[SOLVED]Kernel optimation

[Amo85]

Hey,

My kernl is configuerd by a guide, after the config my server use: 99% and running 850 fps. The server is:

Dual xeon 3.06 Ghz
2Gb ECC Ram

Code:

CPU   In    Out   Uptime  Users   FPS    Players
99.90  0.00  0.00      16     1  642.67       0
stats
CPU   In    Out   Uptime  Users   FPS    Players
99.90  0.00  0.00      16     1  948.77       0
stats
CPU   In    Out   Uptime  Users   FPS    Players
99.90  0.00  0.00      16     1  946.07       0
stats
CPU   In    Out   Uptime  Users   FPS    Players
99.90  0.00  0.00      16     1  938.09       0

This is what i got when i typed in stats, and it makes the hitbox lag.

When my server starts:

Code:

Auto detecting CPU
Using Pentium II Optimised binary.

Is it my kernel kompiled rong or?

[doggy93]

The SRCDS CPU usage is fake, if you want to see the real CPU usage you must use the command top.

[Amo85]

I tryed a new compileing and it worked

[doggy93]

What sort of compiling? Give us the solution.

[BehaartesEtwas]

and what guide did you use?

[Amo85]

The problem is that networking alsow requiers cpu usage, so if your cpu usage on games is to high the game latenzy will sometimes be sky high,
what i did was following the guide:

http://forums.steampowered.com/forums/showthread.php?t=486424.

But instand of unmarking dynamic ticks, i used it. Alsow i change my kernel to 500 hz instad of 1000. The fps would jump a bit more, but the performance of the server would be better. You see:
Low cpu usage give nice hitbox, fps 400-500 would make a fine smooth game. The onley time you need 500+fps is when then the game schould run faster. The eye can catch 300 fps as maximum, and a server whit low cpu usage will make a better hitbox, because the fps would otherwise drop and then you se the lag. One of the most important thing on the server is the tick. My server is right: 500-1000 fps 1% cpu usage when i got 4 people inside. And after the cpu is stabled it goes down to just around 0.

[doggy93]

doggy93 Wrote:The SRCDS CPU usage is fake, if you want to see the real CPU usage you must use the command top.

In some OS'/Kernel's the CPU usage you see in SRCDS is _FAKE_ !!!
I doubt it is any better, but it's your call.

[Amo85]

doggy93 Wrote:

doggy93 Wrote:The SRCDS CPU usage is fake, if you want to see the real CPU usage you must use the command top.

In some OS'/Kernel's the CPU usage you see in SRCDS is _FAKE_ !!!
I doubt it is any better, but it's your call.

I know, before my usage was 20% by commando ps ux now 7% whit dynamic and 1% whit 500hz Thats whit 10 players inside

[doggy93]

Ok then.

[BehaartesEtwas]

even that cpu usage is not reliable... and in any case it's not the quantity one should optimize the server for. low cpu usage isn't a priori better then a high (unless hitting 100% maybe). low cpu usage usually comes along with higher latencies, while low latencies have a higher overhead and thus result in higher cpu usage...
look at the server fps!

[Amo85]

BehaartesEtwas Wrote:even that cpu usage is not reliable... and in any case it's not the quantity one should optimize the server for. low cpu usage isn't a priori better then a high (unless hitting 100% maybe). low cpu usage usually comes along with higher latencies, while low latencies have a higher overhead and thus result in higher cpu usage...
look at the server fps!

On my server i used to have a ping about 1ms now its 8 so i dont see the problem. Allso on my larst kernel sometimes the server would lagg and sometimes i would get a high ping around 200 (not the connection!) but the kernels fault.

[BehaartesEtwas]

I didn't mean the ping... latencies in the kernel produce unstable fps. I don't say, a higher cpu usage would be better, you just should not optimize for low cpu usage.

[Amo85]

BehaartesEtwas Wrote:I didn't mean the ping... latencies in the kernel produce unstable fps. I don't say, a higher cpu usage would be better, you just should not optimize for low cpu usage.

You need to make a "Danisk word: kompromi" between the two things fps and cpu usage.

[BehaartesEtwas]

err... what?

[lhffan]

compromise