Running a Server and Playing on The Same Computer

[willpower101]

(05-21-2010, 10:56 AM)willpower101 Wrote:  Anyway. I forgot about ONE thing that @loopyman pointed out and it is a serious problem. Video card snags that hang the system.
They don't happen often, but I've already had one lag out today, and while it didn't kill the server, it froze up the cpu for about 30 seconds before my client booted me and everyone lagged bad.

Yeah, I'd like to add, this was running the client and sever together with nvideo 8500gt. Borrowed my friend's gtx260 and haven't had a single hiccup. Now I'm back on the fence again. Of course I'll see good pings... I'd still see good pings if the server weren't on the same computer.

[Beaverbeliever]

Graphics cards should really have no effect on the servers performance unless the card is way overkill for the rest of the box.

[loopyman]

(05-30-2010, 02:14 AM)willpower101 Wrote:  

(05-21-2010, 10:56 AM)willpower101 Wrote:  Anyway. I forgot about ONE thing that @loopyman pointed out and it is a serious problem. Video card snags that hang the system.
They don't happen often, but I've already had one lag out today, and while it didn't kill the server, it froze up the cpu for about 30 seconds before my client booted me and everyone lagged bad.

Yeah, I'd like to add, this was running the client and sever together with nvideo 8500gt. Borrowed my friend's gtx260 and haven't had a single hiccup. Now I'm back on the fence again. Of course I'll see good pings... I'd still see good pings if the server weren't on the same computer.

More power too ya bud... Also you should check to see how much your PC pulls ( Amps on 120v ). Then calculate that out to Megawatts per month and show your parents your calculations...

Such as my system i7 with an HD4870 and 2x HD's pulls ~ 3Amp on 115v
So 3 amps x 115 volts = 345 Watts
A device that pulls 345 Watts that runs nonstop for a month pulls:

Seems like a lot for a basic game server...
Average Power Rates: http://www.americaspower.org/The-Facts
Calculator: http://www.handymath.com/cgi-bin/electric.cgi?submit=Entry

[willpower101]

(06-01-2010, 10:31 AM)Beaverbeliever Wrote:  Graphics cards should really have no effect on the servers performance unless the card is way overkill for the rest of the box.

See your own reply below.

(05-21-2010, 02:17 PM)Beaverbeliever Wrote:  This might be a poor analogy, but if a computer is a lake, different lakes differ in depth and size, but a ripple on one side of the lake can effect the whole lake. However, if it is a different lake altogether, you shouldn't see that ripple at all. I think that is the best analogy to fit the situation.

If I'm running the client with a crappy graphics card on the same system as the server, it is going to make a difference on the srcds process. (and did, especially when the 8500 lagged and spiked cpu) The better card keeps the halflife process running smooth as butter, which in turn keeps the srcds process from feeling as many effects. (although since neither take advantage of multi-core processing I still say they feel minimal effects when locked to a core anyway.)

---

(06-01-2010, 01:23 PM)loopyman Wrote:  More power too ya bud... Also you should check to see how much your PC pulls ( Amps on 120v ). Then calculate that out to Megawatts per month and show your parents your calculations...

Such as my system i7 with an HD4870 and 2x HD's pulls ~ 3Amp on 115v
So 3 amps x 115 volts = 345 Watts
A device that pulls 345 Watts that runs nonstop for a month pulls:

Seems like a lot for a basic game server...
Average Power Rates: http://www.americaspower.org/The-Facts
Calculator: http://www.handymath.com/cgi-bin/electric.cgi?submit=Entry

First off, what do you mean "show my parents"? lol, are you like 16? Or do you just still live at your parents house at 25++? If you meant that comment as more of a general guide then maybe you shouldn't have addressed it directly to me? I dunno

Anyway, your calculations are lacking.

• You only take into account a limited set of data in order to prove your unspoken point: that buying a server would be cheaper. However I have no way of knowing what variables you included in your 'about 3a' estimate.
• You don't explicitly take into account peak and min power draws, how often the computer is used for gaming vs work, or the different cost of electricity between day and night in many areas.
• Plus you use an electricity price that only applies to the average cost in new england and part of california, read the highest in the nation. Most other places have a cost half that.
• You fail to observe the opportunity cost recouped from using your home computer's downtime. Sure I could pay you 20$ a month for a 30 man server. But I'd still be paying for my computer to be on all the time. I might as well use that idle time.
  

Now if srcds was using huge amounts of processing power, and thereby electricity, then yeah, it may be justifiably cheaper to buy a dedicated server. But you all have been very clear about the low resource requirements of srcds.

