Posts: 12
Threads: 2
Joined: May 2011
Reputation:
0
Hello!
My linux distro is going to be CentOS 5.6 .
The games are going to be Css, Tf2 and Hl2dm (orange box engine games).
Some quick questions which I was able to find only outdated:
- Would it be better to run 64 bit version since I will be using >4gb of ram and my cpu is sandy bridge based (Xeon E series) ?
- Do I need to recompile kernel to run 300~500 fps ?
Thanks in advance,
Lexx.
Posts: 2,031
Threads: 27
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
17
first I wouldn't recommend centos, as it requires more effort to get the servers running nicely. debian (and derivates) work much nicer out-of-the-box. this is regarding your second question, with centos you probably will, with debian (or even better ubuntu server) you probably do not need to. the "border" is typically kernel version around 2.6.33, below it's bad, above it's good.
to your first question: in my experience yes, even if you do not have more than 2 GB (which is more like the actual limit). if you have much ram and want to use it, it is possible with 32 bit linux as well, but that is not well suited for game servers (it works more like swap in ram). so yes, use 64 bit in any case!
(btw: hl2dm isn't orangebox, is it?)
Posts: 12
Threads: 2
Joined: May 2011
Reputation:
0
(05-15-2011, 06:58 PM)BehaartesEtwas Wrote: first I wouldn't recommend centos, as it requires more effort to get the servers running nicely. debian (and derivates) work much nicer out-of-the-box. this is regarding your second question, with centos you probably will, with debian (or even better ubuntu server) you probably do not need to. the "border" is typically kernel version around 2.6.33, below it's bad, above it's good.
to your first question: in my experience yes, even if you do not have more than 2 GB (which is more like the actual limit). if you have much ram and want to use it, it is possible with 32 bit linux as well, but that is not well suited for game servers (it works more like swap in ram). so yes, use 64 bit in any case!
(btw: hl2dm isn't orangebox, is it?)
So... I should got with ubuntu x64, right? I do not need to recompile kernel for 300~500 fps, right ? Should I go with the latest version of ubuntu server or there are some older versions which suit srcds more?
In regards to your question, hl2dm got converted to orange box last year although no graphical features were added (unlike css - deathcam, etc) apart from ability to set graphical settings higher.
Posts: 2,031
Threads: 27
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
17
(05-16-2011, 01:27 AM)Lexx Wrote: So... I should got with ubuntu x64, right?
right.
Quote:I do not need to recompile kernel for 300~500 fps, right ?
most likely not. nevertheless the result is still better if you compile your own kernel. but if it really makes a notable difference ingame... I don't know.
Quote:Should I go with the latest version of ubuntu server or there are some older versions which suit srcds more?
I wouldn't recommend using older versions. Newer kernels are usually better, and you have also a better security.
Quote:In regards to your question, hl2dm got converted to orange box last year although no graphical features were added (unlike css - deathcam, etc) apart from ability to set graphical settings higher.
ah ok. I didn't notice :-)
Posts: 12
Threads: 2
Joined: May 2011
Reputation:
0
(05-16-2011, 07:28 PM)BehaartesEtwas Wrote: (05-16-2011, 01:27 AM)Lexx Wrote: So... I should got with ubuntu x64, right?
right.
Quote:I do not need to recompile kernel for 300~500 fps, right ?
most likely not. nevertheless the result is still better if you compile your own kernel. but if it really makes a notable difference ingame... I don't know.
Quote:Should I go with the latest version of ubuntu server or there are some older versions which suit srcds more?
I wouldn't recommend using older versions. Newer kernels are usually better, and you have also a better security.
Quote:In regards to your question, hl2dm got converted to orange box last year although no graphical features were added (unlike css - deathcam, etc) apart from ability to set graphical settings higher.
ah ok. I didn't notice :-)
Would you suggest using 10.04 instead of 11.04 ???
The reason why I am asking is because desktop version of ubuntu 11.04 is buggy and unstable compared to 10.04 so I thought the same could happen to the server build as well.
How hard is it to recompile kernel ? Is it identical to building one on my desktop ubuntu (so that I could practice a bit before doing it on the actual server) ???
Posts: 882
Threads: 43
Joined: Dec 2010
Reputation:
13
Why don't you use the server version of Ubuntu and not the Desktop one? I've had problems with the shit interface in the desktop version. Server is much more lightweight so you save alot of ram using it. It's a bit hard with the commands tho..
Posts: 12
Threads: 2
Joined: May 2011
Reputation:
0
(05-17-2011, 06:58 PM)michael_sj123 Wrote: Why don't you use the server version of Ubuntu and not the Desktop one? I've had problems with the shit interface in the desktop version. Server is much more lightweight so you save alot of ram using it. It's a bit hard with the commands tho..
Before stating something, it might be useful to verify certain facts in case something was changed / updated - http://www.ubuntu.com/download/server/download
Posts: 2,031
Threads: 27
Joined: Nov 2008
Reputation:
17
05-19-2011, 06:21 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-19-2011, 06:22 PM by BehaartesEtwas.)
in principal there are not really different ubuntu versions, the difference is only which packages are installed initially. I recently installed the ubuntu server edition on my laptop, because I had no kubuntu desktop CD at hand, and "converted" it to kubuntu afterwards. the server edition has by default no GUI packages installed (as you don't need them) and the kernel is slightly different. the latter might have an impact on the game server performance, and I suspect the desktop kernel to be the better one for us. But as I said, you can install it even in the server edition.
I did not had any stability problems with ubuntu 11.04. ubuntu 10.04 is a LTE version which means you will get security updates for it for a longer time and will not be forced to upgrade to a newer version soon. as upgrades nowadays are quite smooth I personally would prefer the most recent version 11.04. I am pretty sure that 10.04 will require a custom-made kernel for a good performance while with 11.04 chances are good that you don't, if you do not need the ultra maximum performance ;-)
oh and: see my signature for some guide how to optimize Linux and the kernel. it might even be useful if you do not plan to compile your own kernel.
|
