Results 1 to 14 of 14
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Edinburgh, Scotland
    Posts
    37

    Game server bandwidth usage

    hi all,

    firstly i know this is a web hosting forum but have seen other posts relating to games so was hoping there would be someone out there to help.

    i would like to know how much bandwidth a bf1942 (with desert combat mod) 64-player server would use, assuming its 50% full 24/7. i dont really know anything about how the game servers communicate with clients so any help would be great.

    i'm also wondering how much resource such a server would use, and how many servers something like an amdxp2000+ 512mb ram with linux (does the os make a difference?) could handle.

    i'm looking at re-selling dedicated servers so need to get these things right

    thanks for your help

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    1,715
    You can specify the client bandwidth limit in the server (modem, isdn, dsl/cable, t1, and lan, I believe). From there, it's just basic math -- limit per sec * seconds in a month * avg player count.

    I haven't messed with bf1942 / DC for a few patches, but I suspect just one 64-player server would be a stretch on that proc. More than one of any size would definitely be unwise.
    Game Servers are the next hot market!
    Slim margins, heavy support, fickle customers, and moronic suppliers!
    Start your own today!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    44
    Bandwidth is exponential for real time games. The more player-player interactions the more bandwidth needed. Keep in mind, a 32 player takes more than 2x a 16 player server's bandwidth. 64 players probably needs 1.5mbit/s constantly so thats 500GB xfer.. it could be more or less depending on the time of day, etc.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    2,780
    64 Players need more bandwidth than that. I did ran some bf1942 calculation before. The numbers is more like 3TB if it's full 24/7. And CPU wise, you probably need the fastest clocks available to get close to 64.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Syracuse, NY
    Posts
    2,168
    I suggest you get a dual proc and at least 2 GB RAM to run such a resource intensive game. As for bandwidth, i'd think this to use about 1000 GB if 50% full 24/7. Also, i'd stay away from AMD Athlon for gaming. Perhaps a AMD Opteron wouldn't be bad or dual xeons.

  6. #6
    They've improved the cpu usage and memory usuage very much since the game was first released, and it tends to run faster on windows as of right now.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Edinburgh, Scotland
    Posts
    37
    thanks for everyones reply.

    so do you think the server could support 2x 18 or 24 player servers?
    also why arent athlons good for gaming?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    73
    Our clan uses a dual Xeon 2.8GHz setup to run 3 BF42 and 1 BF:V servers. From my calcs, 1 slot*month ~= 27GB bandwidth, so:

    64(slots) * 50%(full) * 27GB = 864GB

    1000GB bandwidth should be enough for you.

    I can't comment accurately on the CPU, as we moved from basic hosted slot solutions straight to the dual Xeon dedicated box, but do note that map changes in BF are intensive. DC is worse than vanilla BF. I'll guess two servers on that box will cause lag on map changes.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    1,715
    Athlons are fine for game servers, but Xeons can schedule two tasks per proc (by masquerading as two procs), so they do better if you have multiple game servers running. If you run two BF servers, you will probably overrun your CPU cache and performance will dive. If you want to multiple large games on a box, dual proc is the only way to go.
    Game Servers are the next hot market!
    Slim margins, heavy support, fickle customers, and moronic suppliers!
    Start your own today!

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Syracuse, NY
    Posts
    2,168
    Originally posted by hiryuu
    Athlons are fine for game servers, but Xeons can schedule two tasks per proc (by masquerading as two procs), so they do better if you have multiple game servers running. If you run two BF servers, you will probably overrun your CPU cache and performance will dive. If you want to multiple large games on a box, dual proc is the only way to go.
    The other thing with xeons is that they have a higher FSB and cache which helps quite a bit in gaming. A single Xeon wouldn't even be bad...

  11. #11
    Originally posted by chansen
    Our clan uses a dual Xeon 2.8GHz setup to run 3 BF42 and 1 BF:V servers. From my calcs, 1 slot*month ~= 27GB bandwidth, so:

    64(slots) * 50%(full) * 27GB = 864GB

    1000GB bandwidth should be enough for you.

    I can't comment accurately on the CPU, as we moved from basic hosted slot solutions straight to the dual Xeon dedicated box, but do note that map changes in BF are intensive. DC is worse than vanilla BF. I'll guess two servers on that box will cause lag on map changes.
    Who do you use to host the dual 2.8's?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    257
    bfv is very demanding is it not?
    eXeGaming : Professional Gaming Organization

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    3,038
    Originally posted by jaali
    bfv is very demanding is it not?
    BFV is one of the most demanding games out right now. But then again you are a game server provider so you would know that already.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    73
    Originally posted by Thebob6
    Who do you use to host the dual 2.8's?
    We deal with Jon from www.ecgnetwork.com, but I believe the parent company is Defender Hosting, which actually provides the dedicated server.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •