[bf1942] Are you using the 64-bit server much?

["Einar S. Idsø"]

Not a bad idea at all! Let's peek over to one of the competitors:

$ cd css-server
$ ls srcds_*
srcds_amd  srcds_i486  srcds_i686  srcds_run

So there ya go :)

Einar

Giel van Schijndel wrote:
> Unless you would start a compliling split on AMD/Pentium, because you
> could make to different compiles for both Athlon and P4, however I think
> bugs might be lots harder to track that way.
> 
> Mortis
> European Tactical Battlefield Forces <http://etbf.kicks-ass.net>
> 
> 
> Kingsley Foreman schreef:
> 
>> the only issue with that is the people running athlons, it could cause
>> issues.
>>
>> kingsley
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andreas Andersson"
>> <andreas.andersson at dice.se>
>> To: <bf1942 at icculus.org>
>> Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 10:48 PM
>> Subject: RE: [bf1942] Are you using the 64-bit server much?
>>
>>
>>> I should probably up to pentuim4 for the 32-bit binary as well. Pentium3
>>> doesn't have enough power to handle the bf2-server anyway.
>>>
>>> /Andreas
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Andreas Andersson [mailto:andreas.andersson at dice.se]
>>> Sent: den 26 augusti 2005 15:13
>>> To: bf1942 at icculus.org
>>> Subject: RE: [bf1942] Are you using the 64-bit server much?
>>>
>>> Yeah you might be right...
>>>
>>> This is what we use right now:
>>> 32bit linux:
>>> gcc 3.3.5 with -O2 and -march=pentuim3
>>>
>>> 64Bit linux:
>>> gcc 3.4.3 with -O2 and -m64
>>>
>>> Windows:
>>> VC.Net 7.1 with Full optimizations( /Ox)
>>>
>>> I'm thinking of increasing -O2 to -O3. But I seem to remember that this
>>> can break introduce bugs? Have you had any experience with this?
>>>
>>> And maybe it would be a good idea to add a -march setting to the 64-bit
>>> binary as well. To athlon64 or something.
>>>
>>> /AndreasA
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: ScratchMonkey [mailto:ScratchMonkey at MatureAsskickers.net]
>>> Sent: den 25 augusti 2005 20:09
>>> To: bf1942 at icculus.org
>>> Subject: Re: [bf1942] Are you using the 64-bit server much?
>>>
>>> --On Thursday, August 25, 2005 1:36 PM +0100 Steven Hartland
>>> <killing at multiplay.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The figures we saw where:
>>>> 1. a 32bit linux server requires 10% more CPU then a windows one
>>>> 2. a 64bit linux server requires 5% more CPU than a 32bit linux one.
>>>>
>>>> This really pains me to say but with those figures we have had no
>>>> option but to put 95% of our servers on windows :(
>>>
>>>
>>> It would be useful to know which compilers, versions, and compiler
>>> switches
>>> were used for the 3 versions. I suspect that will have a lot more
>>> influence
>>> than kernel version.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>