#dedicated-servers
1 messages Β· Page 226 of 1
perfect.
but uhh how does one make a dedicated server
@ivory hare have you read the wiki first
now that that is done, it should just work?
for address do I now put my PC ro router IP?
are you hosting the server from your pc or another pc on the network
from my pc
from my pc
and you pointed the forward port to your computer
so you should beable to connect via your local ip or you excternal ip
does external mean my routers IP?
no
your router has 2 ip a internal so like 192.168.1.1 and a external 98.58.165.45
you want the external
you can get that from the router or from googling what my ip
ok. the option to authenticate does not prompt
did you click on the setup tab
setup?
sec
so do i just download the dedicated server thing and open it? im confused on itr
where do you get lost
946137320569061546
902621736602861588
370472939054956546
how this thing works
you install via epic or steam
epic
whats it do when you run it
ok i was downloading the steamcmd thing and i opened it to update it and it says steamcmd needs 250mb of storage to update but there is like 42gb of storage on that drive
is steam cmd on that drive
ye
you sure
ye
what is the full path to steamcmd ?
thispc/Windows(c:)
what does this mean
so what should i do
do you only have a c drive ?
no i have a c, d, and e drive
so is it C:\steamcmd ?
so its c:
ye
with a steamcmd.exe in c:\
you cant have it in the root of c
so what do i do with it
make a folder called steamcmd
does it matter that the steamcmd thing says old
install steamcmd in the folder you made
so just delete it and reinstall it or can i just move it
cool
help
i just put in the start servers.bat thing in my dedicated server folder and when i go to edit it it says that my pc cant run it
never mind
make sue to edit it to match you setup
or you could endup with more then one install
you need to forward port 15777,15000,7777 from your router to the pc hosting the server
you have a mic ?
yes
@vocal jungle
Bump. Would be nice to gather some statistic to find out if it's a common linux issue or just don't host on ubuntu or something. So far we have just three people: me, #dedicated-servers message and the poster from QA site.
Soooo, after a lot of fiddeling with the VM with adding more storage to it (because I only had 6GB and that was not enough for the validation because it needs at least enough for a new installation) I finally was able to do the validation process. After I started it, the first line was Update state (0x5) verifying install, progress: 34.81 (2250421785 / 6464719048).
After that it started immediately with downloading an update (or just the server again because something was faulty). After that it ran through the veryfying with no problems. I also saw that the starting service includes an steamcmd verify but I think it just didn't do it because it didn't have enough space left.
I won't be able to test it out today but I'll just hope that I'll be able to join the server tomorrow without restarting it.
Question, is there anyway to prevent items on conveys from disappearing at certain points and then returning later down the conveyor?
does the linux Steam CMD version of Satisfactory server store save files differently? I read the wiki, but ~/.config/Epic/FactoryGame/Saved/SaveGames/server is not what I'm seeing. I do have satisfactory/1690800/FactoryGame/Saved/ but it only contains Config and Logs folders. I have no idea where my save game file is.
yes server saves local
where? game only has access to one folder above the satisfactory folder
is this chat for all dedicated servers or just dedicated servers that are on the experimental version?
I have done this, and I've even searched folders higher up on the folder tree. I have searched all the folders that this game has access to. I've gone so far as to move the install folder, and install again and start a new server to confirm there are no .sav files generated by my steam CMD install.
I've searched the log files, which reference a local save, but do not reference the location, nor do they throw an error saying that they can't write to disk.
its in spot where configs and logs go or where u installed the server
or search should find the files if u do it right
when I look at the console for the server I often see "TimeStamp expired" as well as other yellow text. When this happens, its tied to when ever anyone on the server is getting lag. (Not trying to explain that to anyone here, just pointing out the observations I have made) This didnt happen much when we first started the server, any way to fix this?
i'm searching for any files that end in .sav, none found.
make sure network quality setting is maxxed on server and all clients playing on the server
good luck heavy
thanks, I'll give that a go
also, I should probably mention that the first 9ish times I closed the server, I didnt do it in a safe way. (I properly close it now) I just pressed X on the console. Will that have any lasting effects on the server? And can I fix that.
Well then. used the server.savegame command in console and got this:
Saving game to ''
LogServerConnection: Saving game to ''
LogGame: World Serialization (save): 0.170 seconds
LogGame: Compression: 0.239 seconds
LogGame: Write To Disk: 0.001 seconds
LogGame: Total Save Time took 0.415 seconds
you tying to find your save there Heavy
yes. Lost my server with about a month of play time, and want to make sure it doesn't happen again.
windows or linux server
hmm
look in amp to see where its storing the stuff
I've searched the entire folder that amp can write to
amps saves in /home/amp/.config/Epic/FactoryGame/Saved/SaveGames/server
server only has 2 choices
even for the steamCMD version?
Because i can find the FactoryGame/Saved/ folders, but they are not inside .config/Epic
I use Amp as my game manager
in a docker container or straight install?
i done it in both
Mine is in a docker which only has access to the folder /mnt/user/appdata/amp
is your docker self loaded or you useing something like proxmox or unraid
unraid
one sec
heck. I think the files are being written into the container not to appdata.
could be i am looking
I'm able to restart amp and my saves are fine.
but I did an update to amp, and lost my save
do you have krusader installed in unraid
I do.
are you useing it to browse the dir trees
hmm
i found my docker save in /home/amp/.config/Epic/FactoryGame/Saved/SaveGames/server
for standalone amp
ah!
in the sf docker i just setup i found the save in
I don't have it mapped out
/media/appdata/satisfactory/.config/Epic/FactoryGame/Saved/SaveGames/server
but that was just a sf docker not a amp docker
i think i am running diffrent versions of the satisfactory server just from helping people
so @kind phoenix did you get it all sorted then
hopefully. I'm out of luck on my old save, as it only existed in the container and was erased when i update amp.
well you can upload a save using the editor and unlock what you had befor
so your not starting 100% over
That is actually how i started the server a month ago, with like 10 hours of play on my world. but the last month of play was server only π
This is a known bug. it's just a visual glitch
which they still haven't fixed
Yep, it seems to happen for me, when the tickrate of the server goes down. Probably a networking problem
I know the minimum is 6GB, anyone get away with 4GB? I have an old laptop with an i7, thinking about trying to run a server for 2 people on it
I can't see all the blocks of the train lines. My Server is in my local network and the quality is set to 3 (Ultra) on the server and on my client. The tick rate is between 29 and 30.
Is this a known issue?
if Im running a ds from my own pc, it has to be turned on to keep the server also online ?
Of course.
Imagine if you turned your tap off, the water would stop right? Same principle.
thanks
its a known issue it was supposed to be fixed in last patch but i think its still being worked on
i want to setup a dedicated server, and i was able to setup the server, claim it and create a savegame, but everytime anyone tries to connect to it they instantly disconnect with the mesage "Connection to Host lost". Any Ideas?
did you forward the ports?
no, wich ports do i need to forward?
its a dedicated deboan machine btw, im not hosting it from my home
15777,7777,15000
are you hosting from home ?
sorry missed that last cooment
if you can connect remotely to set it up then other people should beable to connect in less your connected to the server via a vpn
this is everything the serverconsole says when someone wants to connect to it: [2022.02.24-21.03.05:869][773]LogNet: NotifyAcceptingConnection accepted from: ipadress
i never needed to forward ports or somehting for any other gameservers on this machine btw
where can i find the client logs?
are any of the ports used by another game/service
currently i stopped everything
I don't think it would bind if there was other services using same port
I don't think server would see the connection acceptance if firewall was blocking π
I'd wage UFW would be disabled on his machine or allow all rule is set
you could if say port 15777 was allowed and 7777/15000 where blocked
Eh, that would be intentional to allow one and not the other though right? Sure he could have forgot but very slim chance on that
who know most people dont notice there double nat'd so i ask my question based on the lowest comon denomantor
oh and debian by default doesn't have ufw
At least in my experience Debian 9, 10 and 11.
