Intel Salivates Over Virtual World Processing Demands 52
CNet has up an article looking at the lucrative virtual world market for processor companies. An Intel developer forum held in San Francisco this week highlighted the opportunities for selling hardware to both consumers and vendors in the VW marketplace. "[Chief Technology Officer Justin Rattner] showed statistics that indicated a PC's processor bumps up to 20 percent utilization while browsing the Web, while its graphics processor doesn't even break above 1 percent. But running Second Life--even with today's coarse graphics--pushes those to 70 percent for the main processor and 35 to 70 percent for the graphics processor, he said. The Google Maps Web site and Google Earth software pose intermediate demands. Running a virtual worlds server is vastly more computationally challenging, though, when compared with 2D Web sites and even massively multiplayer online games such as Eve Online. An Eve Online server can handle 34,420 users at a time, but Second Life maxes a server out with just 160 users."
What really stiffens their niplples... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What really stiffens their niplples... (Score:5, Informative)
SL - "Server" appears to mean a single CPU or box
EVE - "Server" is used to describe the entirety of the Tranquility cluster, which has at least 150-200+ dual or quad-core blades that handle the solar systems, plus some serious database servers.
EVE can achieve around 150-200 on a single machine before things start getting laggy, things get massively painful in the 500-700 range, and much above that and nodes start dropping. EVE has an architecture limitation in that processing for a given solar system cannot be spread across multiple CPUs, so if a single solar system in EVE has 200+ players, they're all on the same CPU. Meanwhile, 10 systems with 5 users each will likely share a CPU, and 50 systems with zero users probably also share.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
> Maybe Fedora should optimize their code?
I ran Windows 98 on such a machine for a long time with no problems.
Sounds to me not like an 'optimisation' problem, but maybe Fedora could do less fancy and unnecessarry processor-eating computations. -_o
I hope you're kidding about this... (Score:2)
You can't? Even if you run it headless? Why the hell not?
Re: (Score:2)
s/An Eve Online/THE Eve Online/ (Score:2)
Now that I think of it Second Life is a single instace too, so in this case to make a fair comparison it would be more apt to say that Eve Online handles around 100 users with what could be considered normal performance on a single (solar system) server.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
This causes lots of lag in high load/usercount systems as they cannot scale by putting in more hardware with increased demand, to the point which I wouldn't call
Errors in article? (Score:4, Informative)
EVE does not have 34,000 people on one server. One shard which people call a "server", but the Tranquility cluster is some SERIOUS hardware. I think they're up to something like 160-200 dual or quad-core blades, at least.
How do you define "server"? (Score:2)
-Rick
Re: (Score:2)
So, a small to medium university cluster? I doubt the server purchases for Second Life or Eve online from the last year mount up to a tenth of a percent of Intel's weekly sales. It's the *clients* they are thinking about.
Hell, Intel should be *donating* CPUs to EVE online then. If buying a company 200 blades means that 34,000 users upgrade their game boxen regularly, the investment probably pays for itself.
A big handful of info (Score:3, Informative)
In Second Life, the game world is broken up into "sims"... sections of the virtual world that represent 256 x 256 in-game "meters". Each sim has its own master process, two of which run on each server within a cluster... everything that goes on within
Don't dump on the OS client... (Score:2)
The recent URL exploit on Windows (it was a command line parsing bug, so wouldn't have impacted Mac or linux since applications don't parse their own command lines the same way) wasn't from any open source build.
Re: (Score:1)
Buy $9.95 worth of Lindens. Why $9.95? It's the subscription amount so won't look suspicious at first glance assuming you ever look at your transaction history (most people don't).
Suppress the purchase confirmation dialog while sending the confirmation.
Transfer the Lindens to the fraud-recipient
Re: (Score:2)
All it would take is one person noticing extra transfers in their transaction history to totally expose something like that, and with a direct link from the modified client to the distributor it would be relatively easy to track down.
And it's a lot harder to hide changes in patches to a client than you think, especial
Re: (Score:2)
The main limitations I encountered in this area were:
Sounds like it. (Score:3, Informative)
There's no "shards". The world is contiguous: you pause less than a second crossing from one sim to another and it's even possible to fly planes across multiple region boundaries at 25 meters a second (hitting a new region every 7-10 seconds depending on the direction you're flying) without losing control... you *can* still "outfly" the sims and crash but it's gotten a lot better than it has been.
