How do you work that out ?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthew
Donnon
Sent: 22 September 2003 10:54
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
halving the CPU mhz is not an accurate way of representing a HT system
Matthew Donnon wrote:
halving the CPU mhz is not an accurate way of representing a HT system
the virtual CPU simply indicates the unused pipelines and math calc units.
which would make it 1176 mhz
Not to mention that he's referring to a Xeon, not even a regular P4.
--
Eric (the Deacon remix)
_
ent: Monday, September 22, 2003 2:09 AM
Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
> Just lookin at a full 1.5 16 player server running de_dust2.
> Note : this is on a dual xeon 2.4 with HT, no other servers running)
> The CPU figures are of 1 of the 4 virtual processors. (eg. 1.2ghz)
>
ay, September 22, 2003 6:13 AM
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
> i get the feeling, that the glibc-2.2.x does something better. somehow,
> most ppl using 2.2.x report normal cpu usage, while the others with
> 2.3.x report high usage + lags.
>
> or am i wrong?
>
> best
>James,
>
>Are you being ignorant again? The P4 _IS_ a marketing chip,
> ...The Pentium 4 is a HORRIBLE design...Read any of the reviews even from
>sites...
Hate to interfere in what is clearly a bitter rivalry...
You're confusing 3D graphics performance with application performance.
I love AMD
James Sykes wrote:
Clearly blinded by some kind of AMD fanaticism.
I like AMD, but at the end of the day Intel still make the better chips.
Yeah, I'll drop that in the same category of unproven dogma as the whole
"It's an established fact that Windows CPU reporting is very inaccurate"
and "THOSE NU
: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
James,
Are you being ignorant again? The P4 _IS_ a marketing chip, and every
word
Eric said is more or less accurate to a T. The Pentium 4 is a HORRIBLE
design which gets higher megahertz with a massive performance. In
benchmarking half-life dedicated server under linux on
ehalf Of James
Sykes
Sent: Sunday, September 21, 2003 5:46 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
Eric,
Talking shit? However much I prefer P3's for a server platform - there's
no denying P4s performance. P4 a crappy design? I don't think so.
You're no
ormation you read on GREATWEBSITE.COM.(powered by AMD of
course)
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Eric
(Deacon)
Sent: 21 September 2003 17:29
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
James Sykes wrote:
> To sum up the total a
Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of raoul
bhatia
Sent: 21 September 2003 17:05
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
would you care posting your 1.5 results with these two test machines
too?
would be nice to see the actual differences
James Sykes wrote:
To sum up the total average CPU usage.
The P4 was using : 1008Mhz
The p3 was using : 576Mhz
I also joined the servers to see the performance ingame - both were
about equal.So we've got quite a large usage difference of 432Mhz!
Anyone care to shed some light?
The P4 is a marketing
would you care posting your 1.5 results with these two test machines too?
would be nice to see the actual differences there too.
James Sykes wrote:
That's not the point.
This difference is MUCH bigger in 1.6 that it was in 1.5
In 1.5 I saw 100-150mhz difference - no more.
_
bject: RE: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
P4 have sucky raw fpu performance compared to amd or p3.
- Sindre
>= Original Message From "James Sykes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> =
>Just did some testing on a few machines here!
>Both machines are running Linux 2.5.75, with HZ set to
P4 have sucky raw fpu performance compared to amd or p3.
- Sindre
>= Original Message From "James Sykes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> =
>Just did some testing on a few machines here!
>Both machines are running Linux 2.5.75, with HZ set to 100.
>Both of the servers are with sys_ticrate 100.
>
>Each
Just did some testing on a few machines here!
Both machines are running Linux 2.5.75, with HZ set to 100.
Both of the servers are with sys_ticrate 100.
Each sample was taken every few seconds.
I originally did this for several minutes - I have just posted the
average readings.
No other HLDS were r
Stan Bubrouski wrote:
Again what the hell are you talking about? All the quote
above says is that windows CPU usage reporting can be
innacurate. I never said it could never reach 100% and
I never made a single claim about Windows reporting more
or less CPU usage than is true. Jesus.
Wait...you s
Daniel Stroven wrote:
This is all I was
trying to argue last night, but James and Daniel
aren't even open to the possibility that the numbers
are even remotely innacurate
Yes, I know, I'm sorry, names often get mixed up my
head as do the words I'm trying to get out, very
frustrating :-/
you mean j
James Sykes wrote:
YOUR CPU USAGE IS INCORRECT.