I doubt it's port/network related since he said it's on a dedi.
Unless host's firewall (like OVH's Game) needs configuring, but I don't think he'd see a connection attempt at all if that was the case.
it not a issue at all i am able to connect to his server no problem
@warped spear What does the client experience/show when connecting to your server using port 15777?
Yeah, I thought it may have been a client-side issue
i am on it i placeed the hub now i am eating all the nut and berrys
tick rate is 30 says open nat- seems fine on all fronts
i am out of ideas, we cannot connect to it from 3 different places, i even disabled my complete firewall...
can you connect
ingame it goes to the loading screen and just kicks us back to the main menu, with "connection has been lost"
i can configure it in the server manager though
Are you able to connect to any other server?
what he said
are you trying to connect with EA or experamental
FYI - the server management is pretty buggy generally. For me sometimes it takes like 3-4+ "Retry" attempts before it shows the join icon.
i have a server you can try let me make sure its up
sent you the ip
no EA is the correct one
@dawn vine can you try my server quick i dont want to say its a him issue with out a second connection success
Maybe its a permission issue? ie when people connect I think it saves the player data, maybe it cant create that?
no i was able to connect no issue to his server
I can't, on my work laptop, I would else.
no worries i going to assume my server is still good i have had people on it in the past
i think he is going to reinstall his game
we think we solved his issue woot woot
good old case of uninstalling mod loader and not removing the mods first i have been stung by that bee befor
The sooner DS work with mods the happier I will be
its coming it slow but its coming
sooner mods work on dedis .. the slower dev will go
Anyone want to start a new factory with me
Hello! I am looking for some assistance with getting buddy on my dedicated server. Is this a good place to come for that help?
this is the place
Ok so, I've made it so far as to be able to actually join my own dedicated server. I am not using a third party service such as gtxgaming or low.ms. Everything is local (as I understand it). So my question is how do I get a friend on my dedicated server? I have tried every rendition of my server info I can think of to include my public IP address. We've used the name of my server, the name of my play session, tried to join through friends list but nothing is working. One fix I was told about, I have to open the ports through my routers settings. Haven't started figuring that part out yet. Thanks again for any help.
Ok, I will look into these. Thank you for the help! Enjoy your night.
u 2 good luck
<@&370483737957236737> [2022.02.25-11.51.31:913][ 0]LogNiagara: Warning: NiagaraSystem /Game/FactoryGame/VFX/World/AmbientLife/Flies/NS_Fireflies_01.NS_Fireflies_01 IsReadyToRunInternal() failed due to missing SystemScript. Spawn[<none>] Update[<none>]
[2022.02.25-11.51.31:913][ 0]LogNiagara: Warning: NiagaraSystem /Game/FactoryGame/VFX/World/AmbientLife/Bats/NS_Bats_01.NS_Bats_01 IsReadyToRunInternal() failed due to missing SystemScript. Spawn[<none>] Update[<none>]
[2022.02.25-11.51.31:914][ 0]LogNiagara: Warning: NiagaraSystem /Game/FactoryGame/VFX/Misc/Event/Christmas/NS_Fireworks_02.NS_Fireworks_02 IsReadyToRunInternal() failed due to missing SystemScript. Spawn[<none>] Update[<none>]
[2022.02.25-11.51.31:915][ 0]LogNiagara: Warning: NiagaraSystem /Game/FactoryGame/VFX/Misc/Event/Christmas/NS_Fireworks_01.NS_Fireworks_01 IsReadyToRunInternal() failed due to missing SystemScript. Spawn[<none>] Update[<none>]
[2022.02.25-11.51.31:915][ 0]LogNiagara: Warning: NiagaraSystem /Game/FactoryGame/VFX/Misc/Event/Christmas/NS_Fireworks_03.NS_Fireworks_03 IsReadyToRunInternal() failed due to missing SystemScript. Spawn[<none>] Update[<none>]
[2022.02.25-11.51.32:035][ 0]GameAnalyticsModule: Display: GameAnalyticsModule has started!
[2022.02.25-11.51.32:036][ 0]LogStreaming: Warning: Failed to read file '../../../FactoryGame/Saved/SaveGames/GameAnalytics.sav' error.
[2022.02.25-11.51.32:254][ 0]LogAudioCaptureCore: Display: No Audio Capture implementations found. Audio input will be silent.
deticated server errror HELP ME! π π π
@marsh dawn help PLS
Hello, I would like to know how to create a dedicated server on satisfactory, thank you for your help!
Hi ! How update my dedicated server ? My server version is 177909 but my game version is 179103..
I use Satisfactory Dedicated Server from Epic Games
I believe the update should come from the epic games store? If not, I'd advise moving to SteamCMD since most people are familiar with that.
Have a look at Coffeestain's video on YouTube as it shows briefly how to do so, but other than that googling "Satisfactory dedicated server tutorial" will likely yield results
you can always force an update by running the verification tag
as far as I understand, both the epic and steam versions have it but i dont know how it works on the epic version
No one does because who hosts servers using Epic's platform lul
ok thx
I just run a docker on my unraid server...so easy
Where is Verification tag ?
dunno, Ive never used epic
look for its instructions, there is usually a flag you can add
Convert to SteamCMD. It's easier to support, practically everyone uses it plus you can migrate the save across.
stop server then in epic library click the ... and verify
i think that will do it
it might update if you close the server and relaunch
did you read the wiki yet ?
no
i look on yt a video with steamcmd but i have satisfactory on epic game
doesnt matter you dont need to own it on steam to use the steamcmd
what do you mean
do you have a diffrent system to run it on or you going to run it on the same system you play from
that is to say ?
there are 2 methods hosting it on the same system and hosting it on a dedicated system
which are you doing
I don't know just I want to play with my friends, so something not too complicated to do and quickly
then just play and share your session id with your friends
you dont need a dedicated server for that
inless you want the game to keep running while your not there
you know it need to stay running on your system if you dont have a second system to host right
ok
do you have a mic
yeah but im french
like you can type english but can hear it ?
Hey,
i am currently setup the dedicated server on an Ubuntu system. All works fine (done via SteamCMD).
Each day at 5:00am the server is automatically rebooting via crontab 0 4 * * * /sbin/shutdown -r +5 to ensure updates are installed automatically.
It seems the Satisfactory server process does not recognize the shut down (via reboot command) of the host system in any way.
If I am online in the game at the reboot time then I figured out that the Satisfactory server process does not save the game before host system is shutdown. Is there a way to force "save now" from the host system into the Satisfactory server?
On Linux, the server process can be gracefully shut down by sending SIGTERM to the server process or, if you have the server controlled by systemd, with the command systemctl stop satisfactory, where "satisfactory" is the name of your unit file. Note that the service file can specify the KillSignal= attribute in the Service block, but SIGTERM is the default if not set.
I tested systemctl stop satisfactory manually to check if a save game was created after using this command. But no save game was created.
What happens if the Satisfactory server process is killed during game saving? Is it possible that the game save is broken after that? I am a little bit concered about that.
(Note: I am a beginner on Linux systems. So I hope my questions dont look to stupid π )
Thanks for help!
In Addition:
If I understand the wiki correctly then if the host system shuts down it kills all processes with a kill signal. All systemd controlled services will stopped with a kill signal, too. So why the Satisfactory server does not recognize it correctly.
I can define KillSignal=SIGTERM in the service file but this have no effect (SIGTERM is the default if not set via the attribute).
I am a little bit confused.
