• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

RAM in a Gaming Server

E

enzoslashslash

Member
Hello all and thanks for reading!

From my understanding, you can get better throughput with DDR2 memory, but the timings on DDR2 are looser than standard DDR memory. I would like fast loading times for maps and such (BF2, Source Engine), but I do not want any jittering mid-game. Does anyone have any firsthand experience with this and would like to recommend a brand/type of RAM?

By the way, I am getting a Pentium D Dual-Core and some 76gB Raptors, just keep that in mind 😉
 
Originally posted by: enzoslashslash
Hello all and thanks for reading!

From my understanding, you can get better throughput with DDR2 memory, but the timings on DDR2 are looser than standard DDR memory. I would like fast loading times for maps and such (BF2, Source Engine), but I do not want any jittering mid-game. Does anyone have any firsthand experience with this and would like to recommend a brand/type of RAM?

By the way, I am getting a Pentium D Dual-Core and some 76gB Raptors, just keep that in mind 😉
Click to expand...


No, you ARE NOT GETTING A PENTIUM D, and YOU ARE NOT GETTING 74GB Raptors. Do you have ANY IDEA how ABSOLUTLY HORRIBLE intels perform in gaming?!?!?!? Get a new SATA II drive, not an old raptor. latency is directly related to throughput, and DDR2 performs horribly. If you get an intel (which I pray that I can convince you otherwise), you will have to get DDR2, it is the only thing that is compatible. AMD uses DDR, and also performs about 4x faster (i'm not streching that, the most expensive amd x2 is 4x more powerful than the most expensive pentium D). PLEASE DO NOT WASTE YOUR MONEY!!!! If you want more proof just give me some time to find some articles.

EDIT: oh yeah, and welcome to the forums!
 
Originally posted by: Crescent13
Originally posted by: enzoslashslash
Hello all and thanks for reading!

From my understanding, you can get better throughput with DDR2 memory, but the timings on DDR2 are looser than standard DDR memory. I would like fast loading times for maps and such (BF2, Source Engine), but I do not want any jittering mid-game. Does anyone have any firsthand experience with this and would like to recommend a brand/type of RAM?

By the way, I am getting a Pentium D Dual-Core and some 76gB Raptors, just keep that in mind 😉
Click to expand...


No, you ARE NOT GETTING A PENTIUM D, and YOU ARE NOT GETTING 74GB Raptors. Do you have ANY IDEA how ABSOLUTLY HORRIBLE intels perform in gaming?!?!?!? Get a new SATA II drive, not an old raptor. latency is directly related to throughput, and DDR2 performs horribly. If you get an intel (which I pray that I can convince you otherwise), you will have to get DDR2, it is the only thing that is compatible. AMD uses DDR, and also performs about 4x faster (i'm not streching that, the most expensive amd x2 is 4x more powerful than the most expensive pentium D). PLEASE DO NOT WASTE YOUR MONEY!!!! If you want more proof just give me some time to find some articles.

EDIT: oh yeah, and welcome to the forums!
Click to expand...

Hey, someone ranted for me! WOOHHOOO!
 
Isn't this for a gaming server, and not a gaming box? So the lack of gaming performance on the intel wouldn't really matter. I know I would definitely want atleast dual cores with when doing a game server setup...
Tas.
 
Originally posted by: Crescent13
Originally posted by: AmberClad
Originally posted by: Crescent13
(i'm not streching that, the most expensive amd x2 is 4x more powerful than the most expensive pentium D).
Click to expand...

Benchmarks?
Click to expand...

OOPS! I was streching that, it is about 2x more powerful. Sorry about that. link
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, in which of these does the A64 get 2x as many framerates? It's well known that A64s will outperform P4s, but don't get carried away 😛.
 
Woah, chill guys, I was just throwing ideas out there. Now that I have read your post for the 4th time, crescent I'm thinking that there is a hint or two of sarcasm?

EDIT: Anyways, I lean towards AMD for gaming, but for severs, I have "heard" that Intels outperform AMDs, serverside(maybe due to HT/Dual core?). My concern is that there aren't any server rackmount barebones out there that support 939-pin or such, just the Opteron 940-pin (correct if I am wrong). I want to keep the rig under $1000, and barebones allow me to have a case and a motherboard that is 100% compatible.
 
Originally posted by: enzoslashslash
Woah, chill guys, I was just throwing ideas out there. Now that I have read your post for the 4th time, crescent I'm thinking that there is a hint or two of sarcasm?
Click to expand...


No, it is not sarcasm. Look at the benches! Pentium D is outperformed every time by AMD. I am serious.
 
If it is a gaming server. then you wouldn't even need fast memory. Just high bandwidth. for that, you are better off with loose timings so you can get more bandwidth. i.e., 3200 memory at CAS 2 would perform worse that 3200 memory at CAS 3. because you need bandwidth, and the faster your timings, the lower the bandwidth.

For an AMD system: Theoretically, to get the most absolute bandwidth, you would purchase PC4800 memory like this You would then take this memory, run its latencies at the loosest timings, and underclock down as low as humanly possible. This would give you the max amount of bandwidth.

For an Intel system (not reccommended): Get memory like this and do the same as you would with the AMD.
 