It is NOT POSSIBLE to have a FULL 16 PLAYER SERVER RUNNING AT 2% CPU
USAGE.
Guys, please bear in mind that this almeighty, mythical "CPU" does not
exist. Instead, we have an insanely wide variety of both CPUs and their
supporting cast. There's a who
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
Deacon what are the specs of your server??
- Original Message -
From: Eric (Deacon)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 10:08 AM
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Crazy
Stan Bubrouski wrote:
The fact remains that you cannot run 3 half-full or full
HLDS at only 30% total. And that a 10/15 player server
is only using 2% of CPU.
Why not?
--
Eric (the Deacon remix)
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view th
Stan Bubrouski wrote:
Gotta stop encouraging this kid. This thread is convincing
people to use outdated, broken, insecure kernels because his
results are skewed by too low of a sampling rate.
-sb
First of all, stop referring to him as "this kid". You're being a
complete asshole, arrogant and insu
James,
> It's an established fact that windows can be very inaccurate when
> reporting CPU usage. I myself have also seen this happen.
Another blanket statement? Can we stop just making statements and not
backing them up? To me, thats not established at all, in fact, I've never
read or come acr
hings that are in the units of "ticks per seconds"
>> >
>> >Not only that, but also by changing the timer in an unpatched kernel the
>> >date would wrap in 49.7 days instead of the 497 you would get with 100.
>> >
>> >James
>> >
>&
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James
Couzens
Sent: 19 September 2003 18:16
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
James,
> YOUR CPU USAGE IS INCORRECT.
> It is NOT POSSIBLE to have a FULL 16 PLAYER SERVER RUNNING AT 2% CPU
> USAGE.
> (A
CTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Daniel Stroven
Sent: Saturday, 20 September 2003 8:36 a.m.
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage [OT]
This is all I was
trying to argue last night, but James and Daniel
aren't even open to the possibility that the numbers
are even
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
Guys... If the readings take a 5 minute average of the "stat(s)" command in the
hlds_l, and if you spawn the CPU is 0%, and walking 5%, and shooting shielding laming
jumping bla bla will take up to 50
Brian are you rebuilding world or just kernel in these tests?
If its just kernel it would be good to see if a full build world
changes the results at all as it could well be an incompatibility
there somewhere.
Steve / K
- Original Message -
From: "Brian A. Stumm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
Daniel Stroven wrote:
r5-cs5- [CS5] Statistics: CPU: 2% FPS: 50 Players: 0/17 Map: de_dust
r5-cs4- [CS4] Statistics: CPU: 0% FPS: 51 Players: 15/17 Map: de_dust
2% with no players and 0% with 15 players? Definitely not right. :) doh!
Even 2% with 16 players is just...
So nice !
Come on guys, it
Brian A. Stumm wrote:
I don't believe that redhat 7.2 fresh install numbers are wrong. Thats
what I run and get similar CPU usage to what he reports. Granted I run TFC
but I still see 2% cpu with 10 players connected.
Jesus can't one of the Valve guys just come
out and say you can't run an hlds
lt;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 12:16 AM
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
> On Thursday 18 September 2003 09:40 pm, Stan Bubrouski wrote:
> > Matt Heler wrote:
> > > Thoose are io schedulers that you were refering to they control the
disk
> > > r
From: "Brian A. Stumm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 12:02 AM
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2003, James Couzens wrote:
>
> > Stan,
> >
> > I am not some "child" wit
At 00:09 9/19/2003 -0500, you wrote:
James Couzens wrote:
Eric,
? It fluctuated between 5-8% during round start and peaks of 32-38% when
people were running around. To be fair avg cpu for that map would have to
be in the 20% range.
James
James Couzens wrote:
Its very real. Your ignorance i
>What do ya think? The windows solution becoming a "think thru"?
If it wasn't for the damn price tag I would have switched long ago.
Jeremy
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://list.valvesoftw
EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Eric
(Deacon)
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 7:22 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>Incorrect or not, you do realize that there is a SIGNIFICANT difference,
>>like, an *expone
>Yes, let's. How about running SETI and seeing what happens?
What does Setti have to do with anything? NM don't answer that it doesn't
matter.
Jeremy
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit:
http://lis
sage -
From: "Sindre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Alfred Reynolds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Half-Life Dedicated Linux
Server Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 8:09 PM
Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
> Have y
gas, go
play on the servers for your self.