I am also a beginner on linux but I hope I can help you a little bit at least. The first thing is, that at least my dedicated server is restarting automatically every 24h with no extra script. Also I am running the server as a service https://satisfactory.fandom.com/wiki/Dedicated_servers/Running_as_a_Service. In this service is defined, that it checks for updates before every start. I think that would be the most elegant solution instead of using you own crontab. Regarding the saves, do you have any saves or isn't the server saving at all. There is a Console Command to create a savegame server.SaveGame saveName you can find it in here https://satisfactory.fandom.com/wiki/Dedicated_servers#Console_commands. But normally it should make autosaves and create a save before a soft restart or soft stop.
its not restarting its reloading the session same as the game does after 24hours
its to keep the sanity of the engine
935994011473293322
902621736602861588
370472939054956546
Ayy, we have 4 people now
#dedicated-servers message
If you check the logs you will see that server does recognize the first SIGTERM but throws and error in (hopefully) the end of the stopping process and stays in that state
On a second thought perhaps you don't actually have this problem. Can you check the logs (e.g. via journalctl -eu satisfactory) to see if you have "LogOnline: Error: OSS: Leaderboards Interface Requested" in them when you try to stop the server?
Regardless, I don't think saving the game is part of graceful shutdown sequence
https://questions.satisfactorygame.com/post/6187120f831c85205235b402
https://questions.satisfactorygame.com/post/618d6778831c85205235d0d1 (the commenter here seems to be wrong and the kick doesn't result in a save)
Thanks for your reply. I will check this today in the evening (german time). Where I can find the log?
journalctl -u satisfactory
optionally -e to scroll to the end
or -f for it to behave like tail -f
Hello everyone, would someone be so kind as to explain to me how to create a dedicated server? For information I am on epic game and I have downloaded "Satisfactory Dedicated Server" (help please ;__; )
Do you actually have a linux/windows server running 24/7 or are you planning to run both the satisfactory server and the client (the game itself) on your pc?
No, actually, I would like to create a server...
Do you know what I mean by "linux server" vs "satisfactory server"? Like the former is a whole separate computer while the latter is just another program you can run on any computer.
Sorry, I didn't understand. In this case I don't have a separate computer so I would say a program that I could run on my current computer
I would advice against that since you already have multiplayer on your pc without a dedicated server, and I'm fairly sure that running both server and the game on your pc at the same time will consume more cpu and memory. I personally rent a VPS for $12 per month (clovux KVM-8G, their kvm plans are clunky since they seem to setup them by hand, and they only host in France(I think), but I guess that's why they are cheaper than others)
But anyway, you downloaded "Satisfactory Dedicated Server" on epic games. I don't use epic games, but can't you just launch that like you do with everything else you download on epic?
when I run "Satisfactory dedicated server" it opens a command window a bit like Powershell, I don't really know what to do with it next...
Congratz you have a running server. That's it. If you want to join it you can probably just launch the game, go to server manger and add a server with address "localhost".
If you want other people to join your server you probably need to setup port forwarding so port 15777 (also preferably port 7777 and port 15000) on your pc is reachable from the Internet. Also do read the wiki https://satisfactory.fandom.com/wiki/Dedicated_servers . Usage with epic game on windows seems pretty much the same as with steam on windows
The problem is that when I want to create a server, I put my ip address (as many people say they do), and I put the port 15777 (I think it's the one to put) so a server is created but it shows me "this server seems to be offline"
start with "localhost" instead of ip
In my exeprience once you see "server appears to be offline" it will always appear to be offline even after the server is fixed until you restart the client
you mean that instead of an ip I just write "localhost" in "address"?
yes
I just did it and it still says "the server seems to be offline".
Just in case try 127.0.0.1 instead of "localhost" (its basically the same thing) but other than that Β―_(γ)_/Β― . Perhaps somebody else has an idea.
Thanks for your help, I think I did it. Now I just have to hope that I don't have any problems with the backups :))
can somebody help me setup my server?
Depends
steam windows
Pretty much nothing to setup there aside from port forwarding if you want other people to join. And port forwarding setup is different for ever router and every ISP
ugh
isnt there a thing on steam delighted server i can download when i open it nothing happends except a cmd opens up
dedicated *
that is exactly whats supposed to happen - cmd running = server running.
how do i see the server adress tho\
but how do you open the server from therew
if its on you computer and you want to join - use localhost inside srever manager in the main game
if my firend wants to join doi just give them my ip?
or hamachi?
wait is it possible with hamachi?
ooh i forgot things like hamachi exist
anyways - individual for every case. First, your firend needs to be able to ping that IP one way or another. Then ensure the ports are open
(localhost doesn't count for "able to ping")
how do i do it with hamachi
should be possible tho i'm not sure about network quality
well hamachi probably assigns you an ip on a hamachi network. If your firend can ping that ip he should be able to put it into the server manager
if windows firewall pops up about blocking some features - tell it to allow. Don't forget that you need to be the first person on your server if you want to own it (localhost is handy for that)
so i start a network and then we use that ip?
Probably, Your firend also probably needs to join your hamachi network. But don't ask me, i don't know how to hamachi
ok
wait is that the address or the port
A port is just a number
ok
dedicated servers are for friends to join not random players right?
Here is the log. I have marked the positions with actions (manual or automated ones) beginning with --.
It seems on normal reboot it shuts down the Satisfactory server process gracefully (see for example timestamp Feb 26 04:05:01 to Feb 26 04:05:36):
Feb 24 04:05:02 satisfactory systemd[1]: Stopping Satisfactory dedicated server...
Feb 24 04:05:02 satisfactory systemd[1]: satisfactory.service: Succeeded.
Feb 24 04:05:02 satisfactory systemd[1]: Stopped Satisfactory dedicated server.
-- Reboot --
Feb 24 04:05:13 satisfactory systemd[1]: Starting Satisfactory dedicated server...
Feb 24 04:05:35 satisfactory systemd[1]: Started Satisfactory dedicated server.
But no save games are created.
Conclusion: Bug?
(And thanks for where to find the log π )
Full log over some days.
(Is there a way to connect via host system console/shell to the Satisfactory server console to call commands? So I can use this as a workaround to inform players online about reboot and force to create a save game?)
if you don't set a player password it's free for all. Unlike regular multiplayer there's no "friends only".
I think it's not a bug but rather a missing feature
Upvote these or maybe we need a new one
https://questions.satisfactorygame.com/post/6187120f831c85205235b402
https://questions.satisfactorygame.com/post/618d6778831c85205235d0d1
Also in your case I think you can just disable automatic system reboot since very few updates actually need one. Otherwise I have an idea: instead of timing saves to the restarts you can time restarts to the saves - instead of a simple shutdown run a script that will monitor save folder and wait up to 1.5xautosave_interval for a new save to be created / autosave updated
I don't think there is at the moment. Which is a shame.
@lilac trench I'm very interested in how your server stops when you tell it to stop. Mine doesn't do it. Can you please run an experiment for me? Wait for the server to laod the game and then systemctl stop it. Does it stop within 5 seconds or does it hang around for 90 seconds? I'd like to see your logs for that run.
What version of ubuntu are you using? (cat /etc/os-release) Is it a headless server?
Are you using satisfactory.service file from the wiki or a modified one?
What are your "Pause game when no players are connected" and "Save the game when a player disconnects" settings? Any changes to the config files?
Did you do a steamclient.so symlink?
NAME="Ubuntu"
VERSION="20.04.3 LTS (Focal Fossa)"
ID=ubuntu
ID_LIKE=debian
PRETTY_NAME="Ubuntu 20.04.3 LTS"
VERSION_ID="20.04"
VERSION_CODENAME=focal
UBUNTU_CODENAME=focal
Are you using satisfactory.service file from the wiki or a modified one?
From the wiki.
[Unit]
Description=Satisfactory dedicated server
Wants=network-online.target
After=syslog.target network.target nss-lookup.target network-online.target
[Service]
Environment="LD_LIBRARY_PATH=./linux64"
ExecStartPre=/usr/games/steamcmd +force_install_dir "/home/steam/SatisfactoryDedicatedServer" +login anonymous +app_update 1690800 validate +quit
ExecStart=/home/steam/SatisfactoryDedicatedServer/FactoryServer.sh
User=steam
Group=steam
StandardOutput=append:/var/log/satisfactory.log
StandardError=append:/var/log/satisfactory.err
Restart=on-failure
WorkingDirectory=/home/steam/SatisfactoryDedicatedServer
[Install]
WantedBy=multi-user.target
What are your "Pause game when no players are connected" and "Save the game when a player disconnects" settings?
