CPU isnt the only factor.Give us your internet connection, ram, ect. For all we know your on a 56k with 32mb ram. maybe 12 slots. celeron sucks for servers.
Sorry, Ive been looking around on the net for dedicated servers. As cheap as possible. Interland has a celeron 1.7ghz, 512mb ram, 80gig hd, 500gb's of cogent bandwidth a month for about $79. But im beginning to think the cel couldn't handle much.
you still havent mentioned the bandwidth, we need upload and download speed, not your cap <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
celerons use a 100 mhz motherboard and 200 mhz ram, and a very small amount of on-die cache, but it isnt really AS weak as these people are complaining. surely the server ops forum would know better than us.
don't rent a server. these guys usually put your server on a machine with another server, and it lags as hell. get a dedicated box, 200 bucks/month? <!--emo&::nerdy::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/nerd.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='nerd.gif'><!--endemo-->
about hosting the server on your machine: you gonna need 5kb/sec per slot. 80kb/sec upload/download for 16 slots. with your proccesor, and if you have 512mb ram. it should run fine.
A 1.6GHz Duron consistently beats a 2.6 GHz celeron, and it is ~twice as cheap. Pentium 4's have long pipelines, they need their cache much more than athlon XP's.
<a href='http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1927' target='_blank'>here's</a> an interesting read.
Also I saw a review of a celeron where they overclocked the hell out of it, it gained very little performance in most newer games since it was constantly waiting to get data from the RAM due to the small amount of cache.
Hey get on irc channel teamir, we got a pretty good server, (east cost) 16 players (private though) for 40$'s a month. And i'll give you the info whenever i get around <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--Soylent green+Dec 6 2003, 02:04 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Soylent green @ Dec 6 2003, 02:04 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->A 1.6GHz Duron consistently beats a 2.6 GHz celeron<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Duron is the AMD version of a Celeron, cheap because the lack of cache. A 1.6 GHz Palomino or Thoroughbred could properly beat a Celeron 2.6 GHz, but not a Duron.
Comments
1.7 Cel= 700 MHZ PX
celerons use a 100 mhz motherboard and 200 mhz ram, and a very small amount of on-die cache, but it isnt really AS weak as these people are complaining. surely the server ops forum would know better than us.
get a dedicated box, 200 bucks/month? <!--emo&::nerdy::--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/nerd.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='nerd.gif'><!--endemo-->
about hosting the server on your machine:
you gonna need 5kb/sec per slot. 80kb/sec upload/download for 16 slots.
with your proccesor, and if you have 512mb ram. it should run fine.
adsl sucks. i want sdsl.
<a href='http://www.anandtech.com/cpu/showdoc.html?i=1927' target='_blank'>here's</a> an interesting read.
Also I saw a review of a celeron where they overclocked the hell out of it, it gained very little performance in most newer games since it was constantly waiting to get data from the RAM due to the small amount of cache.
Duron is the AMD version of a Celeron, cheap because the lack of cache.
A 1.6 GHz Palomino or Thoroughbred could properly beat a Celeron 2.6 GHz, but not a Duron.