Imaginative CPU core useage? Or a dullard's fantasy?

[dmarkwick 261]

Related to this thread, where I suggest the possibility of running a dedicated server on one CPU core, and play as a joining client on another core.

I expect there are many problems, such as doubling up of gaming data, memory bus performance issues, but given that it could possibly give more performance than it removes, would it be doable?

Obviously this would mostly only improve the SP aspect, and probably player/host type setups, but I remember way back when Falcon 4 was big, some people had 2-PC setups where they hosted the F4 world/campaign on one machine and played from another. Seems like we can just about do that on one PC nowadays. My CPU useage never goes above 25% useage even in the most demanding ArmA sessions.

I would expect this functionality to be entirely set up by the user BTW, rather than a default configuration.

[ghostnineone 10]

that could rape less powerful computers...

[rangerpl 13]

Well if this is an option that's available to the people with powerful computers, I fully support it.

I just don't want to have to buy a Core i7 to enjoy the game properly.

[gossamersolid 155]

I don't know why you want to run a dedicated on the same rig as a client. It's called "DEDICATED" for a reason lol.

I'm all for Dedicated servers using more resources though as they start to lag when resources are still available.

[[frl]myke 14]

In fact, actually with A2 i'm using dedicated/client setup regulary and i see a clear improvement of FPS.

On my Quad ArmA 2 goes rarely above 50% CPU usage which is technically Dualcore performance. Since a dedicated server doesn't need to calculate graphics (at least not at the same amount as a client does), the unused 50% of my CPU can easily handle a local dedicated server running alongside. Now since the client application doesn't has to handle non-player controlled AI and the bigger bunch of scripts as this is done on the server app, FPS clearly goes up.

As example a BI Warfare on Takistan, when self hosted (not dedicated) i rarely get 20FPS, forget about going above. The very same Warfare on a dedi/client setup locally i get easily 35+FPS and CPU load goes up to 90-100%.

That said, it would be great if BIS could find a way to automatically use such a load balancing even for SP, meaning that A3 starts a dedi server app in the background and connects locally.

[Tankbuster 1746]

I do it all the time, but only for testing, when writing server side only scripts, for example.

[dmarkwick 261]

I do it all the time, but only for testing, when writing server side only scripts, for example.

Do you have a separate server install/folder or can you run it from the same install location as the client?

---------- Post added at 10:03 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:01 AM ----------

I don't know why you want to run a dedicated on the same rig as a client. It's called "DEDICATED" for a reason lol.

And that reason would be that it's processing game info only. I think I explained the reason for wanting to fairly well :)

[Tankbuster 1746]

I use (the really very good indeed) TA2DST to fire up the server. It runs from the same install as my main game.

I should say that I'm lucky enough to be writing this a month or two after my two yearly system upgrade. I have a 2600K and 8 GB of RAM so it's pretty stokey - I have cpu and memory to spare. I observe memory CPU usage via an app on my Android phone and even with a server and client both running hard, I never use more than half of the memory or two thirds of the CPU.