Thanks for your input coolnessrune,

I have a few questions though; wouldn't underclocking the memory coupled with already loose timings make map loadings slower? I am also curious as to why you picked the type of RAM you picked (not OCZ, but PC4800 and PC8000). I am leaning to the Intel side of things (almost boxed in) because of my case requirements.

Also would SATA II or 10k Raptors be better for this job? Again, I have "heard" good things about Raptors. Someone Enlighten!
 
Originally posted by: enzoslashslash
Woah, chill guys, I was just throwing ideas out there. Now that I have read your post for the 4th time, crescent I'm thinking that there is a hint or two of sarcasm?

EDIT: Anyways, I lean towards AMD for gaming, but for severs, I have "heard" that Intels outperform AMDs, serverside(maybe due to HT/Dual core?). My concern is that there aren't any server rackmount barebones out there that support 939-pin or such, just the Opteron 940-pin (correct if I am wrong). I want to keep the rig under $1000, and barebones allow me to have a case and a motherboard that is 100% compatible.
Click to expand...

1. HT: negligible benefits compared to Dual core

2. Dual Core: obviously AMD has that too.

3. The FSB in Intels are crap and are the inherent flaw that makes Intel's processors slower.

So in the end AMD turn out to the faster everywhere. Encoding, games, servers. Anything. Just look at the whole Mac review anandtech did. It's about Mac as a server but also features AMD and Intel.
Part 1
Part 2


 
An AMD x2 would own that intel you are about to buy. I hope you read a few articles and change your mind before you waste your money
 
Originally posted by: enzoslashslash
Thanks for your input coolnessrune,

I have a few questions though; wouldn't underclocking the memory coupled with already loose timings make map loadings slower? I am also curious as to why you picked the type of RAM you picked (not OCZ, but PC4800 and PC8000). I am leaning to the Intel side of things (almost boxed in) because of my case requirements.

Also would SATA II or 10k Raptors be better for this job? Again, I have "heard" good things about Raptors. Someone Enlighten!
Click to expand...


No remember, latency is how fast the memory can FIND things. Since map data is one chunk, once its was found, it would load it in a constant stream (where large bandwidth would kick in). Remember those numbers are in NANOseconds (in other words you are comparing 2 MILLIONTHS of a second to 3 MILLIONTHS of a second). So unless you are accessing LOTS of out of order, random files, the latency wouldn't be noticeable. It would take 3 nanoseconds instead od 2 nanoseconds to find the file, but would then load at a much higher bandwidth.

Secondly I chose PC4800 memory for AMD because that was the fastest made in the DDR specification.

I chose PC8000 memoory for Intel because that is the fastest DDR2 specification so far.


EDIT: Thirdly, according to my research, the Raptors only perform better when compould with a high quality SATA controller from Promise or LSI. When coupled with the standard MOBO controller, they aren't much more faster than a standard SATA drive. So I would just stick to a standard SATA drive and get more storage.
 
Much Love Everyone! (especially rune)

Well, here are my two options

-Intel Pentium D 820 Smithfield 800MHz FSB LGA 775 Dual Core + OCZ PC8000 + Server Rackmount/Motherboard

-AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ Manchester 1GHz FSB Socket 939 Dual Core + OCZ PC4800 + Undecided Case/Motherboard

Either route will have SATA II HDD

Now my question is, by how much will the AMD overpower the Intel? Is it worth the extra cash?


EDIT: Now that Shadow Blade has brought Opterons into the mix...

I think I might get two
AMD Opteron 242 SledgeHammer 400MHz FSB Socket 940 Processors (178 a piece)
I can still get a rackmount server/motherboard and I have an AMD.

Anyone recommend another Opteron? Remember I gotta keep this round $1000
 
Get a Pentium D 840EE and some DDR2-1000 RAM. Bandwidth is king when it comes to gaming servers.

Also, drop the Raptors and get a Samsung SATA-2 hard drive.

// Sorry for betraying you, AMD. It's just that DDR2-1000 has no competition. 🙁
 
Originally posted by: Bona Fide
Get a Pentium D 840EE and some DDR2-1000 RAM. Bandwidth is king when it comes to gaming servers.

Also, drop the Raptors and get a Samsung SATA-2 hard drive.

// Sorry for betraying you, AMD. It's just that DDR2-1000 has no competition. 🙁
Click to expand...

Monster 🙁
 
Yeah, but there intel 800FSB wouldn't have the ability to keep up with 1000Mhz memory. Besides, we are talking about lowering the memory to 3200 speeds at least or lower. Granted that would give you the most bandwidth but thats where you must do benchmarks.

Take this idea enzoslashslash:

You purchase DDR 2 1000 Mhz memory. You begin underclocking. You get to 3200 speeds. You run memory benchmarks. Hmmmmmmmm. It runs 2000MB (Just an example, not actual fact)

ok thats interesting. Now you run it at 2100 speeds. Hmmmmmm you find it runs 2000MB. This is because the Intel architecture only has 8GB of memory bandwidth. This means that in 2x Dual channel mode (4DIMMS in 2 Dual channel sets), each memory stick can only run at 2000MB max. So you're stuck with extra memory power (which you would just as easily put into Mhz speed). Whereas I believe the AMD system can have 17GB (Verification anyone?) Which means that if you do like 4 DIMMS. Each running at 4000MB, you would, in the end, have 16000MB of bandwidth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top