SRCDS

Ask questions about dedicated servers here and we and other users will do our best to answer them. Please also refer to the self-help section for tutorials and answers to the most commonly asked questions.
Post Reply
suvam_2
New to forums
New to forums
Posts: 13
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC40BgXanDqOYoVCYFDSTfHA
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2015 7:33 am

SRCDS

Post by suvam_2 »

SRCDS uses single core. How can we achieve more performance ?
What is the maximum amount of Mbps SRCDS uses ? I see 4 Mbps on my friend's VDS.
We have unmanaged linux Debian server. When I type net_graph 4 I see that the sv variable shows 900 to 800. And on other servers that are ordered through normal gameserver panel get 29 to 30. Is it the server FPS ? If it is then I saw that the 29 to 30 performs better. How to set it lower ? and we run 25 Players Left 4 Dead 2 Server. Is there any way to achieve more performance ? It lags when full and the packet size sometimes 1000 to 2000 and chokes 48 or 34 or less.
When any client strikes a melee weapon on special infecteds it don't register correctly ( hit correctly ). Thank you very much
hustl4
New to forums
New to forums
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2015 8:24 pm

Re: SRCDS

Post by hustl4 »

For source server higher cpu clock speed is key. I have multiple single-core linux vps's each running 2 csgo servers, and the vps that has a newer cpu (Xeon E5-2690 v2 @ 3.00 Ghz) performs worse than those that have an older cpu (Xeon E31270 @ 3.40 Ghz).
stickz

Re: SRCDS

Post by stickz »

hustl4 wrote:I have multiple single-core linux vps's each running 2 csgo servers
Not smart. While the majority of the load is on a single core, a small (but noticeable) portion can be offloaded to a second core. You'll also achieve better performance in a virtual environment with two or more cores; due to the fact physical cores are shared with other users.
hustl4 wrote: vps that has a newer cpu (Xeon E5-2690 v2 @ 3.00 Ghz) performs worse than those that have an older cpu (Xeon E31270 @ 3.40 Ghz).
NFO leases off all eight threads on e3-1270's, that would depend on the machine load. But the e5-2697v3 VPSes (available in many locations) are consistently faster than both of these options.
User avatar
kraze
Former staff
Former staff
Posts: 4362
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 9:06 am
Location: California

Re: SRCDS

Post by kraze »

suvam_2 wrote:SRCDS uses single core. How can we achieve more performance ?
What is the maximum amount of Mbps SRCDS uses ? I see 4 Mbps on my friend's VDS.
We have unmanaged linux Debian server. When I type net_graph 4 I see that the sv variable shows 900 to 800. And on other servers that are ordered through normal gameserver panel get 29 to 30. Is it the server FPS ? If it is then I saw that the 29 to 30 performs better. How to set it lower ? and we run 25 Players Left 4 Dead 2 Server. Is there any way to achieve more performance ? It lags when full and the packet size sometimes 1000 to 2000 and chokes 48 or 34 or less.
When any client strikes a melee weapon on special infecteds it don't register correctly ( hit correctly ). Thank you very much
Since SRCDS is mainly a single threaded application if you're looking for better performance(if it's CPU related) you would need to be moved to a faster machine or work to optimize the server by limiting addons. I also don't know the average bandwidth usage, but a large enough server can definitely pump out a decent amount, but that's not too important since it'll never be a limiting factor here. It sounds like you may also be getting two games confused. The SV value would be the servers tickrate/FPS. For older HL1 based games that number could be in the thousands, while newer OB based games would cap at 100. L4D2 would be capped at 30 tickrate, so the SV value should stay pretty consistently at 30. Based on what you're saying it sounds like your rates aren't set correctly. I'd recommend setting your servers maxrate to 0 and its minrate as high it is goes (I believe L4D2 has some sort of cap).
@Kraze^NFo> Juski has a very valid point
@Juski> Got my new signature, thanks!
@Kraze^NFo> Out of context!
@Juski> Doesn't matter!
@Juski> You said I had a valid point! You can't take it back now! It's out there!
Post Reply