Thread: Game Servers

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.

Hi Danny,

My personal opinion is that pentiums are poo for gaming

Opterons are indeed very expensive, and powerful, but imo not something you get your money out of for running gaming processes.

Personally, I don't think you can go wrong with either an AMD 3400 64bit or an AMD 3700 64bit.

We primarily use dual xeons from Dell, when they do their 'free 2nd CPU' offers, you really have nothing to loose

To compare Athlon64 and Opteron... Athlon is really a desktop processor and generally has 512k of chip cache, Opteron is really a server processor and generally has 1meg of chip cache.. so generally better performance.

In most instances, you cant fit 'that' many game servers on even dual xeon / opteron boxes anymore purely because CPU usage of game servers being so high!

Im looking at getting a Dual x Dual Core Opteron w/4Gb DDR to run some personal g/servers on in the NL. Seams to have plenty of kick, but ill let you know in a few weeks.

The AMD Athlon 64 3800+ seem to have a slight edge over the rest of the AMD 64 range... might be worth looking at.

150/250 if you are comparing clock speed - but I don't know if clock speed comparison between those architectures is a valid comparison.

Anyhow the 3800+ only has 512KB of L2 cache compared to 1MB on the Opteron - and on some processors the cache can make much more difference than clock speed.

AMD Athlon 64 Processor Model Numbers and Feature Comparison
AMD Opteron Processor Model Numbers and Features Comparison

BF2 really does benefit from 64-bit processing. In tests a dual opteron 248 provides double the player slots of a dual 2.8 GHz Xeon. Dual 252 and Dual 275 is the way forward for games; we haven't bought a xeon in some time now