Both activated.
Any changes to the config files?
No. Only disable automatic send reports.
Did you do a steamclient.so symlink?
Not as I know.
I installed it like this with a new host system user (not root) with sudo rights.
sudo add-apt-repository multiverse
sudo dpkg --add-architecture i386
sudo apt update
sudo apt install lib32gcc-s1 steamcmd
steamcmd +force_install_dir ~/SatisfactoryDedicatedServer +login anonymous +app_update 1690800 -beta public validate +quit
Wait for the server to laod the game and then systemctl stop it.
I loose the connection after some seconds.
I loose the connection after some seconds.
Does thesystemctl stopcommand itself finish fast or does it freeze for like 60-90 seconds? In my case the server process doesn't completely stop on first SIGTERM and hangs around until systemd kills it after a timeout.
Can you please share the log from a loaded game state up to a to systemctl stop's "Stopped Satisfactory dedicated server."?
I'm not sure if all of your logs are in the journalctl or some of them are actually in /var/log/satisfactory.err and /var/log/satisfactory.log but I'd like all of them.
What is your starting biome?
Okay, but not today, its late here, so I say good night for today π
What is your starting biome?
The 1st green one in the south (i dont know the name).
I just realised the post on QA site is actually about server running on windows and I can in fact reproduce the issue on my windows PC.
Which really doesnt help, wth
is there a way to get the server using multiple cores?
it does
MIne isnt
it cant just spread out all the work
most work is serial and has to be done in order
so it loads 1 core and uses threads across rest
So it basically single threaded thanks.
no
its multithreaded but it cant just split it all up
cause the shit has to be done in order
it uses a bunch of worker threads
so its not 1
have a good one
I disagree but it would be allot of work to make it truly multi-threaded so you are probably right. I thank you for your answer
u can disagree but u would be wrong
devs explained it more then 1 time on streams and other things
try the wiki or videos or streams
just dont ping me i dont want to know
Just make separate Conveyer belt Systems there own Thread just a way to aproach this Problem.
@golden roost I dont know who your programmer is so I pinged you sry.
its starting here #dedicated-servers message
anyone having an issue with programable splitters on a server crashing your game?
check the bug site
yea i found only about 8 threads for the same issue
Theyβve been broken since the start of update 5 π
Is there a way to run an already existing world on a dedicated server instead of creating a new one when first connecting?
pls 
Hello there. Can i get some help? I bought a dedicated server and i can join it with no problem, but my friend cant connect " Your connection to the host has been lost". Is there anything i/he can do about it?
Isn't there an upload save button in the UI? If not, I think there are instructions in the wiki for doing that.
Sounds like he's using mods - you can't use any mods when connecting to a server, even those that are client-only.
I've been seeing memory leaks in my dedicated server, where it starts at around 5.2GiB, and just keeps going up until it reaches the 8GiB limit and crashes π Is this a known issue?
anyone here with experience in satisfactory dedicated servers able to tell me how stable they are when running one?
The dedi server is quite stable, just follow recommend system requirements.
It can use up to 8G memory, so good advice is to have a bit more available.
Due to the nature of games, dedicated servers included, it is more preferable to have a higher clockspeed over having more cores. Have an SSD.
So basically run it on a gaming rig, minus the GPU.
Clock speed is so meaningless
You can have low clock speed high IPC single core, high multicore CPU results that absolutely ruin low core count CPU
You want high single core performance, core count is meaningless provided it's single core perf is high.
AMDs Zen 3 is a great example, high core, high single core perf.
I'd ignore what Master said a lot of it reads false. Sorry chief.
You read it false, but he is right. IPC does make a difference, but people usually infer that recent CPU are better than old ones, so the IPC talk (which heavily depend of the load type, so it's complicated) does not help. And yes, having lot of core does not exclude good single core perf. But all of that is noise. The info "higher clockspeed over more cores" is a good simple way to put it π
Concretely, an Intel 12100 with 16Go DDR4 and a value SSD (500Mo/s for read & write is enough) would make a very good dedi server for a budget price! But it's hard to have this sort of hardware in hosted environment unfortunately.
I am running 3 server on
Ubuntu 20.04.3 LTS | 31GB RAM
Intel Xeon X5675 (16C\16T) only a 3.06(3.46Boost) and i can have around 4 - 10 people on each server
i found memory made more a difference with SF the clock speed
does it stay at 30 ticks per second?
Good, good. They say clockspeed over cores but they don't really specify in what proprotions or minimal frequency per core. If 3GHz is enough it opens up a lot of vps options
@vocal jungle when you gracefully stop a server (e.g. via console) does the server process stop? Like in 5-10 seconds as opposed to hanging around until another SIGTERM or a systemd kill
nvm then
but no it does not gracefully stop its a known issue
Is there a QA post with more than 3 upvotes or some official confirmation? I know of approximately one server that does stop when told to stop so I'm still not sure if its a widespread easily reproducible issue or an obscure one
its still so new i just treat it like it is a WIP
like there no real api no rcon no real command set
its very barebones so i dont treat it like a fully flushed software suite and i can live with that
It seems like graceful stop is supposed to be an implemented feature tho
having about 6 diffrent methods of using the dedicated server currently install i am well versed in most issues
just cause something is implmented doesnt mean it works lol
Wiki is written like it works. I'd expect to find a qa post about it but the one I did find is 4 month old with 3 upvotes (1 mine) and is really hard to find for some reason
Either people just don't care or it's not a common issue.~~ (or qa site is not that good)~~
i have see people post in here but if they dont follow up at the QA site is just sits there
Someone said to me get a high clock speed CPU. I'd be like "Where do I start." I stand by what I said. It's literally the most pointless thing to say. "To run a server, you need a computer", "alright, thanks chief."
Hey, Im having a bunch of issue using the epic version of the dedicated server tool. Would anyone have a moment to help?
what trouble
I am opening the dedicated server tool but it does not seem to be running correctly. I get error messages involving a steam ID or environment
I can send screenshots if that would help!
I have also tried it through steamcmd and i get the same sort of issues
warnings are just that
errors are labelled ERROR
your server is most likely working fine
when I open the game and put in my IP it says the server is offline
uhh that does not have the core count you think it has
those old xeons only have 6C12T
even dual socket that's 12C24T
f u dyno
please dont mansplan my server hard ware to me
hahaha
no u
i know what that's capable of, and you're misrepresenting your hardware
or your hardware is being misrepresented by your provider
except i am not, it lists in Amp as (16C\16T) becasue it is a VM and that the number of cores i have given the VM
its wrong lol
oh i see, you're conjuring cores out of nowhere lmao
just look up ur cpu lol its 6core
pls read
i dont need to read it
magic VM cores is not going to make your thing more performant. it has the opposite effect
i know the specs of the cpu and your not incorrect no did i say you where wrong
err i did not say your wrong
so what's the deal here, im confused
you have a dual socket setup, and you've assigned 16 out of 24 threads to a VM?
i understand its 6/12t and it in a r710 - to make a total of 12cores 24 theads
exactly its not 16c/16t that was the point
the vm has 16 threads allocated to it but AMP/Linux sees it as 16cores
weird
but you know what it is, so why say 16 cores?
and i copied the stats off the amp setup page and didnt correct the terms not thinking some retentive dick you care about the terminology
i am not misleading i just need think it was a bfd
my initial intention was to warn you, since i did not know you or your setup/level of tech knowledge
because server providers can be very bait-and-switch
i dont know why it says 16 cores i didnt write amp or linux or exsi ask them why the count theads as cors
cores
fair enough and that info is important for people to have, and thanks
Whats is this server manager,m
just may get all the info before you say someone is wrong, when it could be a type-o or claim there misrepresenting there hardware
its the AMP game hosting manager it use to be McMyAdmin then it was rebranded as AMP
not it supports many different gameserves
the crap part about server providers is there selling 4 slot servers with 2 gig of ram thinking that is enough
asd
Hello, does anyone have experience with Satisfactory servers? I want to connect to my Dedi server, but when I join I just float around and it works. Until it crashes!
anyone know if the items on the conveyer belts on servers are just not properly displayed or really not working as fast as they should? xD (on servers)
I may have oversimplified. Still you want higher single core performance over many cores. In most CPU families this really means having less cores and more clockspeed. Threadripper pro being a perfect example
I can already hear someone saying " yes, but boost clock"
Yeah, well, after the CPU reaches a certain temperature, you only get the base clock.
