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 regards,
raoul bhatia
bad ping wrote:
can you support
, 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)
TOTAL server usage is about 10-12%
49.3
63.4
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)
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
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 sample
: 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 100.
Both of the servers
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.
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
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
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 average CPU usage.
The P4
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 not a CPU architect are you
: [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
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 and
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
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
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
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 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]
I
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%
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 remotely innacurate
you
] 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.
(Assuming you don't have a new Intel prototype server running
- Original Message -
From: Daniel Stroven [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2003 10:00 PM
Subject: Re: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
James,
Do me a favor and put one of your kernels at 1000hz and post me some
data? Just so I can see what you get
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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,
I assure you, it is not incorrect. Its
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
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 that
reports CPU % will also
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 for
[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,
]
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 linux, and that is proc. Thats where the HLDS stats function
gets it from, and thats where ps, top
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 kernel, with
DEFAULT
kernel timings results in performance vastly
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 other on this list have far more linux
knowledge than me. Myself, I
: [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 have cpustat installed when I tested out the 2.4.9 kernel. Pretty
neat, but I would like to see some info from rcon stats if possible
from you.
Also if you
Subject: RE: [hlds_linux] Crazy Usage
The stats command uses the value from /proc/pid/stat ,
which is the same
value that top uses. Perhaps the difference you are
encountering is due to
the sampling intervals (hlds smoothes the usage over a 5
second window but
top simply shows
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
Seriously though I just checked out
[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
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
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
[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
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
http://prodigy.redphive.org/images
: 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 you actually tried 32 players?
I mean, my dual mp2800+ cannot run 32 players
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:
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 *exponential* difference
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:
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
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 with no clue to which I speak. Oh, did I miss
something? Was Alan Cox in here stating to everyone
, 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
reading / writing.. I believe your refering to the O(1) scheduler
which
53 matches
Mail list logo
