Thread: Game Servers

Wizzo, the 2.8 xeons you mentioned, are they the 533 versions or the 800 FSB EM64T versions?

This is on the 533 and 800 FSB. We have quite a variety . Not tried it on the 64-bit Intel versions. However, we've always found that FSB really doesn't affect the performance so much for gameservers we've found. For example, you only just get 2 x 32-slot decent servers out of a dual 2.8 xeon whereas you can run 2 x 64 super smooth on a dual 248 opteron. We did manage to get a 2.8 running 2 x 64 slot servers but they were of half the FPS and really poor performance in comparison. As a result we'll only ever put 32-player max on a xeon for BF2.

We have seen similar performance differences on other games as well, such as hl2ds, although not quite to the same level.

Grrrr, I had spent ages doing a reply, tried to cut and paste into Word (to spell check as you do) and it wouldn’t re-appear :P Anyway the jist of my post was:

Thanks Wizzo, that’s very helpful, unfortunately we don’t quite have the vast resources of MPuK so it can be difficult choosing the correct hardware as we cant really afford to make the wrong choice

We presently have benched a few of our current systems and some of our old ones (a dual 2.8 xeon (533 bus) a dual 2.8 xeon (EM64t) and a dual oppy 244) in general we found the EM64T xeon to perform the best, achieving an extra 20-30 CSS slots over it predecessor xeon chip, I’m not 100% sure how it does against the oppy tho, I’m pretty confident it does out perform the oppy quite a bit, just not as much as the old xeons.

If you're on a budget I'd seriously consider the 4400+ dual core. 2.2 GHz cores, so equivalent to a dual 248 opteron and quite a bit less cost. Dual core is certainly seeming the way to go to get more bang for your buck. For the ultimate density, dual opteron 275 (4 x 2.2 GHz cores yielding 256 BF2 slots in 1u) is a monster of a machine, but somewhat pricey. For best balance cost vs performance, I'd go with 4400+ currently.

Wiz, have you tested any of the 4400+'s?

I had a look at the Intel 2.8 dual cores and found them to be pants, they were barely as powerful as single xeon 2.8, let alone a dual, I want to make sure its not the same with the X2's before I go buy some

We have a few 4400+ running and they perform very comparably with a dual 248 opteron, at least with BF2 which was our key concern in the tests. I expect they would perform similarly well with other games.

I can assure you they are by no means pants. We just bought another batch of them instead of dual opterons.

Our next test will be the new Opteron 100 chips. These seem to offer better pricing than the opteron chip with comparable performance. I believe they are actually Athlon 64 chips which go through more testing, rather than outright opterons. Will let you know when we find out how they perfom.

Hmmm, thats very interesting, Wizzo, I dont suppose you would mind me PM'ing you with a few hardware questions relating to the dual cores?

Cheers!

nps. I can point you in some good directions to source them too

1.) The xeons Rapid sell are the 64bit variety
2.) Please don’t open the Intel vs AMD can of worms, i suggest you use the search feature, you will clearly see from the results what people in the 'know' think about which option is better.
3.) Your server is overloaded, heavily!
4.) None Xeon, P4's are not great to run game servers from really, they aren’t more expensive than A64's in general at all, and the larger amounts of cache on intel systems makes little difference (A P4 3.0Ghz Northwood would out perform a Prescott in terms of latency, power efficiency and heat output)

THIS USER HAS BEEN GAGGED BY THE FORUM HOSTS FOR SPAM OR BREAKING THE RULES...
User will be ungaged in around 78 hours from this post.

Originally Posted by aXeR

(A P4 3.0Ghz Northwood would out perform a Prescott in terms of latency, power efficiency and heat output)

What makes you think that Axer?
I haven't ever bench marked them, but I would have thought the 800 FSB of the Prescott would out perform a Northwood any day in terms of latency / speed.

Agreed they get much hotter and use more power.

they aren’t more expensive than A64's in general at all

i never said xeons or p4s were more than amd64's.

3.) Your server is overloaded, heavily!

It seems you are wrong people are not complaining so people are happy the guys over at srcds seem to agree with me people there are running more than me with success. Its all about timing mate.

4.) None Xeon, P4's are not great to run game servers from really, they aren’t more expensive than A64's in general at all, and the larger amounts of cache on intel systems makes little difference (A P4 3.0Ghz Northwood would out perform a Prescott in terms of latency, power efficiency and heat output)

and this is a load of c**p xeon is a server processor designed for relaying information it is completely different from a p4 we are not talking bout desktop processing i realise opterons are the best but some people cant afford opterons and xeon are the second best thing. I am not one of those biased people who favour amd or intel i just chose the most cost effective solution. And i believe that is the single xeon power efficiency and heat output are the same thing where do you think the wasted power gos it turns into heat you numpty. You are comparing 2 pentium 4 processors not a xeon i realise that the extra cache makes little difference on p4s thats why i dont have one in my PC. I think ill stick with xeons they do wel at the moment but ill see what srcds have to say bout it.
And why is something being more expensive a good thing.


I think that renders your argument completely void AXER

nice to see that your company uses the old xeons so they cant be that bad can they?

Why choose Cybernetic??

We are a real limited company, we have office based staff to answer your phone enquiries as well as the usual online support.

We use Dual Xeon rack mount servers, not pc's or shuttle hardware.

We have multiple networks and network redundancy.

<>

Originally Posted by chrisbyrd

slightly contradicted by:
lol

He was quoting Cybernetic....