[loopyman]

First off, it was an assumption. The majority of the users on this forum are under the age of 18, and believe it or not quite a few Americans do live on the West or East coasts thus are most likely paying higher prices for power.

The 3 amps is the usage of my system during moderate process usage ( I measured this ). Granted most folks don't use a video card in their servers because servers require no video processing.

Again, I was only calculating how much it costs to run a PC like mine 24/7. So yes, it may be cheaper to run your computer 24/7 with a game server.

Please don't compare a professionally hosted dedicated server to your local computer, the comparison isn't there. You have to factor in the fact that the dedicated server is generally hosted in an n+1 redundant facility with great connectivity while your home computer is most likely not located on such a connection nor has the redundancy.

[LGThanatos]

EDIT: WHO DELETED THE POSTS THAT WERE HERE AFTER 95?!? SON OF A BITCH; I WAS WAITING TO READ THOSE TILL AFTER I READ THE WHOLE THREAD. RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGE.
Whatever. I motion the following:
The OP gets updated with up to date information, or unstickied.
The OP gets renamed or overhauled to reflect useful information instead of just saying "listen server or GSP."; it's misleading in that it suggests it contains info on how to host.
I am never replying to threads on srcds that beaver links me to unless I care to again >:\
Original:

(03-07-2009, 05:42 AM)keeroy Wrote:  Well, I have an SRCDS. It's not showing up in the master list... But when my friend type "connect <MY IP:27015>" it works fine. But If he make a listen server, I can see it in the Master list.

Mabye my problem is because of that I run the Server, and play on the same?

thx for the info btw :)

That's because of how stuff in general is setup. Normally trying to ping your own external IP won't work; therefore trying to retrieve server info from it won't work for you either. (192.168.X.X should work though.)
(Unless you mean it doesn't show for him either, in which case it could be a problem or it's just not sending it to him because the server browser is retarded.)

(03-11-2009, 03:11 AM)ComputerHelper Wrote:  good job.

Yea there are lots of people trying to do this, but hell a server should not be run on the same pc u play on, no less a home internet conection

Untrue. I had a connection that was great for hosting with pings under 100 before I moved. I could even host on this with pings under 200 if I wished.

(04-19-2009, 06:43 PM)Beaverbeliever Wrote:  

Dub Wrote:would it be a good idea to run a listen server on that instead of srcds? or did you mean it will run better then srcds on the same comp?

It would be better to run a listen server on the same computer, SRCDS on a different one.

This is incorrect. A listen server does in fact NOT run better than srcds. Even on the same comp.
To imply as such is mere idiocy. Why would one think that an engine which is influenced by it's current state(intentionally) would make a better host than a program running for the sole purpose of the intended purpose?
(It's like saying windows running linux running wine running windows to run an hl2 game is better than running hl2 in the main windows.)

(05-12-2009, 02:16 PM)Beaverbeliever Wrote:  

cookies911 Wrote:I run servers off my comp, when i play , but not for scrims and such in us, i own a server company wtf!!!

So wait- you run a GSP on the same computer you play on? I think that is the most stupid idiotic thing that could ever be done in the book of wrongs in SRCDS...

If that is what he actually meant; then yes, I agree.

(05-25-2009, 03:23 PM)wonginator1221 Wrote:  Post #21

Well said!

(05-28-2009, 08:25 AM)Beaverbeliever Wrote:  

realchamp Wrote:However! If it only are on LAN, then no problem ;)

This is true, I guess I didn't elaborate enough. The reason its hard doing it online is because of port issues. If you are remaining on your LAN, ports are not an issue. Thanks for helping clear that up realchamp :)

That is idiotic; Extremely!
If you know how to do ports correctly, or even just read the SIMPLE instructions on how to fix problems with ports, then there's no problem!

(01-19-2010, 10:11 AM)Beaverbeliever Wrote:  Post #52

There are no risks or limits(from srcds/hl2). (Eg. this obviously doesn't include standard computer limits; like running 5000000000 firefoxes at once.)
A dual-'xeon' quad core computer with 12 gb of ram certainly wouldn't have this imaginary limit you speak of(again, not talking about running obscene amounts of programs on a single computer. like 40 srcds 128slot gmod servers).
If someone doesn't want to play on a server that lags, they won't play there. Simple. There's a ping entry in the server browser for a reason.
I daresay I know more than plenty to be qualified as an 'expert'(as you well know) and calling it a bad idea stated by all experts as fact is incorrect.
Postcount is irrelevant. And probably 'stupid' because you seem like it with your incorrect statements.

