What specs are required for 100 players, no lag, no chat delay.etc

Hi,

We are posting, to find out what specs are required for 100 players, (with around 80 on full time), with no lag.

We have been looking at:

OVH Dedicated Server
Xeon i7 x3450 (i think thats it, its like 2.6ghz)
32GB Ram
60GB SSD
RAM DISK
100mbps up and down.

However need some expert advice on the specs required to undertake this project.

Thanks,
TheTooMuchMinecraft Team!

 

Didn't you already have a thread on this?

Anyway, 32GB RAM is completely overkill for only 100 slots, the other components should be fine.

 

What would you suggest?

 

You'll want 12 gigabytes of RAM on the machine. Also you'll need a 64bit OS and Java 1.7 64 bit. I recommend CentOS or Ubuntu.

 

You can even do 100 players on 5-6 gb ram it just really depends on what you are doing with the server ^^

 

Would we be able to run 100 players, no lag at all on this?
(People would be talking, walking around, light building, worldguard commands and some worldedit)

Q9950
8GB Ram
Raid-10 SATA2 HDD
£100 p/m

 

SSD = Bad.

 

Would the kimsufi 24G host 100?

http://www.kimsufi.co.uk/

i7 4x 2(HT)x 2.66+ GHz
24 GB RAM
100MBPS UP AND DOWN
15TB PER MONTH

 

100£ per month ? That's insanely high-priced...
Run as many players as you want on this one :
http://www.hetzner.de/en/hosting/produkte_rootserver/eq10

I know of a server that hosts 380 with this setup. You could go for the EQ4 or EQ6, which are cheaper, and that would do you just fine.

Yeah, that would easily do it.

 

+1 for Hetzner, £100 / m for Q9950 / 8GB RAM is crazy.

(I've seen 87 on my EQ6, ran fine)

 

So would kimsufi work, if we used a ramdisk and debian 6.0? Also with java 1.7 and optimised it. i.e garbage collections, heap size.etc

 

kimsufi/ovh is known as crap.
Google kimsufi reviews.

 

Yes.
But I'd still go for a Hetzner.

 

yeah hetzner has great hardware and support is good.
If something breaks they replace it in 24hours or less.

 

We would go with hetzner however £150 setup fee is terrible.

 

True. But on the other hand, you are getting the best server around, and the monthly price is brilliant.

 

We have been offered many quotes:

Kimsufi 24G - i7 2.6ghz, 34GB Ram £43 p/m
Other Companies
============

Xeon x3550 12GB Ram £100 p/m
Unkown CPU with 6GB Ram £20 p/m (If we advertise on our and TheSyndicateProject's channel).

I am thinking that Kimsufi would be the best option and with optimization could hold 100 players?

Please advise. Also tell us your specs and server hosts!

 

Like i said kimsufi is known as crap, go with a hetzner for a good server...

 

Kimsufi 24G - i7 2.6ghz, 34GB Ram £43 p/m

I'm assuming the '34' is a typo, but even with that in mind I call bullshit. £300 setup fee or something?

 

Limestone Networks is good, cheap too if you have a coupon code.

 

Hetzner ..... the only choice, period.

 

The kimsufi plan has a £50 setup fee, however we cant buy it because it doesn't accept paypal.

How much ram would I need for 100 players? I was thinking 16gb with a ramdisk and a 2.8ghz+ (Dual if its faster clock speed, l2 cache.etc) and at least a 7500rpm sas drive.

Hetzner look good however the setup fee is too much.

I think the cheapest i have found is £84 p/m no setup fee in NL. That would be:

Sandy Bridge i3 2100 3,1 Ghz Dual core with HT
Integrated IPMI with KVM and remote media support
16 GB DDR3-RAM
1 x 500 GB Western Digital Scorpio Black (7200 RPM)
5000 GB @ 100 mbit
5 usable in a 8 IP subnet - own VLAN
I install my own OS through IPMI with KVM/IP and remote media
SLA 5 Best effort hardware replacement in case of hardware failure included free

or with SSD INTEL X25-M SSD 80GB SATA II MLC its £94 p/m


Would that hold 100 players with a ramdisk? Or is that too over kill.

(The above server was with swiftway.net, they have good reviews on the webhostingtalk forum)

Or the following:

Basic Servers - KS-24G
Intel i7-920 4x 2.66+ GHz
24 GB DDR3
2000 GB HDD
100 Mbps
15 TB/month Upstream

From a kimsufi reseller (that we can buy with paypal) that would cost:

£69 p/m with £50 setup fee.

EDIT by Moderator: merged posts, please use the edit button instead of double posting.

 

Care to explain?

 

i was thinking that to.

 

There are 2 types of SSDs. Commercial and Industrial.

Commercial SSDs are the ones you see on the market at NewEgg, Tiger Direct, etc, your general computer store. The Industrial ones cost about 10x the price. The difference is that the commercial SSDs are not meant for the amount of constant accessing that Minecraft does in chunk handling and storage. Same goes for Second Life or any game or Virtual World platform where you are streaming content back and forth non-stop. This requires non-stop read/writes of SSD. Even micro read-writes are just as damaging and when you run something like windows it is accessing like over 5000 files just to boot up. Coding means compiling/writing constantly repeatedly updating many files, caching web pages, etc. All add to the load on the SSD. And once you add things that really were not on the engineers minds when these were created and you are left with an item that will last 2-3 years under heavy use like Minecraft, SecondLife, and other games that constantly read/write non-stop to the drive. Torrenting as well.
A heavy work load is like about 20-30gb of data written/transferred per day and with games it is very easy to go beyond that by a a factor of 10. However if you are in Australia, you probably have a 20-30gb bandwidth cap so that alone will preserve your SSD use, whereas i transfer 450+ gigs a month including the traffic on the server. I am pretty sure if i had SSDs they would not last 2 years under the load i require they work under.

Historically, games have driven the computer technology market for CPU, HD, RAM Speeds since the 80s. However, it is apparent that games were not in the criteria when SSDs were engineered and introduced to the market for commercial consumption.

 

I think using a ram disk negates all your wear fears.

 

http://forums.bukkit.org/threads/la...me-info-for-those-of-you-who-dont-know.19970/

 

yea but when RAM DISK goes bad... it really goes bad plus it doesn't help for real big worlds

 

You are correct in the write life of these drives. But I hold a slightly differing view.

If my memory serves me right, 2-3 years ago Terabyte drives were still just starting to appear. So come 2013-2014 [insert favourite deity/lack of deity] god only knows what commercial hard drives will be at. In fact, the first EEE PC 701 with it's 4GB SSD started appearing just over 3 years ago. In the intervening time they have exponentially grown in capacity, and also grown in speed.

TLDR: I'm happy if I get 3-4 years out of a drive, cause by then it's so old that it's death would serve as a great excuse to buy a newer one.

But it takes all kinds to make a world

 

Ram Disk is not the best choice for a Linux box because the Linux file system saves so fast that once your world folder hits 5+ gigs, the save speed of non-ram disk will be faster than Ram Disk, as I have experienced on 2 different Linux boxes, and my worlds total 12 gigs every 10min save which is about 5seconds or so, without Ram Disk, a couple seconds longer with Ram Disk, and on windows, the save time hits as high as 10-15 seconds.

Windows Machines need a Ram Disk. Unfortunately Windows based Ram Disks lack functionality that even basic Macintosh Ram Disks had in 1987 - 24 years ago...