Who's buying a threadripper to host a Satisfactory server though? You can make the argument for Xeon servers sure, but most Panel hosts use Core I-series or Ryzen chips and if you buy "game ready" Dedi's from a lot of places (OVH is a good example) they provide high single core performance chips.
Most people who host from home aren't going out of their way to buy expensive hardware to run a dedi for satisfactory, and if they are they likely know about the hardware nuances. For the people who just want to run a server from home will just deal with what they have.
lmao my server uses a threadripper but shared lol
Most people will indeed not buy a Threadripper, I merely used it as an example.
jep, totally agree - it's stupid though that only few games and stuff like this use more than one core
Still holds true with Core-I as well. You do not need the top of the line high core count CPUs, you need the ones with the highest base clock.
That is the point I'm making, high single core performance over having more cores.
But it's a moot point.
High Single Core performance isn't dictated by core count
The 12 core Threadripper (as per example) has a higher single core performance over the 64 core one
bro I have a 5950x. It has one of the best Single Core performance chips available
It has 16 cores and 32 threads
High core count β
High single core performance β
It's a server processor.... 16 cores is low core count....
What does server processor mean?
My OVH dedi has a Ryzen 3 3600X in it
Consumer chip, used in a datacentre
Is this not a "server processor"?
For it's intended purpose: running a game.
Isn't that what we're discussing though?
We're not talking about running an Oracle Database
We're talking about running Satisfactory
Yeah, for which you want, within a processor family, the one CPU model that has the highest single core performance, not incidently that is in most cases the model with less cores.
As the game server runs continuously, the CPU will always be at thermal limits, and thus running base clock
tbh not sure why you even bought up Threadrippers. It's so far from your own point idk what you're arguing anymore.
cpubenchmark DOT net/singleThread.html
I brought up the Threadripper as an example cause there's just 5 models, which makes demonstrating the point a lot clearer
No "server processors" in that list for a while
State your point/argument again.
Unfortunately, Satisfactory's server runs best on a 2-4 core CPU with the latest architecture, which has a higher IPC than a processor with 128 cores and 256 threads.
The ones with high clockspeed, and thus high single core performance, have less cores.
Talk about extreme examples ^
Disagree. High clock speed doesn't dictate high single core performance.
Within a processor family it does
Sure you could make a trendline, but you cannot objectively state that
There's way too many nuances
In the past experience, when operating from a server that accommodates 16 people to tier 8, when the system was operated with Xeon E5-2620v2 at the beginning of server operation, a very serious lag occurred in tier 4 game state.
Provided the Single Core performance is high tier, the core count nor clock speed plays any factor.
When I felt operational problems and put in Ryzen 5600g, from tier 7 to around 7 megabytes of save file size, about 12 people could play the game with a little bit of lag.
You could have some magical CPU which has 500 billion cores, but it's single core performance is fucking fantastic which Satisfactory would run just fine. It'd use the cores it needed and the single core performance would be good enough to support whatever it needs to do
You can't compare a Zen3 with a Core I based on clock speed, true.
You CAN compare, and readily state that a single core , OF THE SAME ARCHITECTURE, the one with the higher clockspeed has the highest IPC.
That's is what I'm saying.
I'm not making any comparison. I used my CPU has a quick anecdote.
I'm speaking broadly
I'm not really making any comparisons between Intel and AMD either. It's just real data from actually running a multiplayer server.
I'm talking real world CPUs, where there is plenty data that shows high single core performance is to be preferred for games.
Indeed you are.
However, that statement is a far cry away from your previous stance
In which way?
MasterDiverM β Today at 15:10
The ones with high clockspeed, and thus high single core performance, have less cores.
Original statement ^
I'm talking real world CPUs, where there is plenty data that shows high single core performance is to be preferred for games.
This ^ statement didn't factor in core count or clock speed
Oh, boy you are stubborn...
You made my argument
High clock speed doesn't dictate high single core performance.
High Single Core performance isn't dictated by core count
We agree, games (like Satisfactory) prefer high single core performance.
It does within a CPU architecture.
A Zen3 core, running 3gHz has a higher IPC, performance etc, then the same Zen3 core running 2gHz.
How is this in anyway comparable?
Who's artificially limiting their CPUs?
Also. Just for reference. The Zen3 cores have all very similar single core performance results
Not artificially, production defects have a significant influence on the max clockspeed
Same performance in a benchmark?
Within tiny tolerances. Also this is SO far from your original claim.
Single Core performance chart for Zen3 (highlighted)
Notice something?
Lower core count have worse single core performance
Funny that
Your example btw
Yes, it's a benchmark, so no thermal limits have been accounted for
A Zen3 core, running 3gHz has a higher IPC, performance etc, then the same Zen3 core running 2gHz.
Doesn't matter. Sample sizes would mitigate issues with peoples setups
This isn't one sample for each chip lol
5950x -> Samples: 2560*
Thermal limits have no correlation with anyone's setup
Okay so why mention it?
5600x -> Samples: 5140*
Fact of the matter is, there's that many samples any defects or differences in chips would be smoothed out in the data.
Well, maybe because you can only run the CPU at base clock when you reach it's thermal limit?
You could have a Zen3 chip that runs like 5% of it's expected performance; won't change data too much if at all due to sample size
Not necessarily. It may throttle lower than base frequency.
Or in the inverse, you could win the silicon lottery and get some chip that boosts most of the time without any thermal issues
Looking at the situation now, I'm just sorry why we have to run the server while considering CPU architecture, IPC, and Core Clock. Basically, if the server side supports multicore properly, this debate will not be very meaningful.
You definitely can win the silicon lottery, but you can only assume the average.
I just disagreed with his premise that "The ones with high clockspeed, and thus high single core performance, have less cores."
Okay, so if your assumption is the AVERAGE then my stats will line up as expected.
Like I said the amount of samples will create a MEAN average; ignoring top and bottom
Yeah, but you are using the wrong data to make an assumption.
kinda like a bell curve
Show me data that proves you right
because just an FYI, we've moved from your original claim
The ones with high clockspeed, and thus high single core performance, have less cores.
Are you happy to concede this is not true?
CPU cores, even when they do nothing, use energy, and thus create heat, which takes away from the thermal budget of the cores that do have a task.
haven't we just agreed that this works inversely?
You can have shit CPU lottery, you can have great CPU lottery
or you can fit right in the normal where most people will see expected results from X chip
Nope, that is due to the manufacturer selecting the best silicon for their "higher" placed models.
Then it's a different chip
you can't compare chips like that and say "I won the silicon lottery because I bought a 5800x and you lose the silicon lottery because you bought the 5600x"
If it has a different name on the chip, then we should not say they are the same chip, fundamentally sure, practicality they're sold at different prices, they yield different result, they may have different feature sets
I've never said "Wow, our 5600x and 5800x's are the same chip."
Just another pivot check, we're far from the original claim you made.
Lets compare the Ryzen 5000 series 5950X and 5800X
And the real world yields are?
Samples are there
5950x has better Single Core performance
5950x has more cores
that's not even relevant, what matters is the TDP
5950x has slower clock speed
you are just showing another benchmark, that does not take in account the thermal limit
Bro listen. I do not care about TDP. I'm focusing on your original claim.
let me reiterate
The ones with high clockspeed, and thus high single core performance, have less cores.
it's all about TDP
Then why is that not what you said AT ALL until now?