Typicall
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, SL was developed in a very "duct tape and bailing wire style" early on, so
Wirth's Law (Score:4, Funny)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirth's_Law [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
(Yes the bloated and inefficient sentence structure is intentional and reflects the topic)
I thi
Kohls spooges over real world clothing demands (Score:4, Insightful)
The other day Kohls
Re: (Score:2)
Uh-oh.
At least it explains why my belly scratching was all laggy. I didn't meet the requirements.
Re: (Score:2)
And we close in to the demands of AI (Score:2)
!True (Score:1)
Web sites without Flash, maybe... (Score:2)
Web sites without Flash, maybe.
The "processor" vs. "coprocessor" arguments has been going on forever. Meanwhile, people like me are still happily running Pentium3 systems at home at probably will for the next 5 years.
SL (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
They're running metric buttloads of physics. (Score:2)
That's with each sim doing concurrent physics calculations for 100 avatars interacting concurrently with 15000 unique objects in a 256x256x768 meter simulated volume, with each avatar running up to 1000 concurrent scripts. Anything from 10 to 1000 objects are independent actors that have to be taking into account for object-object collisions with a 1/45th of a second quantum. Maybe 1000 objects are running the
Re: (Score:2)
So what they badly need is more sensible physics, and limits for what the amateurs do. No in the sense of what they do, but say some automatic creation of collision zones, boundary boxes, etc.
Or simply a better system. For example, 90% of the objects everywhere I went in SL don't have any visible physics. They're just walls, for example.
Re: (Score:2)
More than that 90% (that would be 1500 physical objects in a sim, that's a pretty heavy load). They still have to be included in physical calculations.
I don't know what kinds of internal optimizations Havok (the physics engine) performs, but the point is it's not able to get any useful guidance in diong so from the builders.
Re: (Score:2)
Even those in SL with some skill are limited by the tools that they are given.
Professionally-designed games take into account the maximum number of movable objects that the physics engine will have to deal with, and they probabaly design for a maxim
Re: (Score:1)
Distributed Gaming (Score:2)
I'm surprised they're not trying to capitalize more on this. The piece about the "hard science" of gaming [slashdot.org] was mostly fluff, but it did highlight an interesting point: if you want ultra realistic graphics and physics, you need a crapton of CPU power. Intel, or some other enterprising folks with a lot of computers hanging around, should take up the challenge
When I play WoW (and I use "I" figuratively, since I don't actually), my computer doesn't have to process everything to do with Azeroth. I let Blizzard
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention latency.
Re: (Score:2)
Why not take this one step further, and farm out the physics and graphics processing to a remote super computer cluster? Let's say I play a game where the goal is to knock down a building. I want every brick, tile and support beam in that building to be represented by an object that is controlled by a physics engine, which in turn will be able to simulate every stress, strain and force at work. My CPU certainly can't do that-- but if the CalculatePhysics() routine farms out to a beowulf-whatever-- returning to my CPU only the resultant vectors-- maybe its doable.
Isn't that going to put significantly more load on the network code for the game? (It depends on how many actors are actually animated on your end) But I would imagine having a server send realtime status on the thousands of bits of your building as they fly around and interact...well, that would need one fat pipe. If you have more than one player viewing this scene, the amount of traffic going out duplicates per player. It gets even worse when you factor in players interacting with the scene you're ta
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No you don't. You want to model it as the coarsest objects you can get away with. The mesh does not have to be uniform size and shape - triangles work as well as rectanges and tetrahedrons as well as rectangular prisms. Also the shape of the model can change over time for when you need to model a single brick.
Re: (Score:2)
EVE Online on One Server (Score:1)
Figures Ignore Performance Bottlenecks (Score:1)
That is, if my post were as comprehensive as some of the figures in this story are.
Most web browser are massively memory-hungry. Circular Javascript references have Internet Explorer practically hemorrhaging unreachable allocations, and on Firefox, numbers are often reference-counted and allocated on the heap.
My CPU doesn't break above 20% when browsing the web either. But I'd be getting the same performance I would with four times as much RAM and a CPU that is one fifth as fast.