Text only | Text with Images

Tremulous Forum

General => General Discussion => Topic started by: Confess on July 29, 2006, 11:19:51 PM

Poll
Question: Which is better then a 3.2ghz with HT for Tremulous?
Option 1: AMD Opteron 170 2 x 2.0ghz (2x 1 mb cache) votes: 3
Option 2: None. The 3.2ghz with HT is best. votes: 4
Title: Question for Servers
Post by: Confess on July 29, 2006, 11:19:51 PM
Im trying to find out which would be better for a Tremulous server, specificly the |SST| Tremulous server.

Which of these would be (if they are) better then a 3.2ghz with HT.
Intel Pentium D 930 ~ 2 x 3.2ghz (2x 2mb cache)
or an AMD Opteron 170 2 x 2.0ghz (2x 1 mb cache)
The OS would be Windows.
Title: Question for Servers
Post by: PIE on July 29, 2006, 11:26:47 PM
... the pentium with the 2mb cache.
This might have been a good topic for a poll.. I just have had good experiences with pentiums and that cache is a great help.
Title: Question for Servers
Post by: rasz_pl on July 29, 2006, 11:41:05 PM
http://www.3dnews.ru/documents/12137/quake3.gif

ZERO performance boost from the second core

Why would you want to buy opteron for this beats me. And WHY would you like to upgrade CPU for ONE Q3 server beats me again.
Title: Question for Servers
Post by: rasz_pl on July 29, 2006, 11:42:33 PM
Quote from: PIE... the pentium with the 2mb cache.
This might have been a good topic for a poll.. I just have had good experiences with pentiums and that cache is a great help.

no, that cache is a MUST with P4 NetBurst fiasco architecture.
Title: Question for Servers
Post by: Confess on July 30, 2006, 12:45:09 AM
The servers are all the same price. Upgrading would essentially not cost anything.
Title: Question for Servers
Post by: rasz_pl on July 30, 2006, 01:15:33 AM
in that case I would opt for .. Linux option :]
the speed will be comparable no matter what you choose, I would AMD :)
Title: Question for Servers
Post by: kevlarman on July 30, 2006, 01:16:18 AM
Quote from: rasz_plhttp://www.3dnews.ru/documents/12137/quake3.gif

ZERO performance boost from the second core

Why would you want to buy opteron for this beats me. And WHY would you like to upgrade CPU for ONE Q3 server beats me again.
yes, because the fps is a good measurement of server performance </sarcasm>. depending on how it is written, the server could get a huge increase in performance from having a second core, or it could get virtually no benefit, but the client is completely unrelated which of those will happen
Title: Question for Servers
Post by: Confess on July 30, 2006, 01:25:01 AM
poll added.
Title: Question for Servers
Post by: Belier13 on July 30, 2006, 01:37:51 AM
I don't care and I will tell you that !


I don't care !
Title: Question for Servers
Post by: PIE on July 30, 2006, 03:05:22 AM
Quote from: confesspoll added.
LOL.. options are the same... obviously you have your mind made up already (0o)..
Title: Question for Servers
Post by: Confess on July 30, 2006, 05:08:48 AM
No, I still have no idea which is best for Tremulous SERVERS. Im getting told 2 different things.
Title: Question for Servers
Post by: PIE on July 30, 2006, 05:24:34 AM
Quote from: confessNo, I still have no idea which is best for Tremulous SERVERS. Im getting told 2 different things.
... but i mean.. in your poll.. both options are the same.. take a look...
Title: Question for Servers
Post by: Confess on July 30, 2006, 06:01:39 AM
Crap, I cant fix it either.

The first one is Intel Pentium D 930 ~ 2 x 3.2ghz (2x 2mb cache), and the second is hte Opteron. Note that :P
Title: Question for Servers
Post by: rasz_pl on July 30, 2006, 10:38:23 AM
Quote from: kevlarman
Quote from: rasz_plhttp://www.3dnews.ru/documents/12137/quake3.gif

ZERO performance boost from the second core

Why would you want to buy opteron for this beats me. And WHY would you like to upgrade CPU for ONE Q3 server beats me again.
yes, because the fps is a good measurement of server performance </sarcasm>. depending on how it is written, the server could get a huge increase in performance from having a second core, or it could get virtually no benefit, but the client is completely unrelated which of those will happen

well actually NOT in Quake engines :) FPS is EXACTLY linear to the performance you will get from the server, and second core is USELESS
Title: Question for Servers
Post by: Teiman on July 30, 2006, 05:40:09 PM
I dont like HT, soo the other option is better. HT smell like something you disable at first problem.

On linux most people like the AMD options, and this is important If your server will run linux or a unix based OS.
Title: Question for Servers
Post by: Howitzer on July 30, 2006, 06:55:42 PM
Teiman, your post is full of shit :)
HyperThreading has never caused any problems whatsoever. (not talking about personal experience)

On linux, most people favor Intel, although it doesn't matter if you have an intel or AMD processor since they're both i386 based.
Also, Linux = an unix based OS.

You tried to be smart by sticking some computer terms together? :P
Title: Question for Servers
Post by: PHREAK on July 30, 2006, 07:10:36 PM
Quote from: Howitzer...
Also, Linux = an unix based OS....

While Linux = UNIX based OS, not all unix based OS's are linux. So tieman is as right as it gets about that.
Title: Question for Servers
Post by: PIE on July 30, 2006, 07:14:24 PM
Quote from: PHREAK
Quote from: Howitzer...
Also, Linux = an unix based OS....

While Linux = UNIX based OS, not all unix based OS's are linux. So tieman is as right as it gets about that.
Technically linux is not an os.. and its unix like, not unix based..
Title: Question for Servers
Post by: Howitzer on July 30, 2006, 08:34:01 PM
Okay i stand corrected, linux is a kernel which can be made to form an OS that's part of the unix group (*BSD, AIX, ..)
Text only | Text with Images