FYI, this is called shifting the goal posts
First time you mentioned TDP
First time you mentioned thermal
you want a high sustained clock, in which a CPU with a lower core count has an advantage, it has fewer cores that generate heat.
Original claim
State your new claim because I feel I've adequately proved your original claim wrong.
oh and just an FYI, both of those chips (5800x and 5950x) have the same TDP
Your example remember
my original claim is still true, you only show some benchmarks that have been performed using the boost clock, yeah sure, the boost clock is all but the same
You keep trying to get this in there. You state it like it changes the facts.
so the result of the benchmark will reflect this, the performance at max boost clockspeed
it's still my old claim, 5950X and 5800X have the same architecture, the cores are thus identical in design, and in performance at the same clockspeed.
let me just reiterate, correct me where I'm wrong. Your new claim is specific to the 5950x and 5800x; where you state the performance would be identical at the same clockspeed?
but you will also notice that the 16core 5950X has a lower base clock (when you reach the thermal limit, or TDP), than the 8 core 5800X.
Can we step through this conversation one by one please.
which also means that when the CPU can only run at it's base clock, the single core performance of the 5800X is higher than that of the 5950X
let me just reiterate, correct me where I'm wrong. Your new claim is specific to the 5950x and 5800x; where you state the performance would be identical at the same clockspeed?
I need a yes or a no and why
no it's not specific for these cpu's. It holds true within any cpu architecture family
Okay, I will ask the same question again. Please be as concise as possible.
What is your claim IN FULL?
I want us to be on the same page and right now I cannot do so because we're so far removed from the original claim.
it's true for the Threadripper Pro, It's true for the 12th Gen Core-I, etc
Concisely, what is your claim?
I think I have made myself clear multiple times?
no; hence why I'm asking for you to clarify in full so we can start a new conversation going forward.
My original claim, BTW, it holds true within any architecture family.
Okay
Perfect
Please note NO WHERE in that screenshot you provided states anything to do with power budget. So I expect going forward you do not bring it up.
I disagree with that claim.
Reason: Single Core Performance is NOT tied to Clock Frequency OR Core Count
Sub reason: it's made up of other factors, major one being IPC (Instructions per clock)
I also showed a nice extreme example, the Threadripper Pro, showing that within this family of CPU's the base clock is higher with less cores.
And this has always been true: Same architecture, the single core performance is proportional to the clockspeed.
Also true: You can't run a CPU at boost clock forever, it will throttle down to base clock (per core in some models) when the thermal limit is reached.
Okay let me address each point by point
Wrong, it is when we talk about a single architecture
IPC is identical within same architecture
5950X does not have a higher IPC than a 5800X
same is true for the Threadripper, the IPC per core of the 64core is the same as the 16core
I also showed a nice extreme example, the Threadripper Pro, showing that within this family of CPU's the base clock is higher with less cores.
We agreed this comparison doesn't make sense in reality. Threadrippers aren't mostly used to run game servers nor play games. Some people do, more power to them, the vast majority do not.
Amos --
What does server processor mean?
My OVH dedi has a Ryzen 3 3600X in it
Consumer chip, used in a datacentre
Is this not a "server processor"?
MasterDiverM β Today at 15:04
For it's intended purpose: running a game.
And this has always been true: Same architecture, the single core performance is proportional to the clockspeed.
This is not true. Using my example from earlier, the 5950X has a lower clockspeed, higher single core performance than the 5800X.
Also true: You can't run a CPU at boost clock forever, it will throttle down to base clock (per core in some models) when the thermal limit is reached.
This point is irrelevant. Taking a huge average of thousands of samples will provided expected result with X chip and will follow.
Note... You snook thermals back into conversation after having nothing to do with original claim.
What part of let me address your points first was misunderstood by you?
Snook in thermals? thermals have everything to do with my original claim
Yet they're stated in exactly 0 places (original claim)
Please note NO WHERE in that screenshot you provided states anything to do with power budget. So I expect going forward you do not bring it up.
See my rebuttal from your point list, I prove this wrong there. (Point 2)
this point 2?
"This is not true. Using my example from earlier, the 5950X has a lower clockspeed, higher single core performance than the 5800X."
Yes
of course it is, the benchmark ran at boost clock. the 5950X has a higher boost clock than the 5800X
Why did you use those CPUs as an example? They play into my argument.
basicly you prove my point: higher clock higher IPC
yes
if I took some shitty Pentium from 1922 (before they existed) and overclocked it to 50 trillion gigahertz whatever that would be. It would likely be the best CPU in the world.
Right? The single core would be nuts
But that's out of the realm of reality. The reality is. Core Frequency is NOT the result of good Single Core Performance chips.
I should say, not the only result/factor - as per my original claim
things I did not say, but you should infer:
- This is true within a processor family
- It depends on the architecture
No. You cannot pull the "infer" card
I said like 4 times to concisely state your point
yes I just did
You refused each time referring back to an obscure point
You lost any chance to use "infer" cards
it depends on architecture. Sure. So what? Doesn't prove your point at all.
you infer you can win this argument by determining I can't assume you should know about thermals and architecture?
Neither can I? We're not discussing whether one of us knows the designs more than the other are we?
We're discussing the base principle that Clock Speed = Single Core Performance
Fyi your original claim mentioned nothing about architecture either
which is true within a architecture.
I made that abundantly clear.
Also made clear you have to consider thermals, and thus assume base clock
oh god. I was putting your claim there. I don't agree with it.
You may have starting bring in thermals, but when I said to restate your claim you posted that ^
Which doesn't include Thermals OR Architecture
No it did not, nor was I ever obliged to mention that in my first post. That it only holds true within a architecture is common knowledge (I hope)
well, I do, it appears you do not
I have restated (and expanded upon) my original claim several times
You chose to state your original claim after I gave you plenty of chances to modify your statement and provide a more concise, and thorough statement
The fact you didn't take that opportunity is your own fault
after I expanded upon it
No you cannot expand on it after I explicitly asked you to do that in the restatement
I told you plenty of times I'm arguing your claim
And your ORIGINAL CLAIM
is WRONG
I expanded on it before you asked to restate
my original claim is true.
Yes you did. Then because the conversation was getting cloudy I asked you to compile your thoughts and restate it CONCISELY
You refuse to take that opportunity
I expanded upon the reasons, and limits of my claim
You keep bringing up the same false arguments, showing benchmarks that have been performed using a clockspeed that cannot be sustained.
See if you said correlated I'd be more inclined to agree (Frequency = Single Core Performance)
Is English your first language?
yes
Bacause this is what i've been saying all along
Do I have to search correlated
Because we both know you didn't say as such
I made the correlation by stating that games benefit from single core performance, thus a higher base clockspeed (which can be sustained for longer, if not indefinitely), which is correlated to the core count, as more cores equates to a lower base clock as a general rule of thumb.
Because of thermal limits
higher clockspeed = more heat generated (per core)
I do not disagree with this. But we're so far away from the original claim.
It's such an irrelevant fact when considering CPU choices
CPUs generate heat. This is true. Okay cool, does it run faster though?
I use "faster" as a generic term that's all encompassing
the more heat per package it runs slower
This is not true.
why?
Sorry, let me restate.
"slower" than what?
in my statement of "faster", I was referring to whatever they had currently for comparison
well, let me explain: you have chosen a socket, all CPU's that fit this socket have the same package (more or less) right?
Define package
that package has a maximum dissipation of, let's say, 100W
package = IHS?
Package: the thing that carries the silicon, that enables the silicon to interface with the socket
So the PCB?
The IHS is part of the package
the whole thing
so you have 100W to divide between all cores within said package right?
Just as a quick one, would you agree. Package = CPU?
you may call it CPU
Okay I'll refer to it as that from now on
for all it's intended purposes they are the same
not necessarily, thermal budgets for single core will be different than multicore. You may be able to sustain a higher Single Core frequency than Multi Core frequency
AI = Artificial Intelligence? Can you provide an example of these cores if the acronym is correct.
all, typos I will correct π
Okay, I would agree with a caveat. I don't know what happens if there's literally no work happening at CPU level, the CPU will still cycle at a frequency, how much heat that would generate vs a full workload at that frequency - I don't know the answer.
