There are Dual Pentium 4 1GHz systems? In any case wargod, I doubt anybody here would advocate that running 3-5 HLDS processes on a DUAL CPU system would be a problem so long as you kept the player numbers per server at 18 or less.
Moreover, if you were as clever as you make out, you would know better than to suggest that you run odd numbers of HLDS processes on Multi-CPU systems. I think the previous flame war errupted because the initial poster only had a single CPU system, but some people appeared to overlook that fact when the argument broke out. Moreover it would probably help if these Server Variables were properly documented as well as the affect of changing them has on other variables and server performance for a few standard hardware configurations. On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 11:57:19 -0500, wArgOd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Kevin, assuming you are running in console mode, what is the "fps rate" > on your server when it is running? > If it reads around 65 then your simulation rate is low which is the > cause of the latency. make sure you use one of the methods mentioned > here to "unlock the fps". such as running clock.avi in windows media > player. when your servers are all showing above 250 "fps" then try > loading the servers again. > > The "fps" in the console, according to Alfred, is the simulation steps > per second. with the 65fps you will be lucky to host 32 players without > player latency. > > The settings in the steam forums were from before the last 2 updates and > are obsolete. > Change your server.cfg settings as follows and try your server > experiment again: > fps_max 500 > sv_allowdownload "1" > sv_allowupload "1" > sv_downloadurl "http://yourautodownloadurl/"; > sv_forcepreload "1" > sv_stats "0" > sv_maxrate "8192" > sv_minrate "2048" > sv_maxupdaterate "90" > sv_minupdaterate "45" > sv_unlag "1" > sv_maxunlag "0.75" > sv_max_usercmd_future_ticks "15" > sv_cacheencodedents 1 > sv_forcepreload 1 > sv_instancebaselines 1 > snd_digital_surround 1 //new setting with last release > > Also set -nohltv on your command line. > The new -tickrate command line parm defaults to 33 for srcds. > if you intend to only run 2 servers then raise this value towards 100 > until you acheive around 75% CPU when both servers are full. > > Regardless of what my hate club fans say, what I run works for me on my > server hosted at theplanet. theplanet has done a very good job at > keeping the big pipe open for my servers. at one point a technical issue > developed in the router matrix (looked like a ddos attack but wasn't) > and when they finally identified the issue they took the steps at their > cost to correct the issue with even better equipment. In fact they just > performed another round of maintenance on the network for my host last > night. The players in the *E|M|F* servers are very happy to have these > servers on the internet. When a player is banned they always plead for > unbanning because "The EMF servers are the best on the internet". I side > with the players. I have used game hosters and they always give you a > good server for the first 2 months and then the lag starts and you can > see more and more servers in the same ip block. smart hosting providers > are not going to let you change the bandwidth settings so you don't get > to tune your server for optimal performance. unlimited bandwidth does > not equal good performance. but the speed hackers do love unlimited > bandwith on untuned servers. > > I find it interesting to look in the server list at these "hosters", who > swear they can't run more than 4 or 5 servers on a dual xeon host, stay > in business by renting game servers out at a rate that adds up to less > than they have to pay for the host itself. Then you can look in the > internet server list at the IP blocks and see they are running as many > servers as I am only with a lot of customer server names that are > different. So, it seems to me that the hosters don't want anyone else > entering the business as competition so they strenuously argue against > any effective server settings to fool newcomers into thinking there is > no money to be made. > > truth is, there isnt much money to be made anymore hosting game servers. > but for those who are in this to provide entertainment to the players > then read these specs carefully and tune your server. > > And I am hated because I state the truth. Interestingly, another person > has posted a very detailed web page on lag-free servers that just > happens to have a lot of the exact same metrics I use. He is thanked for > the same information as I am attacked for providing. But I no longer > take the bullshit from ray over at raynserv.com. he can kiss my ass. he > has nothing but derisive and arrogant posts and gets the flame wars > started. Ray is the asshol who needs to be removed from all lists. > > but remove me. i have another ten thousand email addresses at my > disposal to subscribe with. > > Myths perpetuated by game hosting companies: > 1. The number of servers per host is limited to between 3 and 5. > 2. Running your autodownload web server on your game host lags the games > 3. You need the services of a "Professional Game Server provider" to > have a popular and hot running game server. > 4. Effective game server administration tools are not free. > 5. wArgOd is an asshole and does not know what he is talking about even > though he has helped many thankful people get set up with their own > dedicated host since is is cheaper in the long run to not go through a > middleman matrix who give you nothing you cant get yourself for less. > > > Kevin Cantrell wrote: > > >sorry if this is a double post, it's my first time > >posting, I have been a lurker. > > > >I would like to throw my two cents in this, It just > >so happens two days ago I was researching information > >in the steam forums and ran across a thread from the > >EMF wargod guy, he posted his rates and talked about > >running 20 servers at once. So I tried it.(kinda)(note > >he has banned by his name in the forums) > > > > > > > >I have a Dual P4 1ghz, 2.5gm ram, Ultra 320 SCSI HD, > >W3k Ent. Server. running on a very fat pipe on the > >backbone. > > > >Below is my normal setup > > > >I have our Main Source server running abovenormal > >priority on CPU 0 > > > >I have a 24/7 Source scoutknivez server running > >abovenormal priority on CPU 1 > > > >I also keep a cs 1.6 server running << but NO ONE ever > >plays on it. > > > > > > > >I am not running any -tickrate or high freq. timer > >like media player. > > > > > > > >I adjusted my rates per the example of the EMF guy, << > >usually I keep things opened up more, but I wanted to > >try more than two servers. > > > > > > > >Here is a copy/paste from the relevant parts of the > >server.cfg file the EMF guy posted > > > > > > > >sv_maxrate "8192" > > > >sv_minrate "2048" > > > >sv_maxupdaterate "60" > > > >sv_max_usercmd_future_ticks "8" > > > >sv_maxunlag "1" > > > >sv_maxvelocity "3500." > > > >sv_minupdaterate "10" > > > > > > > >I average about 15% CPU utilization as a constant, but > >I get LOTS of peaks as high as 80%, during map changes > >it goes to 100% > > > > > > > >Last night I added another 24/7 <map> source server > >running on CPU 1 and abovenormal priority > > > >It filled up very fast. So I had about 45 people on > >total for all three servers. > > > > > > > >This did not work out for me, even though I had my > >main source server on a CPU by itself I was getting > >all kinda of CPU lag when I played on it. > > > >If someone threw a bomb the players froze for a > >second. or a big firefight it lagged out. I checked > >DU meter and was running about 1.5mpbs bandwidth when > >all three server were full, << I have a 6mbps pipe. > > > > > > > >As soon as I shut down the second 24/7 server all > >calmed down and both servers ran well. > > > >I guess my point is to help anyone reading this as to > >what I get from the specs of my server, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >__________________________________ > >Celebrate Yahoo!'s 10th Birthday! > >Yahoo! Netrospective: 100 Moments of the Web > >http://birthday.yahoo.com/netrospective/ > > > >_______________________________________________ > >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 > _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds
