ET:QW Server hardware specs & bandwidth

[ace72]

Has there been any information released regarding hardware requirements for game servers? I've since upgraded my old RTCW server, and the bandwidth has also doubled. It would be nice to know if my hardware should be able to run a 24-32 player server w/o contributing to lag, assuming that a 3meg pipe is enough.

Pentium4 CeleronD @ 3.0ghz
1g PC3200 ram
3meg Internet Connection

[Kamikazee]

Please see Questions about setting up a server... (http://community.enemyterritory.com/forums/showthread.php?t=128) and don't forget to read the sticky threads at the top of this forum.

[ace72]

That thread you quoted didn't answer my questions. I've looked thru the FAQ and ran a search before posting. I agree with a previous post that there should be a separate server/admin forum section. I've run game servers for many years on a good internet connection (typical US East coast pings ranging from hi 20's to mid 50s). One of the other guys in my gaming channel will be running another server in Michigan connected to dual DS3's =).
I'm hoping to hear back from someone who is currently running a beta ET:QW server for feedback.

p.s.
I'm running on Suse 10.2

[Lanz]

I doubt a 3meg Internet Connection would be good enough for a 24-32 player server.

[KlosterKatten]

No, it would probably run 16 players at maximum under 100ping. But that is ofcourse only pure speculations.

[mortis]

Has there been any information released regarding hardware requirements for game servers? I've since upgraded my old RTCW server, and the bandwidth has also doubled. It would be nice to know if my hardware should be able to run a 24-32 player server w/o contributing to lag, assuming that a 3meg pipe is enough.

Pentium4 CeleronD @ 3.0ghz
1g PC3200 ram
3meg Internet Connection

No specs have been released yet for servers, however I am willing to offer some generic (and totally unofficial) speculation. The Celeron is not a good processor, it greatly underperforms when compared to a P4 of the same Ghz rating due to its slower bus speed and other limiting factors. 1GB of RAM was plenty for old Q3 engine games, but the newer games are much more RAM hungry. I'd suggest putting in at least 2GB of RAM. It certainly won't hurt your system to have the extra RAM, in any case. A 3 Mbps connection isn't going to cut it for more than about 8-12 total players (even in Wolf:ET!). The servers that I admin all share a 100 Mbps port. They don't saturate that bandwidth the whole time mind you, but the ping is very stable on such a big port. Home connections get extremely laggy when even under a moderate load. Ultimately, you will need a redirect server as well, preferably colocated somewhere in the Internets. Keep in mind that your UPLOAD speed is the clients download speed, so if you have a 512/3000 connection, you're only going to have 512Kbps of bandwidth for your clients to work with.

If I was building a dedicated server, I would build:

A dual or quad core CPU (a Core2 Duo for example)
Windows XP Pro (Vista drivers just aren't ready for prime time)
A decent mainboard (with discrete graphics if used for playing, integrated graphics is usually okay for fulltime servers)
4GB of very fast RAM

With a server like that, there would be absolutely no worries about it being sufficiently powerful. When I hear the word 'Celeron' it makes me cringe. It might indeed be able to run a single instance of ETQW without any issues...I'd be interested to hear how the BF2 ded server performs on a modern Celery system. Anyone have any experience with the P4 derived Celeron chips?

[Martijn]

IMO should you run servers on linux. Windows has a GUI wich gives you much overhead. And a console is much more relaxed to administrate then a Click and go wizard system.

[Gunslinger]

We rent a dedicated server from a GSP in the UK

Dual Core Pentium D 830(3.00Ghz)
2GB RAM

At the moment we run:

32 slot 2142 Titan Only server
32 slot 2142 Northern Strike (or Conquest) server
16 slot 100 Tickrate CSS server

Anybody who has played 2142 will now it's a CPU hogger, I'm hoping ET:QW won't be as demanding as 2142

[DiecastV]

We rent a dedicated server from a GSP in the UK

Dual Core Pentium D 830(3.00Ghz)
2GB RAM

At the moment we run:

32 slot 2142 Titan Only server
32 slot 2142 Northern Strike (or Conquest) server
16 slot 100 Tickrate CSS server

Anybody who has played 2142 will now it's a CPU hogger, I'm hoping ET:QW won't be as demanding as 2142

Let hope the ET-QW will not hog like BF2142.

[Viperkhan]

After what I've heard, ET:QW runs better than BF2/BF2142.

[[ls.leodavinci]]

on http://www.i3d.net/gamehosting-pricing.php?

they price BF 2142 for + 25 euro (compared to normal price)
they price Quake Wars for + 30 euro (compared to normal price)

dunno if these prices can be pointed @ hardware/bandwidth

[Skymaster]

AthlonX2 4200+
2GB RAM
1meg connection

I live in Brazil, my ping in UK servers s...

Maybe i run it :P

[Gunslinger]

;2340']on http://www.i3d.net/gamehosting-pricing.php?

they price BF 2142 for + 25 euro (compared to normal price)
they price Quake Wars for + 30 euro (compared to normal price)

dunno if these prices can be pointed @ hardware/bandwidth

That's very interesting - considering SD are keeping very tight lipped about it's Ranked partners, saying there will be an announcement in the near future :rolleyes:

[Skymaster]

That's very interesting - considering SD are keeping very tight lipped about it's Ranked partners, saying there will be an announcement in the near future :rolleyes:
yea, nice :cool:

[[ls.leodavinci]]

cant read anything about "ranked" there ?!

[Gunslinger]

;2350']cant read anything about "ranked" there ?!