If you're asking for absolutes. Does a CPU that is powered generate any amount of heat? Yes.
You would agree, cores that have been deactivated (by having their power lines on die cut) do not generate heat?
No power, no heat. I agree.
so a 8 core cpu has per core more thermal budget than a 16 core cpu, right?
No. The thermal budget is the same. If it's rated for ~100W, a 1 core CPU still only has 100Ws of thermal room to use vs 8.
But obviously 1 core could be doing a lot of work in the 8 core CPU above and would have a portion of that thermal room available
Sorry - just seen the "per core" part. Yes. I believe that's reflected in the above statement(s)
Sure
so the 16 core cpu has left 68W and the 8 core 84W to be used by cores doing work
I'm following
we also can establish that an increase in clockspeed means a exponential increase in heat generated?
Remove exponential. It's linear; you stated 2w per hypothetical core. Graphed would be a line
Each time the clock ticks you're charging or discharging a bunch of capacitors. The energy for charging a capacitor is:
E = 1/2CV^2
Where C is the capacitance and V is the voltage to which it was charged.
If your frequency is f[Hz], then you have f cycles per second, and your power is:
P = fE = 1/2CV^2f
That is why the power goes up at linearly with frequency.
You can see that it goes up quadratically with voltage. Because of that, you always want to run at the lowest voltage possible. However, if you want to raise the frequency you also have to raise the voltage, because higher frequencies require higher operating voltages, so the voltage rises linearly with the frequency.
For this reason, the power rises like f^3 (or like V^3).
Now, when you increase the number of cores, you're basically increasing the capacitance C. This is independent of the voltage and of the frequency, so the power rises linearly with C. That is why it is more power efficient to increase the number of cores that it is to increase the frequency.
Why do you need to increase the voltage to increase the frequency? Well, the voltage of a capacitor changes according to:
dV/dt = I/C
where I is the current. So, the higher the current, the faster you can charge the transistor's gate capacitance to its "on" voltage (the "on" voltage doesn't depend on the operating voltage), and the faster you can switch the transistor on. The current rises linearly with the operating voltage. That's why you need to increase the voltage to increase the frequency.
oh fuck me you're adding a lot to this hypothetical CPU
Why didn't you start with this?
for completeness we do need to add a lot
"You can see that it goes up quadratically with voltage. Because of that, you always want to run at the lowest voltage possible. However, if you want to raise the frequency you also have to raise the voltage, because higher frequencies require higher operating voltages, so the voltage rises linearly with the frequency."
This is the important bit, we need to raise the voltage to raise the clockspeed
Problem is, now you're out of the realm of this conversation. I'm not an electrical engineer.
remember, no silicon lottery in this hypothetical CPU
I happen to be an electrical engineer
I just have to agree with you, with no possibility of pushback
This is going to be a very boring conversation moving forward
which CPU can sustain the highest clock speed, knowing this?
I can't answer because I don't understand the provided context above.
It would be naΓ―ve of me to just say yes going forward. As I said, boring conversation.
We can have a conversation back on the main point if you want; but you've drove it into a wall - a wall I'm not going to learn Electrical Engineering to climb over
I can do a laymans explanation
But now you're appealing to authority
Again...
I just have to agree
You could feed me a load of bullshit, I can't pushback because I wouldn't know.
the 16 core had left 68W
or 4,25W per core
the 8 core had 84W left
or 10,5W per core
I just explained a moment ago there's no point continuing down this road since it would be me watching you type with no resistance.
this is not that hard to understand, I hope
You see that the 8 core has over 2x the power budget of the 16 core
and this is why less cores equates to a higher clockspeed
this is high-school fysics
analogy:
2 cars same model, one having a 100HP engine and the second a 200HP engine, same displacement, same everything. which car has the highest top speed, and by how much you guess?
In this crafted scenario, I'd be inclined to agree with you. Thermal headroom = higher boost = better single core.
However, this doesn't disprove anything of what I said.
5800x - 5950x example.
5800x has higher thermal room - less cores - same TDP - lower boost freq
5950x has higher single core - more cores - same TDP - higher boost freq
Though, the 5950x cannot maintain the boost freq forever - and if it can it has a higher single core performance on a high core CPU which fits against your original claim.
I've tried to explain that you can't assume the boost clock
Okay, ignore the boost clock then
5950x has lower base clock - higher single core perf - more cores - same TDP - less thermal headroom
it has the higher single core performance, because of the higher boost clock
that is what the benchmark tells you
But you just told me to ignore boost
yes, but that also means you can't use the benchmark score, which is measured at this boost clock speed
I'm lost. Why can I not use boost clock and if I can well see my above claim
and at the same time, you can see, the score is lower, for the CPU with the lower boost clock
the benchmark only tells you what the performance is, at the boost clock speed
I'd argue the 0.3GHz delta isn't enough to move single core performance to the point it disagree with you
I had to scroll back a bit:
But lets divide the score by the boostclock
you get something funny
5990X scored 3500 SCP (Single core Perf)
5800X scored 3450 SCP
you posted this benchmark result
divided by the respective boostclock we get:
5950X: 3500/4.9= 714.3 SCP/GHz
5800X: 3450/4.7= 742,6 SCP/GHz
funny result isn't it?
I think we can't trust the benchmark, in my humble opinion
gimme 20 mins just gotta run I will respond though lol
gonna prepare dinner, so might be more than 20mins before I respond π
Looking at this I think 5950x can't sustain boost for very long at all (if even it gets there?) running close the the frequency of the 5800x. I don't see any reason to discount or distrust the benchmark. It has enough samples to be fair.
You're making an awful assumption that the only thing that affects benchmark score is clock speed
There's more to it, I know
Except when you're talking the exact same core-die as is the case with 5950X and 5800X.
They're not exactly the same bruh
5950 probably scored lower because of scheduler overhead, 5950 has 2 core dies identical to the 5800's one core die.
Interface complex is identical as well
Just do a quick Google search...
Yep, "they are exactly the same bruh" is an even worse argument than "go Google it."
there's this magical thing called binning
sure, in theory the CCDs in both the 5950X and 5800X are the same; they are not in reality
if you're going to try to argue "this benchmark is invalid because [dumb math] you're making a huge mistake"
especially if said benchmark is an average of every result submitted by the users
it's going to naturally have flaws and biases that you can point towards that don't involve math
no, no. I'm just here waiting for the "well, you're a woman you obviously don't know tech" or something dumb like that
because I have yet to get it myself
I'm joking about the convo theft btw. More the merrier regardless of what opinion you hold π
heeeeeeeeeey now
I don't think Master would make that argument, you made that argument yourself
c'mon now
Have some self-respect
oh shit, you're right
As a matter of fact, the best hydraulics engineer I ever worked with was female
i must go yell at myself now
tbh you said that like you wanted the conversation to derail into that
it's mostly car people that make that argument anyway
Really unnecessary
it was a joke
but back on topic; if you want to argue against a benchmark go for userbenchmark
yeah for sure 100% agree ^
If I was lifting benchmark results from userbenchmark I'd be for sure providing shitty data
But Passmark I hold quite high respect with benchmarking companies
going from being the one everyone loves and trusts to getting banned from several subreddits is impresseive
Any benchmark....