(01-19-2010, 08:16 PM)DREAD_XI Wrote:  

(01-19-2010, 10:11 AM)Beaverbeliever Wrote:  I smell funny

... I for one would not say "oh that Beaver guy doesn't know what he's talking about" He has 1,171 post ! I would not figure that was a whole lotta talking about nothing. ... ...you should listen to the Beaver guy. ...

Aside from these, I would agree with you.

(01-19-2010, 09:28 PM)egor1908 Wrote:  Post #58

Agreed.

(01-20-2010, 08:59 AM)Beaverbeliever Wrote:  

(01-19-2010, 09:28 PM)egor1908 Wrote:  

(02-24-2009, 03:02 AM)Beaverbeliever Wrote:  but I think all experts in SRCDS will agree that it is HORRIBLE to host a server and play on the same computer.

It is NOT if you know exactly what to do.

I would say this statement is false. I mean, how is there a RIGHT way to host on the same computer? The whole act is wrong in itself. The RIGHT way is to get another server box that is capable of running the server you want, and keeping it separate.

Disagreed, and you're an idiot for saying as such.

(01-20-2010, 08:17 PM)DREAD_XI Wrote:  Post #60

Well said! /clap.

(05-20-2010, 01:05 PM)willpower101 Wrote:  Post #67

EVEN MORE WELL SAID! /Applaud!

(05-20-2010, 01:19 PM)Beaverbeliever Wrote:  The point is saying its not possible, the point is saying its highly not recommended. Of course there is people who will do it, and I am just notifying the people who don't know about CPU and bandwidth requirements.

Also keep in mind I am talking about long termed and highly used servers, not 2 slot Gmod servers being put up for a few hours just to play around on.

I also am not quite sure why people are so scared about renting a server. It really is the most used choice for most new clans and most people who do not have the proper resources or knowledge to do it.

Also my comment on YouTube was merely a loose example on the use of your connection and how it can affect the servers performance.

I will assume you meant "the point is NOT saying it's not possible".
Who is it 'highly not recommended' by? You? (Who I might add has REALLY FREAKIN SHITTY INTERNET. <1Mbps download and <.5Mbps upload.)
The youtube example is not merely a loose example, but a mostly incorrect and pretty crappy example. (Yes, technically, if you have too low download and start watching youtube, people may not be able to upload their movement/action information and thus lag.)

(05-21-2010, 05:50 AM)Spartanfrog Wrote:  Is it alright then to generalize that since YOU are able to sustain advertised speeds, that everyone can? "Up to date" hardware would also not be a factor as, like you said before, there two separate entities. It is common knowledge that many cable companies throttle your internet connection. Cablevision, Comcast, etc practice this.

1. Generalization is bad in general.
2. 'Up to date' hardware is totally a factor. Firmware/software updates can fix problems with routers/modems that slow you down. (also it's 'they're')

(05-21-2010, 06:22 AM)willpower101 Wrote:  Post #74

Another good post! /Moar applaud.
The example is a bit high though.
(Just a note; I'm not actually paying attention as to who is writing the posts except beavers[and taking into account his crappy internet on his opinion], I actually had to go and look who wrote this one and the other good one to see if they were the same.)

(05-21-2010, 07:47 AM)Spartanfrog Wrote:  Post #76
Nope, here's why:
Home networks are not designed for optimal latency
Throttled Connections
Lack of optimization
Most likely, server not up 24/7

But then what are you left with? A server with high ping, a server with already decreased performance (No matter what your hardware, it would still decline while playing and hosting), and one that's not even always on!

1. Irrelevant and technically generally correct but not always in practice.
2. What? Don't generalize. (if you're talking about node sharing) (also don't generalize if you're talking about transfer caps.)
3. BULLSHIT. I optimizate the shit out of whatever I host.
4. 'most likely'? If someone's running a 24/7 server, which I was under the impression we were talking about here, then yah. (minus steam/game updates and server restarts, which are fairly common even on my clan's servers)

5. BULLSHIT BULLSHIT BULLSHIT. Ping is related moreso to distance if your connection isn't crap. Performance declination irrelevant to hardware? BULLSHIT! SRCDS has a limit as to how well is can perform; If it reaches that, it won't perform better. Therefore you are wrong. As for the last part, see 4.

(05-21-2010, 08:16 AM)willpower101 Wrote:  Post #77

And then I read this^ post which basically says exactly what I just said.

(05-21-2010, 08:42 AM)loopyman Wrote:  I really don't want to jump into this... but...

Hosting and playing on the same computer can work out, it can be problematic with cases whereas your game / video drivers locks up crashing your computer causing your server to empty. You your self will have amazing registry and latency and others will not giving you a slightly unfair advantage. You can also run into major issues if you don't have rate settings and don't have download redirects ( fast downloads ) when players connect to download a large map they can eat up that little 5meg connection with their 50meg and cause major latency issues with players in the game server.

In most cases, I don't recommend hosting from home or hosting and playing on the same computer.

Although it can be done, its not recommended.
Although towing a travel home with a 4banger is possible, its not recommended.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AyXgMal3C1U

That is all pointless and irrelevant if you set your stuff up correctly.

(05-21-2010, 02:17 PM)Beaverbeliever Wrote:  This might be a poor analogy, but if a computer is a lake, different lakes differ in depth and size, but a ripple on one side of the lake can effect the whole lake. However, if it is a different lake altogether, you shouldn't see that ripple at all. I think that is the best analogy to fit the situation.

It's an at-first-glance good analogy, but in reality not so good. Keep in mind the ripple would have to be fairly big for air/water pressure to not cancel it out before it does, and this is srcds we're talking about.

(05-23-2010, 03:04 PM)Spartanfrog Wrote:  Post #85

The AVERAGE HOME USER doesn't generally run a [24/7] server.
That pdf was posted in august of 09. 9-10 months ago is outdated in my books, when considering internet.

Of course optimizing is beneficial; It is by very definition. Otherwise it wouldn't be optimizing.
The way you phrased that statement, 'T1, the average user will not have access' is not necessarily correct. What's preventing them?

(05-23-2010, 11:24 PM)Spartanfrog Wrote:  If you have a fiber connection, you are very lucky :D. I wish I could have that. About Optimization, I don't think it would be possible for you to run a 1000 FPS server while playing at the same time. That was the only benefit I was talking about.

You're kidding me, right? 1000 fps is fairly easy. (while playing and with a 1.8 quad core, even.)

---

:( I don't remember how to break automerge.

[Darksoul]

(06-02-2010, 09:05 AM)loopyman Wrote:  First off, it was an assumption. The majority of the users on this forum are under the age of 18, and believe it or not quite a few Americans do live on the West or East coasts thus are most likely paying higher prices for power.

The 3 amps is the usage of my system during moderate process usage ( I measured this ). Granted most folks don't use a video card in their servers because servers require no video processing.

Again, I was only calculating how much it costs to run a PC like mine 24/7. So yes, it may be cheaper to run your computer 24/7 with a game server.

Please don't compare a professionally hosted dedicated server to your local computer, the comparison isn't there. You have to factor in the fact that the dedicated server is generally hosted in an n+1 redundant facility with great connectivity while your home computer is most likely not located on such a connection nor has the redundancy.

I gotta love how the mods deleted my post and never even bothered to tell me why or warn me.

So I'll post it again:

The majority of the users on this forum are under the age of 18

What are you basing this on?.

People that assume things make me sick.

[Mooga]

(06-05-2010, 12:19 PM)Darksoul Wrote:  I gotta love how the mods deleted my post and never even bothered to tell me why or warn me.

So I'll post it again:

The majority of the users on this forum are under the age of 18

What are you basing this on?.

People that assume things make me sick.

I don't remember deleting that... but that is actually true.
At least for the active members.

[Darksoul]

(06-05-2010, 12:45 PM)Mooga Wrote:  

(06-05-2010, 12:19 PM)Darksoul Wrote:  I gotta love how the mods deleted my post and never even bothered to tell me why or warn me.

So I'll post it again:

The majority of the users on this forum are under the age of 18

What are you basing this on?.

People that assume things make me sick.

I don't remember deleting that... but that is actually true.
At least for the active members.

Weird, maybe I never posted it then. Not sure it was a while ago.

My bad.

[loopyman]

(06-05-2010, 12:19 PM)Darksoul Wrote:  I gotta love how the mods deleted my post and never even bothered to tell me why or warn me.

So I'll post it again:

The majority of the users on this forum are under the age of 18

What are you basing this on?.

People that assume things make me sick.

-snip-
I don't have anything to say to you anymore.

[Darksoul]

(06-06-2010, 07:49 AM)loopyman Wrote:  

(06-05-2010, 12:19 PM)Darksoul Wrote:  I gotta love how the mods deleted my post and never even bothered to tell me why or warn me.

So I'll post it again:

The majority of the users on this forum are under the age of 18

What are you basing this on?.

People that assume things make me sick.

-snip-
I don't have anything to say to you anymore.

That's great to hear. I was getting tired of you saying its not a good idea to host from home without actually giving a reason.

To everyone who has been following this thread:

Yes, you can host from home. There is nothing "impossible" about it. All you need is the following:

A internet with at least 1Mbps upload.

A computer. (Doesn't have to be a server, any will do. Including your gaming PC.)

A IQ above 50.

Basic knowledge of networking terms and components, as well as your current network setup.

Basic knowledge of how to setup SRCDS.

That's it, that is all you need.

It is not only possible, but if you know what your doing there is virtually no difference hosting from home (even off the same PC you play on) and renting a dedicated server or renting from a GSP.

While I could go deeper into this, including terms of service violations if your ISP doesn't allow you to - I'm not going to. Because we're not here to discuss that.

From reading this thread and arguing with several people over various things, I've learned the following:

Most don't want you to host yourself from home for various reasons, but in most cases it comes down to the following:

They are ignorant. Or:
They want to make money by hosting you.

I really can't come up with any other reason why people will say you shouldn't host from home, at all.

I hope this helps someone, have a great night!.

[loopyman]

Now this is the "Running a server and playing on the same computer thread"
TO clarify. YES you can host from home and this works fine and dandy, but don't expect to be hosting the next professional gaming league.

As for reasons why NOT to host on the same computer. (Some apply to hosting at home)
If you bothered to read any of our posts, I mainly hit on the fact that networks to the home are not designed for optimal latencies ( pings ) to other homes...
Hmm... Paint Time.


Now the internet is going to be 500x more complex than this diagram.

[Darksoul]

Hey loopy, I think I have clarified in the past you don't need a multi-million dollar internet backbone in order to host a gameserver.

So people have 5ms-15ms higher ping, big whoop. It just means you won't be able to reach as far out as you could in a datacenter when it comes to people far away from you.

AND that is taking into account your with a normal ISP, if you go with the right residential ISP (Verizon FIOS anyone?) that has their own backbone across the entire USA, you wont notice any difference at all really in terms of latency and packet loss.

So, since your entire argument is hinging on the fact a datacenters backbone is far better then a residential ISP... that is true, but not a huge factor when it comes to something not mission critical... like say, gameservers?.

kthks for the nice graph, bye.

To prove a point:









Look at those pings, aren't they gorgeous!. Look at that, a 150 ping to Tokyo of all places!. Wow.

Your argument has no grounds.

(06-08-2010, 05:26 PM)loopyman Wrote:  Now this is the "Running a server and playing on the same computer thread"
TO clarify. YES you can host from home and this works fine and dandy, but don't expect to be hosting the next professional gaming league.

As for reasons why NOT to host on the same computer. (Some apply to hosting at home)
If you bothered to read any of our posts, I mainly hit on the fact that networks to the home are not designed for optimal latencies ( pings ) to other homes...
Hmm... Paint Time.


Now the internet is going to be 500x more complex than this diagram.

[Spartanfrog]

Latency has a HUGE factor in gameservers. I do not know why you seem to deny this? Plus, those servers you are pinging from Speedtest are located in a DATACENTER, not at someone's homes. Those pings do not who ping to people's homes. All you have shown us there is that you have a nice ping to datacenters located in those areas.

Some people, evidently yourself, have a decent enough internet speed to run a server and if you do not care about latency, then be my guest. However, many users have crappy connections and will be sorely disappointed if they try to run a server at home.

Once again, act civil on these forums and have respect please. Even if someone owns a GSP, they are still a valuable member of this community. If you don't like that, then get out.

[Darksoul]

(06-08-2010, 08:28 PM)Spartanfrog Wrote:  Latency has a HUGE factor in gameservers. I do not know why you seem to deny this? Plus, those servers you are pinging from Speedtest are located in a DATACENTER, not at someone's homes. Those pings do not who ping to people's homes. All you have shown us there is that you have a nice ping to datacenters located in those areas.

Some people, evidently yourself, have a decent enough internet speed to run a server and if you do not care about latency, then be my guest. However, many users have crappy connections and will be sorely disappointed if they try to run a server at home.

Once again, act civil on these forums and have respect please. Even if someone owns a GSP, they are still a valuable member of this community. If you don't like that, then get out.

I just don't consider a 5ms latency difference anything to worry over.