On 29.04.2009 20:28, Barny wrote:
> To be honest (considering that I'm neither
> a Linux, nor a HLDS expert), for me it seems that L4D/HLDS will consume
> all the resources quickly what you provide to it, although it can
> operate very nice with moderate hardware like as I described above.
>
I
I use one virtual L4D server (Xen, Linux as both the host and guest OS),
which mainly operates in campaign mode, so serves up to 4 players. The
host machine is an old IBM server with dual 1.3GHz P3 CPU (Coppermine)
and a RAID5 array with SCSI disks, 3 units. The virtual (guest) machine
has the
Good point. I don't want to find myself in need of a better server in
6-month so a year even. I'd like to be able to leave this server
running for quite a long time.
Would I maybe be better off getting a machine like I listed to JUST run
TF2 (1 game) and then another same or even with less pow
Are we talking about a multi-core like Dual Core or Quad Core? I am
trying to watch how much I spend, but I don't want to spend too little
and get screwed in a few months or a year. Right now my group only
plays L4D (some of us have been playing TF2 for a long time), but we are
slowly getting
Assuming you're talking about the old single core Xeons here, but
depending on the player slots on TF2, but a machine with those specs
really won't be up to scratch at all. To give you an indication,
anything over 16 players on a TF2 server running on a 3.4Ghz Xeon causes
noticeable in-game pe
I am not sure of the exact hardware needs (RAM/CPU) for TF2 and L4D. I
currently have a L4D server running on a Windows XP Pro w/ 512MB RAM and
a P4 2.0Ghz, which runs good until we get more than 6 real players on VS
then it tends to lag a bit. So I am looking to buy/build a server that
will
6 matches
Mail list logo
