tomcat_ 0 Posted November 14, 2006 yes indeed that discussion will help...however is an estimate before the release of Arma. Now with the release i was hoping that some players will release real data...or BIS will release real data. My question is that 32kbs that have been quoted is download or upload speed. Either dsl, 56k or isdn...this is very very important to know... In any case we need to know an average (cause is mission depended) download and upload speed. Also, something that it has been mentioned as high ping users cause the whole server players to have high ping. On our dedicated i have 170ms ping and when really busy and my bandwith will not cope i will go up to 700-800ms. The other players never have probs with ping, bandwith or dysync.. We can either carry on discussing this on this thread...or we can carry on at mine...up to placebo... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rekrul 7 Posted November 14, 2006 The uploadspeed is estimated to 32kbps. To get some more definate data, we need someone with ArmA to come in here. As for the DL bandwidth, we don't know. I would assume that if you are connected to a server with 10 players you get less than one with 64, but this is not proportional. It depends on the number of active units in play as it doesn't impact the bw wether there is an AI or human soldier moving around. It's still the same data, but there is likely to be more talking and maybe voice when there are more human players than less. All in all I would guess the DL bw would depend on the number of units in the mission and a slightly increase per human player connected. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Baff2 0 Posted November 14, 2006 I´ve checked everything. There even was an initiative with collecting signatures to get DSl, but no luck so far. Wow, I was collecting signatures for DSL too, it took them three years to enable DSL at my suburbian apartment. Altough wireless was available all that time, it was too expensive for home use. After 2 years, I found the installations manager for the local telecoms company and bribed him. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tomcat_ 0 Posted November 30, 2006 Has anyone got more accurate data on the average and max download and upload bandwith necessary from client point of view? Also, can one moderator move this thread to the multiplayer forum please? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Placebo 29 Posted November 30, 2006 Belongs in MP now there is an MP Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ISVRaDa 0 Posted December 2, 2006 Hi! In my server we have been playing five days approximately with 10-12 players and we have not had any lag problems. My connection: 3Mb Download and 1Mb Upload. I need more online tests but for moment it has convinced me. PD: sorry for my poor english level Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sickboy 13 Posted December 2, 2006 Altough this is not alone about the connection speed but more over the rest of the netcode and engine, I thought it would be some nice info to post: Server running on 1 cpu: AMD Opteron 2000mhz, 1mb cache, 3gb DDR1. ArmA v1.01. ArmA and OFP Dedicated servers are hardlimited to 50fps max. 12 o clock, Sarahni Desert, both sides walking into eachother and fighting. We were watching the fight 912 units (incl. 32 vehicles) east+west, 0 ai civs, 2 player civs, 800m viewd: server fps ~2, client fps ~7, in fight server output ~535kbps, input ~15kbps 456 units (incl. 16 vehicles) east+west, 14 ai civs, 2 player civs, 1600m viewd: server fps ~7, client fps ~18, in fight server output ~1100kbps, input ~300kbps 456 units (incl. 16 vehicles) east+west, 14 ai civs, 2 player civs, 1000m viewd: server fps ~8, client fps ~19, in fight server output ~1100kbps, input ~300kbps 456 units (incl. 16 vehicles) east+west, 0 ai civs, 2 player civs, 1000m viewd: server fps ~9, client fps ~22, in fight server output ~1100kbps, input ~100kbps 228 units (incl. 8 vehicles) east+west, 14 ai civs, 2 player civs, 1000m viewd: server fps ~22, client fps ~40, in fight server output ~600kbps, input ~250kbps 114 units (incl. 4 vehicles) east+west, 14 ai civs, 2 player civs, 1000m viewd: server fps ~35, client fps ~45, in fight server output ~275kbps, input ~50kbps Pretty much units, server itself isn't the highest speed cpu available etc, so I think that with some faster computers, good arma patches.. we can manage ~456 units or even more fighting eachother while still having a descent fps, and think about.. how many times you gonna have so many units fighting on your screen? Think about what can already achieved with current hardware, when using DAC by Silola or CoC AI On Demand etc... The server fps remains pretty high at the start ~35-45 while the units are standing still and starting to move. When they collide the server got the fps of what you see in the table. Server FPS climbs step by step again when units die Will post some more results when we come to it Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tomcat_ 0 Posted December 3, 2006 so from what you are saying with these data is that with 2 players in the server the max input and output for the clients was 550kbps and 150kbs respectively..!! which means someone who doesn't have at least 512k connection for down and 150k for up will be getting lag or dysync.... is that correct? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sickboy 13 Posted December 3, 2006 so from what you are saying with these data is that with 2 players in the server the max input and output for the clients was 550kbps and 150kbs respectively..!!which means someone who doesn't have at least 512k connection for down and 150k for up will be getting lag or dysync.... is that correct? Yes I'm saying that the game in it's current state and if there are so many units on about 1 square kilometer fighting eachother all at once, while the player is near to it, then players need the mentioned kbps in the table divided by 2, times about 125%. I dont know what happens if the fight is 2km away from the player location, will have a look at that, only tested when we were close/middle in the battle. Second, what's wrong with needing a proper internet connection for playing a huge battle where extreme numbers of AI are battling eachother etc? 512kbit down and 150kbps up is like bottom of the line nowadays... 6mbit down 512kbps up is more the usual... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
j w 0 Posted December 3, 2006 I've got 8 both ways, and probably upgrading to 24/8, would that be enough for Armed Assault, for lets say compared to OFP, a CTI? I mean, if I have the dedi at that connection. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tomcat_ 0 Posted December 3, 2006 Second, what's wrong with needing a proper internet connection for playing a huge battle where extreme numbers of AI are battling eachother etc? 512kbit down and 150kbps up is like bottom of the line nowadays... 6mbit down 512kbps up is more the usual... nothing's wrong with that...is just usefull to know what's the need for playing the game bandwith wise... Of course the standard in most parts of the word is what u mentioned...apart from developing countries...where 128k down and 64up will set u back a nice Å100 per month or 150€ per month or $189 per month...:) That's why i want to know the bandwith needs cause every bloody kb in this part of the world costs more than gold... when u love something though...is worth the sacrifice...:) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
zyklone 1 Posted December 3, 2006 I think it might be a mistake to draw the conclusion that those BWs are the minimum required for that number of units. It will probably still be playable on a worse connection as the server adjusts how much data it sends to the clients depending on what bandwidth it believes the client has. Overall the number of units looks promising. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tomcat_ 0 Posted December 4, 2006 I think it might be a mistake to draw the conclusion that those BWs are the minimum required for that number of units.It will probably still be playable on a worse connection as the server adjusts how much data it sends to the clients depending on what bandwidth it believes the client has. Overall the number of units looks promising. I don't know if there are correct or not but with 128 down and 64 up...still have the same problems which is high pings and high dysync at times... so these numbers have to be quite close...as noone else on the server is getting high pings or dysync... looks like arma is using similar bandwith as OFP... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sickboy 13 Posted December 4, 2006 I don't know if there are correct or not but with 128 down and 64 up...still have the same problems which is high pings and high dysync at times...so these numbers have to be quite close...as noone else on the server is getting high pings or dysync... looks like arma is using similar bandwith as OFP... as long as not more than 75% of download and upload is used, in usual connections, then there will be no desync/lags. (which is depending ofcoarse on how much data the ofp server is pushing to you, but as a chap earlier mentioned, ofp can make things more jumpy instead of smooth, on lower bandwidth, so probably arma too! Desync/lags usually come from improper servers, missions, scripts, Â routes between the server and the troubled client can have hickups (Internet is very huge, there are many backup routes, but if certain routes start 'hicking' then there is not much you can do about it. Furthermore desync/lags are caused by downloading ppl, as said, 75% should be maximum used of both up and down, otherwise you start experiencing slowdowns, as many people are on routers with their little brothers and family, you can bet where the lag/desync is coming from... There is usually a queue that the router/windows works with, this queue of packets should remain small... if this queue becomes big, especially in the case of other programs using bandwidth and being in front in the queue while game packets are at the last part of the queue, you also get desyncs/lags. Having a good router with proper QOS setup (I said proper, not the el cheapo 5 buck solutions) which controls the queue and gives high priority to gamepackets, will ensure proper connection throughout the whole match, even when others are downloading/uploading on the same line! Connection speed has nothing to do with pings, until the connection is full and needs to queue the packets. Location, provider's equipment and setup, length of the line, location compared to the server (The route that it needs to take to the server), quality of the lines (errorrate), that are all things that have effect on the ping to the server. Aswell as that the server FPS should remain above 20 to not create desyncs/lags afaik. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pwablo 0 Posted December 4, 2006 Sickboy, Regarding Server FPS, In OFP dedicated using a P4-3.2Ghz HT cpu I gained several FPS when using the "TimeCall" tool HERE Do you think it is worth testing this to see if ArmA gains any extra FPS when running dedicated? Cheers Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Romolus 0 Posted December 4, 2006 ArmA already seems to use high resolution timer, so using that tool wouldn't help at all. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pwablo 0 Posted December 4, 2006 ArmA already seems to use high resolution timer, so using that tool wouldn't help at all. Thanks for that I wasn't sure, so I'd thought Id ask, because I noticed other games like FEAR Combat Dedicated Server also gained FPS when running this tool. Cheers Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