Quote from the site:

"i3D.net has a special offer for Quake Wars Ranked gameservers"

[[ls.leodavinci]]

hmmm yep... funny, must be online since a few days/weeks... havent seen this before

http://www.i3d.net/quake-wars-ranked.php

[Skymaster]

;2360']hmmm yep... funny, must be online since a few days/weeks... havent seen this before

http://www.i3d.net/quake-wars-ranked.php

i'd like the prices :(

[Urs0]

i'd like the prices :(

Holly s...

43 euros for 12 slots server :eek:

[Skymaster]

Holly s...

43 euros for 12 slots server :eek:
hahaha yea Urso!
Its nice to Brazilians éh? :cool:

[KlosterKatten]

Settings up a homemade server locally maybe wouldnt be a problem, but having a dedicated server up, i wouldnt bother if you dont have any support on running it anyway.

[mortis]

IMO should you run servers on linux. Windows has a GUI wich gives you much overhead. And a console is much more relaxed to administrate then a Click and go wizard system.


That's true. I was mostly concerned by my utter hatred for Vista. Linux is a perfectly reasonable alternative for a ded server.

[Wiman]

That's true. I was mostly concerned by my utter hatred for Vista. Linux is a perfectly reasonable alternative for a ded server.

Well, dedicated servers should be running on machines that have almost nothing else running then that what is needed on it. So in not having Vista as a dedicated server you are absolutely right.

[Underoath1233]

No matter what the game, your gonna need a good server set-up regardless because its gonna be a nationwide game and an international wide game, people will join from everywhere.. so the bandwith will be stretched... your most def. gonna need something really good especially if dedicated to manage that many people

[Rudedog]

To a certain point your upstream bandwidth is more important then the hardware you run on.

A normal "Cable modem" here in the states is not going to cut it unless you have a connection like fios.

Usually dedicated servers are hosted in large data centers with very big pipes and that is what most of your $$\Euros go to when going through a GSP.

[Mr_Meow]

Hmm very interesting, We've been thinking about getting ourselves a Dedi box.

Maybe the information here will shed some light on some of our problems (:

[ace72]

No specs have been released yet for servers, however I am willing to offer some generic (and totally unofficial) speculation. The Celeron is not a good processor, it greatly underperforms when compared to a P4 of the same Ghz rating due to its slower bus speed and other limiting factors. 1GB of RAM was plenty for old Q3 engine games, but the newer games are much more RAM hungry. I'd suggest putting in at least 2GB of RAM. It certainly won't hurt your system to have the extra RAM, in any case. A 3 Mbps connection isn't going to cut it for more than about 8-12 total players (even in Wolf:ET!). The servers that I admin all share a 100 Mbps port. They don't saturate that bandwidth the whole time mind you, but the ping is very stable on such a big port. Home connections get extremely laggy when even under a moderate load. Ultimately, you will need a redirect server as well, preferably colocated somewhere in the Internets. Keep in mind that your UPLOAD speed is the clients download speed, so if you have a 512/3000 connection, you're only going to have 512Kbps of bandwidth for your clients to work with.

If I was building a dedicated server, I would build:

A dual or quad core CPU (a Core2 Duo for example)
Windows XP Pro (Vista drivers just aren't ready for prime time)
A decent mainboard (with discrete graphics if used for playing, integrated graphics is usually okay for fulltime servers)
4GB of very fast RAM

With a server like that, there would be absolutely no worries about it being sufficiently powerful. When I hear the word 'Celeron' it makes me cringe. It might indeed be able to run a single instance of ETQW without any issues...I'd be interested to hear how the BF2 ded server performs on a modern Celery system. Anyone have any experience with the P4 derived Celeron chips?

Thanks for the reply.

I have to take exception to your assertion that a 3 meg pipe isn't sufficient for a 24 person server however. This isn't a cable modem connection, but one that has 3meg upload/download, and can burst even higher as allowed by the traffic shaping rules of the service provider.

I agree that *any* Celeron/Duron or otherwise deliberately limited bargain basement cpu isn't optimal. I'm just trying to see what specs current server admins use for their systems. The fact that this is a dedicated linux server that sits at 99% idle when not running a gaming server allows for pretty much all the processing power this box has be dedicated to running the etqw.exe. Celeron or not, even with a lower bus speed and single core, it might not matter that much for an application that for the most part is just pushing packets after it does all its calculations and other required tasks.

I've been in IT for 20yrs now, and have built servers/workstations both at home and on the job for a long time. I also have done extensive application support, so I have more than the "average guy's" background in this area. I'm *not* saying this trying to say I'm an expert and my word is gospel, just to give perspective to my post and my comments.

The main reason for this post was to get more info on the following;

1) Is this game more memory or cpu hungry?
2) Is there multi-core support built into the dedicated server code?
3) Are there similar cv and sv vars that allow you to fine tune packet rate, fps, etc?

As I mentioned before, I have another sysadmin friend who will be hosting another server on a regular P4 3.2ghz / 2g ram, and hope that he'll be able to host 32 player maps.

I suspect that my CeleronD @3ghz might be suffice for anywhere between a 12-24 person server, again depending on the memory limitations. I do have another linux server that I could use in place of this one should the CPU prove to be a bottleneck, a Dual core PentiumD @3ghz.

If I can't get any feedback from someone currently running a beta ET:QW server, I can just sit back and test out various server configs while monitoring resource use through 'top' and 'ntop' while connected.

Thanks to all that replied to this post.