We are running a CSS 32-man server on a P4 2.8. When I look in the task manager, it seems that only cpu0 (the physical cpu I think) is getting used, while cpu1 is nearly empty. And I never see the scrds.exe process go above 50%.

Would disabling hyperthreading help with this? I would hate to think that we are only using 50% of the cpu power. Or am I misreading it?

As far as I understand Hyperthreading, it is not the same as physical Dual Processors. It is just one physical CPU and that would be your CPU-0. If there is any excess CPU resources, it would be allocated to the virtual CPU-1 and if there isn't, nothing gets allocated.

If you are running just a single game server, chances are it would only use up the full extend of the CPU.

It is somewhat like turbo-charging for an engine where it make use of the discharged exhaust to spin the turbo-charging turbine a little more so as to give the engine a little more boost.

At best, Hyperthreading would give you a 20% boost in performance which comes from effective usage.

From what I see, turning hyperthreading off would not make any change. However, if memory serves me right, changing hyperthreading properties might require you to reload the OS.

Actually HT is a feature turned on/off in the BIOS.

Thats something TP would have to do.

Only using 50% of the CPU is good. The lower the better.

Turning off HT would most likely make no difference.

Turn it off...

Leave it on.

There is not really any performance hit (It is generally always as fast as being off, though not always), and if you ever run a second server you will see an advantage.

You also are probably getting some minor advantages even with just one server.

And to answer your question, no, you're not losing CPU time because it's split into two CPUs. That's not how it works. Each virtual CPU (There is no such thing as one physical and one virtual, they are both virtual) tries to use the CPU as best it can. The reason they split it into two virtual CPUs is that if one virtual CPU is fully occupied but not using certain resources in the CPU, the other virtual CPU can take advantage of them.

We have tested it both ways, and HL based games seem to run smoother with it off. I would suggest you test it, and you should see the difference.

Well, I had SM disable hyperthreading, and then we played on it for a few hours. I then asked them to reenable it, and have been playing with it that way for the last few hours. I would have to say that having HT enabled seems to be the best way, but its kind of hard to tell.
For one thing, since the VAC-enabled patch a couple weeks ago, there is much more lag now, which many others have reported as well. But, when we had HT disabled, it was almost unplayable. Now, its just "barely" playable.
As always, YMMV.

Also, I did notice that with HT enabled, 50% of the CPU used in the task manager, really means 100%. Because when I disabled HT, it peaks at about 98%. Has anyone else noticed this? That seems extrememly high. And this this the only thing we run on this box.

That does seem high for a Source game. Howver I haven't played around with source since a few updates ago. So my input could be completely wrong by now :shock: due to VAC2 eating stu

We have allways run with HT off on our servers and have had good luck, no lag etc...


It seems that you should have a pretty lag free server if that is the only thing running on that box. Have you checked the rates in the config?

Yea, I've played around with the rates a bit, but can't say its really made much of a difference. I posted them here:

http://forums.servermatrix.com/viewtopic.php?t=15907

Change this

sv_maxrate 8000

to

sv_maxrate 25000

That would be about the only thing I can see that would help.

I think you read the wrong one.

I guess I did

I would say setting the maxrate at 25000 instead of 0. It could be flooding clients with info at that rate.

Yea, oddly, that happens to be one of the settings I changed yesterday, and it is set at 25000. I have played with a lot of the settings to no avail.

Another question, we are debating moving to a dual xeon box at insomnia. Does anyone think a Xeon 2.8 would perform better than a P4 2.8? If not, we might be better of going to a P4 3.2. We'd like the Dual Xeon so we can run another server or two.

Obviously 2 cpus are better than one, and a dual Xeon will kick ass. I still think you should be fine running that one game on that box, unless there is something else wrong with it under the surface.

As for running other games, it would depend on what games and how many slots for each, to see if it would take a dual to run them. Of course if you have the cash, then a dual would good to have for running multiple games on.

I should have been a bit more clear, sorry. 2 cpu's are better than one only if you are running more than one server, which is our ultimate goal. However, multiple cpu's don't help at all with a single game like we have now.

(lol...type, erase, type, erase. I can't figure out how to phrase this question.)

Would I expect to get better performance out of a Xeon 2.8 over our existing P4 2.8 running a single instance of CSS? Or would they both be about the same?

Although we would like multiple games, we want the main one we have now to be the best it can be. So, we are either going to go to to a P4 3.2 or Dual xeons.

You are correct, Source will only draw from one CPU. To answer your question the game should run better on Dual Xeons.

And if you plan to add more games on in the future, that would be the way to go.

Well, I hope so, cuz I just did it. Got the $199 dual Xeon box @ Insomnia. Yeehaw!

Congratulations! Enjoy it!