Thread: RE: [GD-General] Bandwidth
Brought to you by:
vexxed72
Menu
▾
▴
gamedevlists-general
|
From: CAVEY G. <GER...@sg...> - 2004-09-21 08:29:30
|
>Memory is fuzzy, but here I go. Praetorians (RTS using standard fare=20 >lock-step multiplayer) peaked at about 8K/s on a server with 8 players = >(server collects input packets from all clients and resends them to = every=20 >client, 5 times per second). Well, higher than that if all players = decide to=20 >start frantically banging their keyboards / mice. Average bandwidth = would be=20 >much lower because the low frequency of commands during actual = gameplay, but=20 >we never bothered checking it; perhaps 2-3K/s. Well i guess your engine was using TCP , right? No need to test to say that UDP games will consume much more. GC. ************************************************************************= * Ce message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le "message") sont confidentiels et etablis a l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires. Toute utilisation ou diffusion non autorisee est interdite.=20 Tout message electronique est susceptible d'alteration.=20 SG Asset Management et ses filiales declinent toute responsabilite au = titre de ce message s'il a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. D=E9couvrez l'offre et les services de SG Asset Management sur le site www.sgam.fr=20 ******** This message and any attachments (the "message") are confidential and intended solely for the addressees. Any unauthorised use or dissemination is prohibited.=20 E-mails are susceptible to alteration. =20 Neither SG Asset Management nor any of its subsidiaries or affiliates = shall be liable for the message if altered, changed or falsified.=20 ************************************************************************= * |
|
From: CAVEY G. <GER...@sg...> - 2004-09-21 10:43:01
|
>The figures are in Kilobytes/sec, and no, the engine used UDP = (DirectPlay=20 >protocol). Why would UDP games consume "much more"? Well because of transmission reliability , and i would have say at = least more maybe not much more ... GC. ************************************************************************= * Ce message et toutes les pieces jointes (ci-apres le "message") sont confidentiels et etablis a l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires. Toute utilisation ou diffusion non autorisee est interdite.=20 Tout message electronique est susceptible d'alteration.=20 SG Asset Management et ses filiales declinent toute responsabilite au = titre de ce message s'il a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. D=E9couvrez l'offre et les services de SG Asset Management sur le site www.sgam.fr=20 ******** This message and any attachments (the "message") are confidential and intended solely for the addressees. Any unauthorised use or dissemination is prohibited.=20 E-mails are susceptible to alteration. =20 Neither SG Asset Management nor any of its subsidiaries or affiliates = shall be liable for the message if altered, changed or falsified.=20 ************************************************************************= * |
|
From: <ma...@ch...> - 2004-09-21 11:04:20
|
On Tue, 21 Sep 2004, CAVEY GERARD wrote:
> >The figures are in Kilobytes/sec, and no, the engine used UDP (DirectPlay
> >protocol). Why would UDP games consume "much more"?
> Well because of transmission reliability , and i would have say at least
> more
> maybe not much more ...
If you game rely on realtime responses, using TCP is really not very
clever. Its quite easy to build a reliable stream on top of UDP, in the
cases where you need it, but if you chose to use TCP, you are stuck with
all the assumptions about traffic, that TCP makes.
Perhaps TCP is suitable for a small class of online games (online chess,
stuff like that), but I can't really see anyone choosing it as their first
choice.
And, everything else beeing equal, there is a greater overhead in TCP than
UDP. In fact, the only scenario I can think of, where UDP has a greater
overhead than TCP, is if you use UDP as a reliable stream in a really
silly way.
Mads
--
Mads Bondo Dydensborg. ma...@ch...
If you have a chance, take a look at the virus code, and see what some 300
lines of visual basic can cost industry in say a 24 hour period.
- Ron Sprenkels on the 'I Love You' email virus
|
|
From: Javier A. <ja...@py...> - 2004-09-21 12:44:17
|
CAVEY GERARD wrote: >> Why would UDP games consume "much more"? > Well because of transmission reliability , and i would have say at > least more maybe not much more ... I was gonna say pretty much what Mats already has. There was a discussion about these issues in the GDAlg list, with the subject "[Algorithms] select()+recv() vs. non-blocking sockets", so it's probably best not to repeat it here. Mats, check it out - apparently Warcraft 3 (among others) uses TCP instead of a reliable protocol over UDP, which surprised me. PS: the search function in Sourceforge's mailing list archive interface does not seem to work - I can pack that thread into an Outlook Express folder and zip it to you if interested. -- Javier Arevalo Pyro Studios |
|
From: <ma...@ch...> - 2004-09-21 13:39:20
|
On Tue, 21 Sep 2004, Javier Arevalo wrote:
> CAVEY GERARD wrote:
>
> >> Why would UDP games consume "much more"?
> > Well because of transmission reliability , and i would have say at
> > least more maybe not much more ...
>
> I was gonna say pretty much what Mats already has.
if (Mats == Mads) { ...
> There was a discussion
> about these issues in the GDAlg list, with the subject "[Algorithms]
> select()+recv() vs. non-blocking sockets", so it's probably best not to
> repeat it here. Mats, check it out - apparently Warcraft 3 (among others)
> uses TCP instead of a reliable protocol over UDP, which surprised me.
That surprises me too - however, if their realtime requirements are low
enough, and they assume very minimal packet loss, I guess it makes sense.
It is probably a lot easier to get through firewalls, stuff like that.
> PS: the search function in Sourceforge's mailing list archive interface does
> not seem to work - I can pack that thread into an Outlook Express folder and
> zip it to you if interested.
Can't really read Outlook Express I am afraid ... :-(
Mads
--
Mads Bondo Dydensborg. ma...@ch...
Did you ever notice how at trade shows Microsoft is always the one giving
away stress balls...
|
|
From: Andrew G. <ag...@cl...> - 2004-09-30 14:43:29
|
Narrowband still has a pretty substantial share in parts of the US. For example the split with PS2 online users six months ago was around 50/50, according to people at SCEA. Andy -----Original Message----- From: gam...@li... [mailto:gam...@li...] On Behalf Of Noel Llopis Sent: 30 September 2004 15:17 To: gam...@li... Subject: Re: [GD-General] Bandwidth On Wednesday 29 September 2004 03:22 am, Javier Arevalo wrote: > At 50kb/s (6.25Kbytes/s), a 56K modem > would barely be enough to let someone connect to a server. Is anybody making games with 56K modems in mind anymore? I thought even the crappiest of broadband connections was assumed these days for most online games. --Noel Games from Within http://www.gamesfromwithin.com ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl _______________________________________________ Gamedevlists-general mailing list Gam...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gamedevlists-general Archives: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=557 |
|
From: Javier A. <ja...@py...> - 2004-09-21 10:01:43
|
CAVEY GERARD wrote: > Well i guess your engine was using TCP , right? > No need to test to say that UDP games will consume much more. The figures are in Kilobytes/sec, and no, the engine used UDP (DirectPlay protocol). Why would UDP games consume "much more"? -- Javier Arevalo Pyro Studios |
×
Want the latest updates on software, tech news, and AI?
Get latest updates about software, tech news, and AI from SourceForge directly in your inbox once a month.
Thanks for helping keep SourceForge clean.
X