Blizzard Reveals WoW: Cataclysm System Specs

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
To assume that every network problem (even load problems) are all related to bandwidth is moronic. To suggest to fix the problem by installing windows 2008 servers to replace their current BSD based park is sheer idiocy. To actually believe that just any one can have a 2mbit upload from there home is just being fucked up.
 
The water effects when turned up look really good now in 4.0.1. Blizz did a good job at polishing the graphics in WoW if you have a good enough system to turn all the graphics up.
 
[citation][nom]hemelskonijn[/nom]To assume that every network problem (even load problems) are all related to bandwidth is moronic. To suggest to fix the problem by installing windows 2008 servers to replace their current BSD based park is sheer idiocy. To actually believe that just any one can have a 2mbit upload from there home is just being fucked up.[/citation]

You didn't bas your reply on what I wrote did you?
I didn't say bandwidth is the only factor. But with high available bandwidth often comes low latencies as well. And with server 2008 r2 comes multithreaded tcp stacks, thus solving the connection limit seen in previous microsoft enviroments.

As for the 2mbit upload ; I have no idea what you meant to write?
If it is some form of poorly worded response to my assumption that a constant 2mbit tcp stream from the realm to the user should on average be enough, then what's it got to do with the users upload speed?
I checked my server's network performance the other day while two people were on wow raiding, and it barely even reached 2mbit, so I know my estimate if anything is too high. Yet it still has nothing to do with the available upload speed of any user?

In short - you're just rambling with little or no actual info being communicated. Don't post if you don't know what you're saying.
 
[citation][nom]neiroatopelcc[/nom]You didn't bas your reply on what I wrote did you? I didn't say bandwidth is the only factor. But with high available bandwidth often comes low latencies as well. And with server 2008 r2 comes multithreaded tcp stacks, thus solving the connection limit seen in previous microsoft enviroments. As for the 2mbit upload ; I have no idea what you meant to write? If it is some form of poorly worded response to my assumption that a constant 2mbit tcp stream from the realm to the user should on average be enough, then what's it got to do with the users upload speed?I checked my server's network performance the other day while two people were on wow raiding, and it barely even reached 2mbit, so I know my estimate if anything is too high. Yet it still has nothing to do with the available upload speed of any user? In short - you're just rambling with little or no actual info being communicated. Don't post if you don't know what you're saying.[/citation]


If you don't understand it it says more about your (lack of) knowledge then my (lack of) communicative skills. To request packets you need a reliable upstream connection with a low latency and that's where most if not all consumer connections fail. Now in itself this is no problem since at the server side a lot can be guesstimated but more players with a crammed upstream connection means more geusstimations which in turn means that every one suffers latencies in one form or another.

Switching from a highly customized BSD to a generally phat and resource hungry system is not a solution for the failing consumer internet connections. In any network your performance is directly influenced by the weakest link and though except from the windows 2008 stuff the things you say are true they are a non issue as long as there are other weaker links.

True knowledge requires one to accept there are always new hings to learn.
 
Do you have any idea just how little tcp data is required to keep a connection alive? less data required to send leads to lower latency - try it with ping -l and increase the data size !
I've just been standing in dalaran with 30.8fps @ eventide - and at no point have I yet broken the 100ms latency barrier (and vent reports 31ms ping time at the same time). And before my antivirus started downloading signatures (which didn't seem to affect latency by the way) I wasn't seeing transfer rates above 203kbps (both up and down), clearly proving that neither latency nor bandwidth cause the abyssmal performance.
And also proving that you don't need a hugely fast connection to have low latency and definetly that your upload is vastly irrelevant.
 
As for 2008 being resource hungry, do you even know what you're talking about? no doubt a linux distro can be tailored for better efficiency than a windows box, but a windows core installation (without all the guy junk) is highly customizable, and vastly more flexible when it comes to hardware upgrades. With a windows based cluster, maybe their 24+ hours of realm downtime could be cut into half if they do their homework. Or maybe not, but at least it's flexible enough that it is a possibility.

Anyway, yes you can learn something every day.
 
All the above is besides the point like i said before your connection latency and bandwidth is not the point. The weakest link ... clearly your not it ...

Ohw and i hope you know BSD is not a linux distro.
 
[citation][nom]hemelskonijn[/nom]All the above is besides the point like i said before your connection latency and bandwidth is not the point. The weakest link ... clearly your not it ...Ohw and i hope you know BSD is not a linux distro.[/citation]

then what is it? all unix and linux are based off of the same system, and bsd started out as a unix system, ergo it's the same's any other linux
 
BSD is short for Berkley Software Distribution and is based on BSD tape 4.4. The tape contained partly rewritten UNIX-like code and partly open code the kernel for what now is BSD (Free-BSD Open-BSD PCBSD Net-BSD Dragonfly and others even Darwin to some extend)is based on a reverse engineered and optimized bell labs UNIX kernel. Linux is based on minix. Maybe Linux wasn't as much based on minix as it was inspired by it since Linux got a monolithic kernel where minix had a micro-kernel.

Minix in turn was a project of a dutch student who wrote it for his study on operating systems. Now days nearly all operating systems have hybrid kernel i just referred to there original state to show you that they are far from the same.

You can call them UNIX like or *nix systems but you cant call BSD Linux or vice versa. True they use much of the GNU toolkit but hey then again you can use the GNU toolkit on windows and that doesn't make windows UNIX like or linux.
 
