I run 2 40 person servers on a p4 3.0 ghz 1 gig of ram with about 40 people
total im running about 85% usage(working on getting a duel processor
computer) that should fix alot of my problems with low fps
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ian mu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, May 20, 2005 3:09 AM
Subject: Re: [hlds] Re: What does RCON STATS CPU Really mean?
Out of interest, how much cpu do others think a 40 slot game server
would take when fully loaded? Not sure if you said what spec the CPUs
are. I'd probably guess its about right (can't be "that" far off
whatever) and expect most current CPUs to hit 85% or so with that.
On 5/20/05, Whisper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
There does appear to be a correlation between the FPS and the CPU numbers
The 18 player server though seems to cope quite well with:
fps_max 600
sv_maxrate 2000
sv_maxupdaterate 120
tickrate 100
whilst maintaining >500 FPS
The 40 player server though (which I never expect to run constantly at >
500 fps) seems to cope quite well with:
fps_max 600
sv_maxrate 2000
sv_maxupdaterate 100
tickrate 66
The but the overall playing experience on the 40 Player server for
people
with client computers that can keep up, results in a excellent end result
especially considering the numbers of players.
On 5/20/05, Alexander Kobbevik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Look at the FPS though... it drops, right?
> And maybe the stats command stress the CPU or HLDS? :-)
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Whisper
> Sent: 20. mai 2005 06:05
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [hlds] Re: What does RCON STATS CPU Really mean?
>
>
> --
> [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
> Clayton the sampling might be correct, but how would that explain the
> results I get when I spam "rcon stats" into console and receive numbers
> that
> are all within 10% of each other?
> Here is exmple:
> 14:03:37 stats
> 14:03:37 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 86.53 73784.24 227882.64 177 6 56.87 39
> 14:03:38 stats
> 14:03:38 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 86.53 74690.58 228744.00 177 6 63.98 39
> 14:03:38 stats
> 14:03:38 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 86.77 75565.57 229665.05 177 6 35.32 39
> 14:03:38 stats
> 14:03:38 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 86.77 76380.45 231317.58 177 6 34.13 39
> 14:03:39 stats
> 14:03:39 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 86.77 77197.75 232984.47 177 6 34.13 39
> 14:03:39 stats
> 14:03:39 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 86.77 77256.87 234898.08 177 6 30.10 39
> 14:03:39 stats
> 14:03:39 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 95.31 77242.05 236992.31 177 6 26.96 39
> 14:03:39 stats
> 14:03:39 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 95.31 77264.55 238138.23 177 6 33.02 39
> 14:03:40 stats
> 14:03:40 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 95.31 77243.81 238387.27 177 6 33.04 39
> 14:03:40 stats
> 14:03:40 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 94.57 77214.17 238615.45 177 6 40.99 39
> 14:03:40 stats
> 14:03:40 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 94.57 77057.98 238889.06 177 6 34.12 39
> 14:03:40 stats
> 14:03:40 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 94.57 76746.83 239109.53 177 6 33.05 39
> 14:03:41 stats
> 14:03:41 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 94.57 76242.27 239287.92 177 6 57.57 39
> 14:03:41 stats
> 14:03:41 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 94.30 75778.00 238699.22 177 6 37.94 39
> 14:03:41 stats
> 14:03:41 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 94.30 75704.43 238780.63 177 6 60.21 39
> 14:03:41 stats
> 14:03:42 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 94.30 75405.64 238652.98 177 6 25.60 39
> 14:03:42 stats
> 14:03:42 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 93.41 75245.19 238275.91 177 6 28.43 39
> 14:03:42 stats
> 14:03:42 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 93.41 75358.87 238213.38 177 6 27.67 39
> 14:03:42 stats
> 14:03:42 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 93.41 75571.36 237885.63 177 6 28.46 39
> 14:03:43 stats
> 14:03:43 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 93.41 76112.34 237668.05 177 6 30.11 39
> 14:03:43 stats
> 14:03:43 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 89.06 76824.73 237348.69 177 6 60.34 39
> 14:03:43 stats
> 14:03:43 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 89.06 77527.95 237276.89 177 6 36.56 39
> 14:03:43 stats
> 14:03:44 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 89.06 77854.19 237533.16 177 6 46.56 39
> 14:03:44 stats
> 14:03:44 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 90.63 77517.18 238679.83 177 6 34.15 39
> 14:03:44 stats
> 14:03:44 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 90.63 77084.93 240084.63 177 6 36.57 39
> 14:03:44 stats
> 14:03:44 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 90.63 76791.86 241383.80 177 6 31.04 39
> 14:03:45 stats
> 14:03:45 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 90.63 76871.59 242368.47 177 6 22.76 39
> 14:03:45 stats
> 14:03:45 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 91.71 77053.85 242882.44 177 6 23.81 39
> 14:03:45 stats
> 14:03:45 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 91.71 77454.66 242307.06 177 6 32.04 39
> 14:03:45 stats
> 14:03:46 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 91.71 78062.38 240988.48 177 6 35.32 39
> 14:03:46 stats
> 14:03:46 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 91.71 78272.21 239666.45 177 6 32.02 39
> 14:03:46 stats
> 14:03:46 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 91.83 78384.60 238314.08 177 6 36.57 39
> 14:03:46 stats
> 14:03:46 CPU In Out Uptime Users FPS Players
> 91.83 78409.96 237305.31 177 6 33.04 39
> Now you cannot tell me that this is not odd and that this is some sort
> of
> time sampling mismatch
> task manager ought to damn well show something that approximates what
> SRCDS
> is reporting back or vice versa, but it does not!
> On 5/20/05, Clayton Macleod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > true, but you have to sample for a certain period of time to get a
> > percentage reading. Obviously I'm just guessing that the period that
> > the game's using is shorter than the period that task manager uses,
> > but it would seem to make sense considering the observations. Why
> > would that be so hard to accept? If you're only sampling usage for
> > 0.1
> > seconds and you see a 99% value there's nothing wrong with that, even
> > if task manager only showed 10% usage at the same time, since task
> > manager samples for 1.0 seconds and it could have been idle for the
> > other 0.9 seconds, which would indeed mean 10% usage for task
> > manager's period.
> >
> > On 5/19/05, Whisper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > --
> > > [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
> > > Well it is not like anybody has stepped up and stated categorically
> what
> > it
> > > really means and is able to explain the discrepancies between the 2
> that
> > a
> > > critically thinking human being would accept.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Clayton Macleod
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
--
_______________________________________________
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
