Extreme CPU usage

mslmsl Join Date: 2012-11-26 Member: 173281Members
in Server Discussion
Hi,

I work at a german GSP and wanted to integrate NS2 in our gameswitching offer (currently ~100 games). Sadly due to the extreme high CPU it is impossible to offer NS2 servers for a reasonable and competitive price. The RAM usage is also quite high, but RAM is no problem (cheap and easy to upgrade). The real problem is the high CPU usage of idle servers. e.g. on an E5-1650 the server.exe grabs 50% CPU of one core and nobody is using the server.

Many people would like to host servers or buy servers from a hoster for a good price and with a good quality which can both only be done by reducing the hardware ressource usage.

Are there any plans to reduce the CPU usage with the next updates?


cheers

msl
Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome

Comments

  • Kouji_SanKouji_San Sr. Hινε Uρкεερεг - EUPT Deputy The Netherlands Join Date: 2003-05-13 Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
    It's not a simple task to just reduce CPU usage though, its an inherent thing about the Spark engine and its lua integration. It might become better and has already seen some improvements, but it will always be a CPU heavy engine.

    On that 3.2Ghz CPU you can perhaps host a 16-18 player server btw...
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • mslmsl Join Date: 2012-11-26 Member: 173281Members
    Thanks for the reply. I'm aware that this is not a fast task todo. But I hope to hear something like "yeah we know and we are working on that". ;)

    I really hope it gets better soon. Maybe a "hibernate" mode like in counter strike global offensive would be a first step to reduce (at least) the idle cpu usage.

    Of course I could host one server on that box. But I don't know many guys that want to afford a dedicated box for just _one_ gameserver with 16 slots... (or let it be 4 servers - one each core, which is still not acceptable).
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • Kouji_SanKouji_San Sr. Hινε Uρкεερεг - EUPT Deputy The Netherlands Join Date: 2003-05-13 Member: 16271Members, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue
    edited November 2012
    <!--quoteo(post=2035155:date=Nov 26 2012, 05:01 PM:name=msl)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (msl @ Nov 26 2012, 05:01 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2035155"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Thanks for the reply. I'm aware that this is not a fast task todo. But I hope to hear something like "yeah we know and we are working on that". ;)

    I really hope it gets better soon. Maybe a "hibernate" mode like in counter strike global offensive would be a first step to reduce (at least) the idle cpu usage.

    Of course I could host one server on that box. But I don't know many guys that want to afford a dedicated box for just _one_ gameserver with 16 slots... (or let it be 4 servers - one each core, which is still not acceptable).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    Well, what I meant is that on a 3.2Ghz 6 core CPU such as the E5-1650, it means you can indeed host up to 5 servers at 16-18 players (core 1-5), with core 0 dedicated for the OS

    And to answer your "yeah we know and we are working on that" remark. Performance is always being worked on and always will be worked on, it is one of the biggest concerns to have this engine run on cheaper server hardware, as it should. It simply is too expensive in its current form with minimum speeds of 3Ghz or rather 4Ghz+ to get this baby running above 18 players. Come to think of it, I think running an 18 player server on just 3.2Ghz is already pushing it currently.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • DawormDaworm Join Date: 2009-06-22 Member: 67900Members
    <!--quoteo(post=2035164:date=Nov 27 2012, 04:15 AM:name=Kouji_San)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kouji_San @ Nov 27 2012, 04:15 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2035164"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Come to think of it, I think running an 18 player server on just 3.2Ghz is already pushing it currently.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
    3.6GHZ Xeon CPU died as soon as Jetpacks became involved... on a 16slot server.

    I might try spin up a 12slot maybe, see how that goes... But it should be able to handle it. :(
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • GuspazGuspaz Join Date: 2002-11-01 Member: 2862Members, Constellation
    edited November 2012
    <!--quoteo(post=2035312:date=Nov 26 2012, 05:58 PM:name=Daworm)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Daworm @ Nov 26 2012, 05:58 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2035312"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->3.6GHZ Xeon CPU died as soon as Jetpacks became involved... on a 16slot server.

    I might try spin up a 12slot maybe, see how that goes... But it should be able to handle it. :(<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    "3.6 GHz Xeon CPU" is meaningless. Such a CPU was launched in 2004 based on the Netburst architecture (the Pentium 4 based Xeons), and such a CPU should have no expectation of running NS2 at all. On the other hand, an Ivy Bridge Xeon running at 3.6 GHz such as the E3-1280V2 should have no problem running a 16 slot server, even with jetpacks.

    The performance difference between the first and last 3.6 GHz Xeon is enormous, as in the newer one is multiple TIMES faster clock-for-clock.

    For reference, that first Xeon is 90nm, and the newest is 22nm, which means that the first 3.6 GHz Xeon required about 17x the space for the same number of transistors.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • DawormDaworm Join Date: 2009-06-22 Member: 67900Members
    TY for the info Guspaz, as server is off, I'll check the actual specs and see which it is when I'm home.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • GuspazGuspaz Join Date: 2002-11-01 Member: 2862Members, Constellation
    edited November 2012
    More detailed specs on Daworm's processor seems to indicate it's a single-core Pentium 4 era Xeon. Irwindale, specifically, on an E7520 chipset.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • DawormDaworm Join Date: 2009-06-22 Member: 67900Members
    Yeah, thanks for the input via PM Guspaz. I was honestly thinking the hardware was a tad too old. (sad panda) but still feel some server-based optimisations should allow it to run.

    It was almost 10-12 minutes before my server tick rate started to drop at the time, but then it was full and JPs came into play.

    I'll try again on a 12-slot server and see if it's any difference. Maybe even as a CO custom server. Less entities all-around being built might make a difference too.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
  • SeeVeeSeeVee Join Date: 2012-10-31 Member: 165206Members
    edited November 2012
    Even on great hardware this game has issues when reaching 20+ players because of the single core limitation. When a game engine uses 50% CPU on idle that should be huge red flag to either multi-core it and spread the load out or revamp the engine. An online game is only as good as it's dedicated server software.

    If the dedicated servers are not made to run smoother sooner it could cost them the game. Unfortunately there are a lot of games out there that run a lot more smoother and due to most people not having patience they will just play those games sooner than later.

    Hopefully there is a remedy soon as I love this game and would hate to see it pitter out.
    Off Topic Disagree Agree Awesome
Sign In or Register to comment.