CS: Source vs CS Networks

[Olibaba]

6 gigs of pure good for 1 yeear fraggin'

[Gpig]

Bokuho wrote..

At the end of the day, we'll all complain about lag and bad reg and people having 'dodgy rate' etc. So whatever results they come up with aren't going to change anything.



Ya'll know that UT had, and always will have, the best net code ever

UT, that's the game that tried to have netcode as good as Quake 3 and failed, right?

[Whisper.]

You would think it would be too much to friggin ask to post that sort of crap on the STEAM FORUMS!!



Also if you compare it to the current HL netcode, it doesn't necessarily mean you will be able to hit anything or whether your bullets will register at all.



Just another typical friggin weak excuse for an explanation we come to know and love from Valve.



How about somebody who knows what they are talking about asking some few pertinent questions and getting decent answers for a change, such as:



1. What are the preferred client settings to use for a given internet connection and what will the bandwidth and CPU implications be if you change them??



2. What are the preferred setups for Internet based Servers to use for a given internet connection and what will the bandwidth, CPU and Memory implications are if you change them??



3. What are the complete explanations for all available Client (CVARS) and Server Variables and what are the implications to FrameRate, Client/Server BandWidth, CPU and Memory usage if you change them?



These are the same friggin questions we been asking about Half-Life / Counter-Strike for the past 5 years without getting a straight answer!! It would be nice if we could get a complete and comprehensive documentation for Client Setup and Server Administrators setup so we don't have to waste all our time on using guesswork and trial and error to get 50% improvements in performance!



I mean we should get clearly documented explanations as to what to do and why we should do things that gets us close to the 100% ideal, say 90% of the way there, and if people want to, they can then slave to get that last 10% of performance if they want, but as thing currently stand now, you have to work your backside off just to get that 90% which is unconscionable from so called professional programmers!



Oh, and one other thing, how about posting this information on an official Valve site or any official Valve site with big fat links saying YOUR ANSWERS ARE HERE!!

[ymboc]

What's the distinction between gldsrc and source?

[cliffe]

ymboc wrote..

What's the distinction between gldsrc and source?

Goldsrc is the HL1 engine.

[Mike424]

cliffe wrote..

Goldsrc is the HL1 engine.

I thought that meant Source/HL2 has gone gold and that the engine is finished....darn. So, when's Counter-Strike 3: Operation L337 coming out?

[MoJo|Night]

OK i know ther wasn't a a massive in depth explanation but for the person complaining he only showed data for low rates I just want to point something out.



If the new engine has comparrable traffic values at low rates it stands to reason that that the new engine will have comparable traffic values at higher rates. So if you currently host a server that has good bandwidth when everyone has upped their rates on the old engine then it should be fine for the new one.



I would like to see some cpu usage stats for different maps with different player numbers though. I installed a beta server on our dedicated and with no players on it uses less cpu than a normal CS1.6 or CZ server does with no players on it. I realise that's a pretty useless statistic though. I'll be interested to see how the cpu is taxed by the physics.



If server rental comapnies hosting 4 or 5+ cs servers on one machine upgrade to source will the machines be able to cope?