Server rentals :: NFOservers.com

im currently using a amd phenom 9500 quad core 4g ram in a dedicated server configuration to run a bunch of game servers and a voice server.

but im ready to move this off site, looking at nfo. this is primarily due to bandwidth issues im having.

trouble is, im not sure which package to get.

currently im limited by internet bandwidth, and not cpu; to run the bare minimum of what i want, im using 25% overall cpu or thereabouts. if i use the 50% rule, that would mean if i had a nfo dual core option it should be able to run what i need, ASSUMING similar cpu attributes like clock speed etc.

but i didnt fine any reference to clock speeds in any of the faqs, just that is is Nehalem or better; does that mean we get at least 2.66ghz, or ?

also, the faq said you rent hyperthreaded cores. what i think you mean is one thread of a physical hyperthreaded core; can you confirm? in other words, if i want the equivalent of an single physical core (2 threads), i need a "2 core" server.

if i rent a 2 core server, do you place the threads on the same cpu physical core, or is it more random? i ask this because the nehalam shares alu/cache etc. and it might be difficult to track down performance issues attributable to cache utilization etc. if they arrise. maybe not an issue with game servers, not sure. ive had this issue with some non game apps in the past.

all that said, i suspect the speed/core issue might be irrelevant compared to the memory limitation. to that end im just not sure how i will be impacted going from 4gb to 2gb.

any guidance on how many slots/core people have experience running on say TF2, L4D2, CSS or even kf? (keeping cpu utilization at about the 50% rate)? the 1-3 game servers per core in the order page really doesnt tell me much; it would be more informative if you spec'd slots for a particular game (or series of games).

finally, it seems from the faq that moving up or down in cores is seamless; anyone have any experience with this? i assume the os/files/ etc. remain untouched. i may try a 1 core for the 2 day trial to see what it can do, and scale from there.

thanks for any guidance,

mark

I'd recommend starting low, based on only your RAM usage requirements, and then working up, if need be. VDS upgrades are easy to do and only result in a prorated payment (or nothing, during the free trial).


The exact base clock speed varies, and some machines have turbo, as well. The most common machine right now is an L5640 (2.26ghz, turbo to 2.8ghz), which is quite fast, but some machines are even faster.

All of these CPUs will easily beat your current one in terms of performance per core.


Yes: viewtopic.php?f=47&t=5099. However, two hyperthreads here will likely be more than a single physical core for you (and closer to two), because of the way we load-balance.


It's a bit more sophisticated than that. Cores are assigned based on load and can change as the machine balances itself.

We haven't seen CPU load problems for any customers yet on our machines, due to the machines being so underloaded.


I'd recommend checking this out in the task manager while your current server set is running. You should add up how much all of the servers use, then add at least a few hundred megabytes for the OS and some basic caching.

The more RAM, the better, of course -- cache really comes in handy for speeding up level loads.


Even within a game, there is significant variance depending on how loaded the servers will be, the plugins that will be run on the server, the OS that will be used, and other options (replay, sourcetv, etc). It can be very difficult to predict ahead of time what resources a specific customer will require, so we keep the numbers general.

During the 2-day free trial, the performance is something you should become more in tune with. Start low and upgrade if need be.


Upgrading is pretty painless. The only thing that slows things down is when a server has to be moved to a new machine because the original one does not have the capacity to contain it, in which case there is a delay for the copy. If a delay might be a problem, I recommend contacting us about it to see if it will actually need to occur.

John, do you purchase the machines themself, set them up with Xen, then ship them off to the data center that needs it? Always wondered how exactly you do it. Or do you purchase another machine from the data center?

_________________

Yes, I purchase, build, and ship these machines myself. All the equipment in our cabinets is company-owned -- we don't lease (or resell) anyone else's hardware.

What's the model on most of the machines?

_________________

We just added a new rack mounted to our collection at our shop, and I believe it's the R810. Just in the process of moving virtual machines over to it now. Curious what machines you run. We plan on running 7-8 virtuals on it. Domain controller, exchange server, file server, blackberry server, SAP server, Sentry File, Testing, Game server (boss don't know about this one).

_________________

I can't provide much depth on that, but we use server-class machines with higher-end processors and the fastest available ECC memory. If your machine fits those specifications, it should perform similarly.

I also have a number of tweaks and workarounds in place that make Xen run much better than it does in its default configuration.

one clarification; my current 4 core amd (not hyperthreaded of course) is running a clock of 2.1.

with your 'most common' running 2.26, wouldnt this be about, per thread, the same as what i have now? so a 4 core would be pretty close to what im currently running? ie a bit more clock speed, a bit less efficiency because of the hyperthread, should be about a break even per core?

as soon as the weekend is over i'll take your advice and order the single core, to see what happens. but i suspect i'll be needing a lot more.

thanks,

mark

Ah now that is an answer to that question ANY user should and could ever want to hear.

_________________
. [ R ] .
For Gamers, by a gamer.
http://www.WeGameYouPlay.com

For multiple busy servers, you'll likely run into RAM limits on the one-core, and CPU usage problems as well (from map reloads maxing the single processor and choking out other servers, if nothing else). The single core will be good for testing one server, though.

yeah, thats what i was thinking too. i'll try the single core, but dual+ is where i'll probably end up.

Thanks again for the responses. its good to know someone is actually here if i ever have an issue. my web hosting could learn a lesson...

Not a problem. And we offer that, too .

i went to order, read your terms and conditions.

one clarification; it says i i cannot "Initiate connections to external IP addresses (outside of the server machine), to include pinging another address or connecting to an external database or client,..." without permission.

i use a web host for forums, stats, etc. and it gathers info from all the game server sites. am i reading this restriction wrong? if so, i need permission...

and one further question; windows 2003 vs 2008 vs 2008r2. i would prefer r2, but does r2/2008 use any more memory than 2003? trying to save what little is available for gaming!

thanks

mark

The "General restrictions on servers and services." section (where that is listed) is prefaced with 'This section applies to all services offered by Nuclearfallout (called "servers" below) with the exception of dedicated servers and virtual dedicated servers.'. It doesn't apply to your VDS.


For maximum memory savings, Win2k3 would be the best choice, of Windows flavors. All are pretty reasonable, though. Linux would save a bit more RAM yet, of course, but HL1/HL1/OB servers on Linux tend to use a bit more CPU.