24.207.0.203:27015
24.207.0.203:27016
24.207.0.203:27017
24.207.0.203:27018
James.
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 8:28 AM
Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
Matthew Cheale wrote:
A firewall isn't going to protect you from a buffer overflow in a
required daemon ( e.g. ssh ).
Sense when is sshd required to intialize a linux box?
--
Eric (the Deacon remix)
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or vie
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Incorrect or not, you do realize that there is a SIGNIFICANT difference,
like, an *exponential* difference, between two 14-player servers and one
28-player server, right?
How do you know there is a difference if there is no way to measure the
usage?
Jeremy
...? Are you ne
Have you actually tried 32 players?
I mean, my dual mp2800+ cannot run 32 players without fps dropping below 30 on
some maps, and I'm the kind of guy that really wants 100fps, which shouldn't
be that hard with such "state of the art" hardware.
Your windows binaries are far better though, it ran the
Frank Stollar wrote:
The new VM started
with 2.4.10 was (after some bugs) superior as the old VM. Proved by
application benchmarks. And the new scheduler in 2.6. adds even more
power to the kernel. Why should all other applications gain from the new
VM besides HL?
Forgive my ignorance, but what are
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You are proving nothing. You are offering opinions and just assuming your
programs are correct.
In his defence, he's showing you hard numbers, not opinions, and yes,
he's assuming that proc isn't lying. Has innacurate proc info been a
major issue reported by anyone else in
t; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 7:16 PM
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
> I must say those stats are laughable what do u have to do on that box to
> get something to show above 10% calculate pi to 1000 decimal places :P
fe Dedicated Linux Server Mailing List
> Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
>
>
> The "stats" command uses the value from /proc//stat ,
> which is the same
> value that top uses. Perhaps the difference you are
> encountering is due to
> the sampling intervals (hlds
Sent: 18 September 2003 15:19
>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
>>
>>
>> James,
>>
>> Can you give us some "rcon stats" results on these games? When you
>> the servers are close to full?
>>
>> I
et/
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Daniel Stroven
> Sent: 18 September 2003 18:25
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
>
>
> James,
>
> I have no doubt, you and many ot
- Original Message -
From: "Frank Stollar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 12:24 PM
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >>I am telling you, and PROVING to you, that using this k
-
From: "James Couzens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 10:38 AM
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
> Daniel,
>
> Statistics information, IE "cpu jitters" are constantly updated in a
single
> place in linu
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am telling you, and PROVING to you, that using this kernel, with DEFAULT
kernel timings results in performance vastly superior to any kernel
released after.
When we all know it is just impossible for the 1% you quote to be true.
I fully ACK Jeremy. This is not possible,
>I am telling you, and PROVING to you, that using this kernel, with DEFAULT
>kernel timings results in performance vastly superior to any kernel
released
>after.
You are proving nothing. You are offering opinions and just assuming your
programs are correct. When we all know it is just impossible f
PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
Daniel,
Statistics information, IE "cpu jitters" are constantly updated in a single
place in linux, and that is proc. Thats where the HLDS "stats" function
gets it from, and thats where ps, top, and any other utilitiy in linux tha
>http://prodigy.redphive.org/images/de_airstrip.jpg
You are nutts, that is not real. Please use some common sense if you thing
you can run all those players on one server and get those results.
Sorry
Jeremy
___
To unsubscribe, edit your list prefere
PROTECTED]
Subject: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
Guys,
Refer to my previous post, which states, and proves that by using kernel
2.4.9 you can achieve incredibly low useage, using default kernel timings.
Here is an example:
AMD XP2600 1GB PC2700 DDR333:
[7:19:pm] -r5-cs3- [CS3] Statistics: CPU: 1
chip.
If it works for you great, for me the performance simply wasn't there.
- Original Message -
From: "James Couzens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 2:15 AM
Subject: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
> Jeremy,
>
&g
I've got a Dual P800 1GB of RAM running 2 CS servers (not mps so why not
eh). It copes fine when playing dust etc, but when the heavy maps begin
the CPU usage shoots up. I am going to have to replace the box, which
isn't something I can warrent yet.
Daniel Stroven wrote:
This is a multi-part mes
ts in performance vastly superior to any kernel released
after.
James
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2003 7:43 PM
Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
> >Here is an example:
> >
> >AMD XP
56 matches
Mail list logo