Most will not divulge how they come to the results they present
passmark does
all their formulas are available on their forum
and, on the topic of dumb math arguing against passmark
I benchmarked an E6600 and a Q6600
Still the IPC of a 5950 and 5800 are identical when looking at a single core
And I believe that shows in Passmark
the multi-thread result of the Q6600 was almost exactly 2x the result of the E6600
There's a delta of 50 in Single Core perf
within margin of error
^
Expected result for a multicore benchmark
let me see what freq I get on my 5950x when stressing sc with prime95
expected result for those two CPUs given the E6600 is 100% just half a Q6600
I don't think I'll see 4.9
I just scored 3276 for single-thread with my 5950X
but I have a bunch of stuff running so take that with a grain of salt
Ah, yes, any user submitted data is influenced by exactly this
You didn't, but countless others did
yes but this would be smoothed out in samples size
that's the downside of crowd sourced performance metrics
idk why you're so concerned with what some people do with their chips. After 1k samples it doesn't matter
People with 5950x aren't ALL going to be using 90% of the CPU and leaving 10% for the benchmark
Same with any other user and CPU combo
All of it will be factored into high sample size scores
Those scores will be reliable
3543 after closing everything
Well, the interconnection complex is going to be busier with 2 CPU complexes attached
Funny this btw. My 5950x is stressing 1 core at 4.7GHz Stable, same as 5800X
And the SCP is within 50 points delta
They are remarkably the same
Until you start stressing enough cores
Yes but the numbers we're referring to is Single Core
So that's a pretty fair result right there
And reflects reality AND the passmark benchmark
Run multiple instances bound each to their own core.
Reality is that a game uses 1 core to the max, but the other cores are busy too
IDD
You quickly run out of thermal budget to sustain a higher clockspeed
So your argument is... Single Core Performance is important, provided it's actually sustainable on Multiple Cores, though Multicore itself isn't too important?
Because of the total thermal budget simply being much larger per core (our 8 Vs 16 core CPU)
So am I accurate with the reframing?
you know, I could also bring an actual 5800X into the conversation; my roommate has one
that definitely requires getting up though
This is exactly the core issue
Wouldn't matter - Benchmarks reflect reality
And remember, for games, as these are very single core performance dependent
not all games are single-core dependent
yeah but I just helped reframe it and that isn't your entire argument
True, but Satisfactory is
most newer games actually arent; devs are pushing multi-threading whenever possible
Your argument is... These games are single core performance dependant, on multiple cores, but not all cores.
lol
Which we were never arguing at the start
this is an entire new argument
And I don't disagree with
that argument is actually part of why userbenchmark is banned from several subreddits (along with chaning their formulas to support their own point of view leading to some fun comparisons)
Absolutely right, but we were talking about how to get Satisfactory to run as fast as possible, and it happens to have an older game engine that essentially is single threaded
tbh I don't know many games that are true multicore. Most if not all I've played have most of the logic on the main tick thread/simulation thread, and everything else can be passed off to additional threads as small workloads.
the only game I actually payed any attention to started transitioning to multi-core support by offloading sound processing to a second core
dunno where it went after that; i stopped caring for that game
Unreal does support multiple threads
I believe most modern game engines will support multiple threads, but it's up to the developer to utilise it
there's a launch option to utilize all available threads
I noticed not change in performance or thread usage when using it
And in practice, it's hard to move simulation/order sensitive stuff from the main thread due to risk of out of order execution (this is assumption/speculation)
Thus, making is effectively heavy single core performance with hints of multicore workload π
Providing more cores to engine won't move the main loop workload to utilise it though
i should also mention that work on multiple threads is easily observed when playing Satisfactory
yes, but the main simulation thread is single core
oh yah, most games will use multiple cores, but almost all work will be done in main loop - single thread
do you have documentation that backs that claim up?
Almost every single game
thus limited by clock-speed on any given CPU
leaving out some information there
it's what the game devs have said on a number of occasions
clock speed isn't the only indicator of performance still
Satisfactory, Dying Light 2, Minecraft, New World, Hell Let Loose, Deceit, Dyson Sphere Program, Counter-Strike
"they have said it" is not evidence
there's a few, multicore games with heavy main-loop single core load
true, there is a difference between different architectures, however, within the same architecture clockspeed is your only remaining indicator (cache etc being the same per core)
Factory tick parallelization: Spreading out the factory tick over more cores if available. This can considerably improve factory performance, depending on the CPU
the only thing I could find on short notice related to multithreading
just taking a look at the per core loading when running the dedi server tells you that one core is loaded to the max, before any other core is being used
eh good luck with this argument lol. I've tried having it. The new, restated claim which I agree with is:
Single Core Performance is important, provided it's actually sustainable on Multiple Cores, though Multicore itself isn't too important.
there are situations where that claim is true and situations where it's false
if you have between 8+ cores sure; being able to sustain higher performance on actually necessary amount of cores will be important.
Anything less than 8 cores and that argument makes zero sense.
I'm running a server with linuxGSM and it seems to want to reboot, but will only actually do it if I'm online and playing? Like I got the 60 second warning and logged off, couple minutes later logged back in and 'server will reboot in 30 seconds'
Does it eventually kick you off then reboot the server if you stay connected?
LinuxGSM will not prompt in-game for restarts. If you need to restart, you need to manually do it; else the server will remain online; assuming it doesn't crash.
It did kick me off and reboot, it's back up now.
Have a look at the logs. I've had my server online now for like 100 hours -- since last update
I didn't trigger the restart though
setting up a dedicated server in this game is an interesting experience
anyone experienced a bug where a train station is appearing randomly on the map
calculator is showing me this...
ingame...
lol it's a common bug as i just found out on the satis question website... that's stupid... :/ no fixes provided so far
I can connect to my server using the internal ip but not with the external, and i cant find anything else useful searching up key words in the discord
and my friends cant connect using the external ip either
fix your ports and forwarding an d firewalls and such.. wiki page has tons of info
Hi, how do I play a dedicated server?
try the wiki link in here
where is the link
look up
check the pins
what pins
pinned messages
its the thing that looks like a pin
or just read header of the room
Is there an easy way to set the server IP up with my domain name on my CloudFlare DNS, thx
setup server properly and setup ur dns stuff so it points to the server ip
Would I need something like SRV records cause it's not a static IP
try google.com
Anybody experiencing major train signal failure either they stop or crash due to the trains not obeying the signals, is it us in our dedicated server only this happening or happening to everyone? before the latest patch everything was 99% perfectly working, I've had to shut down the server due to all we do is fix damn trains all the time!!!
try the pinned messages in #old-questions-and-help
Is there a way to configurate the RAM usage of an Dedicated Server?
My server keeps crashing after some time, any suggestions what I should look at?
Its a fairly mature server
I haven't crashed while in game, but after a few hours? maybe a day, it crashes
are experimental servers run off your own pc?
I've had this server running since the experimental release and after I loaded a new save into it my friend is getting this error message when connecting to the IP. Has anyone else experienced this?
You should check ports, may be changed or sth like that, bc it must be seen.
thats the 0,0 point of map, everything you dont see directly in multiplayer ends there
train stations, trains, trucks
and you will end up there if game decides to zero your position (or truck you are in), under map unfortunately
you can run it on any pc, but you do need to have a computer (e.g. a VPS ) and have admin access to it
look at the logs
how do you make a dedi server
read the topic or pins
can someone do a vc with me sometime or something? the wiki is all over the place and i just need heeelp
ask your question with some info if possible
note to self:. do not put tick rate above 60
had this happen to us a lot as well, very annoying
I hope the next patch will fix it as I have my server shutdown itβs unplayable we have over 40 trains all we do is fix trains problems cannot play the game as intended
Most of the factories shutdown due to no trains coming in or out
there is a link for train signal help in #old-questions-and-help .. you could try using that to see if u can fix it
it should work fine but you might have to do little fiddling with signals like moving slightly closer/away from junction/station
and as you narrow areas down u can post screenshots in that room and people will try to help u get it fixed up
nice bug on dedicated server, all my conveyor belts are invisible, awesome
@stoic stream above . maybe use a non dedicated server?
Just weird bugs.
Hello, I've got a couple of questions around dedicated servers and saves/performance
According to the wiki the save file for my dedi server should be in %LOCALAPPDATA%\FactoryGame\Saved\SaveGames\server
And my "normal/singleplayer" should be in %LOCALAPPDATA%\FactoryGame\Saved\SaveGames
But I don't have a subfolder called server at all