[cod] Linux vs. Windows

[Ian mu]

Last one read as "are including" cached memory


On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 18:07:02 +0000, Ian mu <mu.llamas at gmail.com> wrote:
> Would be interested to know how much your (and anyone elses, never
> really compared) windows machine uses out of interest, my Linux ones
> typically hover at about 80meg (no game servers running), windows
> closer to the 200meg mark. Wonder sometimes if some mem usages viewed
> aren't including cached memory etc.
> 
> I think its horses for courses though, often the best servers can be
> the best you can administer, i.e if you're not comfortable on Linux,
> maybe it's best sticking with windows. I think it also depends if
> you're only running one game process on there, or several, and if so
> what other games etc. If only cod:uo I wouldn't worry too much and
> would probably suggest sticking with Windows, if mixing some I
> probably would go for Linux (personal preference), and also for me I
> just find it easier and quicker to admin in Linux, but end of the day
> a lot of its what you are used to.
> 
> I personally hate windows, but if happy with it, try it and see. Worst
> case scenario if you feel its bad you can put Linux on instead.
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 09:39:07 -0800, Ken <ken at moonridge.net> wrote:
> > Not true, I can show you screen shots of my linux box vs windows box.  My
> > windows is using less ram than linux. Also all extra services can be turned
> > off in less than 1min, and then you have a screaming box. Please don't give
> > people false information.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Edwin Terlouw [mailto:edwinterlouw at tiscali.nl]
> > Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:32 AM
> > To: cod at icculus.org
> > Subject: Re: [cod] Linux vs. Windows
> >
> > Also Linux uses a lot less ram, windows uses aroudn 64 meg of ram, linux
> > doesnt. Windows also runs auto applications who aren't even neccesary.
> >
> > Ow and sorry for my bad english ;)
> >
> > Cheers
> > Edwin
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "hotrod deathtoll" <hotrod_death_toll at yahoo.com>
> > To: <cod at icculus.org>
> > Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 6:25 PM
> > Subject: Re: [cod] Linux vs. Windows
> >
> > >I haven't seen any real numbers on what kinda
> > > performance either OS does running a game but with
> > > Linux you can eliminate the desktop overhead that you
> > > would normally have in windows (= more potential
> > > performance).
> > >
> > > The other main advantage is every Linux box in it's
> > > own right is a server.  Out of the box Linux can serve
> > > as SSH, FTP, HTTP, RSH, IPTABLES (firewall), etc...
> > > You get my drift I'm sure.  Being a Linux dude for me
> > > it's just easier to admin remotely and that's why I
> > > use it.
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> > > --- Michael Neikes <michael at neikes-net.de> wrote:
> > >
> > >> As not beeing the hardcore Linux guy I ask you to
> > >> give me some short
> > >> informations about your experiances.
> > >> At the moment we have a ded. Linux server and we are
> > >> concidering to get
> > >> another one. Windows would be a lot easier for me to
> > >> administrate, so
> > >> therefore the question.
> > >> Does a Linux Server has really so much more
> > >> performance as a Win Server?
> > >> Please do not reply if you only want to say "Win
> > >> sux!", or to tell me that I
> > >> am making it to easy for me.
> > >> I am just not able to have a comparison between a
> > >> Win and a Linux machine
> > >> for Games (on the same Hardware)..
> > >>
> > >> Thanks for your help.
> > >>
> > >> Michael
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > __________________________________
> > > Do you Yahoo!?
> > > The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
> > > http://my.yahoo.com
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>