First off... Cable is a shared medium... The more people that use it in an area, the slower it goes. Also, for a server, you want a higher max upload, not download... While a server does need download, it needs the upload more.
That is why DSL is better for a server, you actually pay for your specific speed (though this is changing with some of the providers so they can supply DSL to a wider range of customers at greater distances). I paid for 768/768 DSL and thats exactly what I got, no more, no less. As for T1/T2/T3 lines... First, T1 lines are 1.5Mbps both directions... so its enough to run a 22-28+ person server depending on your settings. While there is technically a such thing as a T2... as it is specified by the IEEE, it is not used by any providers, except for MAYBE within business installations and between buildings (though if they are using something that slow I pity them). Many probably used to however. A T2 is approximately 6Mbps... A T3 owns you, and you could never afford one. It opperates at approximately 45Mbps, and if you had one, you could be your own ISP or server farm. Though you would be a pretty crappy ISP unless all of your subscribers were 56k dialupers, had an extremely small amount of broadband users, or had more than one T3. A T3 is good for an average sized company doing an average amount of webwork. Anything more than that and its way too slow. As to the server specs. I ran my 20 person server on a 2GHz P4 with 512 meg of ram. I know it was overkill, the processing power was more for Windows 2003 Enterprise than for the server itself. However, your server is a Duron... IE: a crippled Athlon, and a slow one at that. If you wanted to give it a fighting chance, run it under Linux, because it uses less resources. Other than that, yes, your server is probably too slow, but since you have such a slow upload rate you probably arent getting more than 4-6 people on the server before it lags all to hell, and 1.1GHz of any kind is enough for 4-6 people. Gondor --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I have Cable and at first i had a 1.5 Mbps > connection. Then they doubled it so i was curious to > check out how much better my bandwidth had gotten > so i took a test and it had like 196k upload and > 1200 download were my best results. When i asked my > ISP comcast why i wasnt getting 3 Mbps they said > that the bandwidth test was inaccurate because if i > did 8 tests at the same time they would be all about > the same upload/download. So my "cap" i am assuming > is 3Mbps but only when i have a whole lot of action > going on like 25 downloads and 5 uploads at the same > time. So why cant my server for steam work any > faster!!!!!! it sucks. I dont like how comcast does > that, i want 3 apples for each download! and an > accurate max upload all the time. Oh pity me! I know > cable is faster than DSL but is it faster than a T1 > T2 or T3 line? And any advice to what i can do with > my Server. I dont see why i need more than 1.1 ghz > AMD duron, 768 MB DDR. Im low budget. If thats my > problem go ahead and laugh. Not like i can hear you! > Sincerely, > POTHEADshotyou > Paul > > > > Send hlds mailing list submissions to > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide > Web, visit > > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body > 'help' to > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it > is more specific > > than "Re: Contents of hlds digest..." > > > > > > Today's Topics: > > > > 1. RE: Hlds_proc Beta 2 (David Fencik) > > 2. RE: Hlds_proc Beta 2 (Rob Harwood) > > 3. Re: Hlds_proc Beta 2 > (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Johan_Str=F6m?=) > > 4. RE: Hlds_proc Beta 2 (Napier, Kevin) > > 5. RE: Hlds_proc Beta 2 (Rob Harwood) > > 6. Re: Hlds_proc Beta 2 (m0gely) > > 7. RE: SV: SV: SV: [hlds] ot - bandwidth vs > utilization (Marshal Mannerheim) > > 8. Re: Hlds_proc Beta 2 > (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Johan_Str=F6m?=) > > 9. RE: SV: SV: SV: [hlds] ot - bandwidth vs > utilization (David Fencik) > > 10. Re: SV: SV: SV: [hlds] ot - bandwidth vs > utilization (Shane Robinett) > > > > --__--__-- > > > > Message: 1 > > From: "David Fencik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: RE: [hlds] Hlds_proc Beta 2 > > Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 10:35:55 -0400 > > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > I second that. > > > > Dave > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of HLDS List > > Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 4:21 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: [hlds] Hlds_proc Beta 2 > > > > Rob, > > You, sir, are now officially 'da man!' > > I haven't tried the Steam updater, but the Web > Interface is great! > > > > Now for what's sure to add to your long to-do > list: > > How about some functionality that allows certain > users to start/stop > > servers without giving them access to the configs? > > This could be a per-user/server kind of deal or > an all-user/all-server > > setup. > > > > I trust my top admins to start and stop servers, > but I don't want to > > give > > them the opportunity to muck around in the > configs. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or > view the list archives, > > please visit: > > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > > > > > > > > --__--__-- > > > > Message: 2 > > Subject: RE: [hlds] Hlds_proc Beta 2 > > Date: Thu, 13 May 2004 16:22:30 +0100 > > From: "Rob Harwood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Beta3 will have, among other improvements, a > permissions system for the > > web interface where you can define usernames and > passwords, each user > > can have access to different servers, and I will > include a couple of > > levels of access, like "stop/start", "change > config", "view logs" etc. > > > > I'm also experimenting with installshield to see > if I can improve the > > setup procedure somewhat. > > > > - Rob. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of David Fencik > > Sent: 13 May 2004 15:36 > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: [hlds] Hlds_proc Beta 2 > > > > I second that. > > > > Dave > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of HLDS List > > Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 4:21 AM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: [hlds] Hlds_proc Beta 2 > > > > Rob, > > You, sir, are now officially 'da man!' > > I haven't tried the Steam updater, but the Web > Interface is great! > > > > Now for what's sure to add to your long to-do > list: > > How about some functionality that allows certain > users to start/stop > > servers without giving them access to the configs? > > This could be a per-user/server kind of deal or > an all-user/all-server > > setup. > > > > I trust my top admins to start and stop servers, > but I don't want to > > give > > them the opportunity to muck around in the > configs. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or > view the list archives, > > please visit: > > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or > view the list archives, > > please visit: > > > http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds > > > > > > --__--__-- > > > > Message: 3 > > From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Johan_Str=F6m?= > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: [hlds] Hlds_proc Beta 2 > === message truncated === __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Movies - Buy advance tickets for 'Shrek 2' http://movies.yahoo.com/showtimes/movie?mid=1808405861 _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