Ok let me spin it for you 😉

CP/M is a UNIX derivative that was copied by Tim Paterson of Seattle Computer Products and re branded QDOS (Quickndirty Disk Operating Systems) though in the source just enough changes where made to make it differ enough from CP/M to be considered legal. QDOS is bought by Microsoft who re branded it MS-DOS 1.0 so by your definition this is not a new branch of operating system but merely another UNIX right?, Lets skip to NT.

Though Microsoft created a new kernel for NT it was based on and backward compatible with DOS up until kernel 6 (Vista) though over time just like the BSD and the Linux kernel evolved on their own. So again by your definition windows is UNIX?

I don't care much for what you as a person think what is mind boggling though is that according to your profile you are a professional and i wonder what savings account you got your education with. Either you are not a professional or you education has been poor to say the least.

Back to networking blizzard streams you data but if blizzard doesn't get data from other clients in time it cant send you the data. Your connection with blizzard tells you nothing about how complete the received data is.
 
Unlike all the linux stuff, the windows system you see before you has not only evolved but actually changed. Although by design possible, once you moved to a gui in windows you no longer used interchangable shells, you no longer had modifiable (and by extension less predictable) kernels. Therefore windows is fundamentally different from all the rest of the personal computer operating systems. Dos I would agree is very similar to linux, and the basic idea of all operating systems are similar. But really there's nothing since the death of windows 9x and dos 7 that should invite you to compare windows and linux in this manner.
As for my profession, I must point out that your personal attack indicates you're no longer comfortable with a serious and unbiased discussion. I AM an IT professional, and I've been employed as such for 12 years at the same company. I can't claim to be a certified expert on either linux nor windows, but judging by your responses neither can you. While I do have a ccna and stuff like that, my specialty is problem solving and systems automation. Neither of which require historical knowledge of operating systems like what you just googled. I do have to say I saw my last cp/m system be trashed in 2001 though, so while I never heard of qdos I do know that system at least.

As for the streaming, while in general a legit theory, it doesn't actually work in this context. You see the game is very well made in regard to syncronization and latency handling. The game does not need all clients to respond before an update can be compiled, so those too slow will simply be 'skipping' updates. They'll run while not moving, they'll autoattack and not use special abilities etc. Also the global cooldown system is a means to syncronize mistimed events, so that if the client clicks too early or too late in regard to their global cooldown timer, the game will send the response predictably at global cooldown time, thus aiding the scheduler of the game.

 
finally some movement in that thick brain of yours.

Those skipping updates are no problem if there are a few but when server usage (number of users logged in) peeks the effects of those "skips" are the reason people experience low fps and the effects of low latency without actually having a low latency.

My statement about your education is not a personal attack to you it is merely a proven observation that you chose your own definitions of various things and refuse to accept the world (except for ill informed people) sees BSD Windows Solaris Linux and even Darwin based systems as their own tree of operating systems. That you choose not to accept shows more of you then it shows of me.

Further if you scroll up to the post i made that started this discussion you might notice that the problem you just describe fits my post. It is NOT a bandwith issue replacing BSD (not linux) for windows 2008 is NOT the solution and poor consumer internet connections ARE on peak loads the problem.

Of course that i DO work in exactly this kind of environment is not relevant as i am merely using Google to look up nice factoids.
 
I do accept the alternative definitions, but since yours is merely another persons, and since I don't find you worthy of an extradinory amount of respect, I won't replace a decade of knowledge for some strangers claim. bsd is a unix system just like the rest.
And you may be working in the kind of enviroment you describe, but I find it hard to believe really.
Also I've seen no indication of the event you describe where an extraordinary amount of skips could cause the low fps. I just haven't come across the connection yet that is too slow to play wow. I mean you can barely even get any connections that count in kbits anymore. At least not in europe.

ps. I'm more prepared to go towards darwinian systems being a seperate system than linux than I would bsd, but only because of the locked down unalterable nature, not because it really differs in structure.

In the end it's really simple. I think you're claiming some googled stuff that maybe you don't even understand. Maybe I'm wrong, and maybe not. In the end I believe what I've seen to be true until someone can explain to me why it only appears true but isn't. So far you've failed misserably I'm afraid.
 
Dude :S you really don't get a grasp of this don't you? ... i don't need your respect i don't even want it though i am glad to know your finally calling BSD a UNIX in stead of Linux though its still not correct its progress. A simple Google might teach you more then those 12 years of hard work and i would really urge you to do so before you fail like this in front of a client ... as we all know clients are not that forgiving. You can get plenty of shitty connections and though in Europe connections are commonly sold per MB (8 16 or 20 seem to be common for ADSL) that's not the end product just the highest possible connection speed. Also you still don't seem to grasp the importance of a good upload connection which is shitty specially in Europe (except for optic fiber and some cable networks).

Darwin is completely open just as open as the regular BSD kernel so again your pissing against the wind.

Its fine that you think i am claiming some googled stuff but be honest before spouting out your reply did you even check how accurate mine or your reactions really where?... did you just assumed that if you believe something is true for 12 years it must be true and therefore you take part in this pissing contest? so far all i have said i can back up can you actually do the same ?
 
I found a handy tool to let you check your pc specs against the games system requirements using the handy tool over at Game Debate.
Hope it helps
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom