> > >>> I also have an older AMD Athlon64 x2 4600+ that runs a single > >>> 24-player TF2 quickplay server. It averages 70% usage when full > >>> and gameplay is great. > >>> > >>> Both of these are desktop class boards with DDR2 PC800M RAM. > >>> Linux 2.6.39. > >>> > >>> Try watching your CPU usage at (relatively) high resolution with > >>> something like "htop -d 1" > >>> > >>> No clue why you are maxing out like that. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Eric Riemers wrote: > >>>> All, > >>>> > >>>> I run a 32 slots server on a i7 920 @ 2.67ghz, but i can see > >>>> with top and such that its potentially maxing out at 100% at > >>>> times since it only uses one core. Is it really now doing so much > >>>> cpu that even a i7 core isn't enough? Didn't have much complaints > >>>> before the pew pew. > >>>> > >>>> 24 slots on the same server do around 60% when full. > >>>> > >>>> Eric > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, > >>>> edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please > >>>> visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > >>> > >>> -- # Jesse Molina # Mail = je...@opendreams.net # Page = > >>> page-je...@opendreams.net # Cell = 1.602.323.7608 # Web = > >>> http://www.opendreams.net/jesse/ > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, > >>> edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please > >>> visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, > >>> edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please > >>> visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit > >> your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > >> http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > >> > >> _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit > >> your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: > >> http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > > please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > > > _______________________________________________ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, > > please visit: > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux > > -- > # Jesse Molina > # Mail = je...@opendreams.net > # Page = page-je...@opendreams.net > # Cell = 1.602.323.7608 > # Web = http://www.opendreams.net/jesse/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please > visit: > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
