Jump to content

SERVER CPU is not supported after last OB update


Recommended Posts

After last update OB 2.5.6.49718 is required to have SSE4.1 hardware support even with --server --no-render

m4sNCQPfPbxyokp0vVUGtCUdWpetfa

 

So basically 70% of CPU available to rent in datacenter are NOT able to run DCS server. :thumbup:

 

Thanks!

FlighRIG => CPU: RyZen 5900x | RAM: 64GB Corsair 3000Mhz | GPU: nVIDIA RTX 4090 FE | OS Storage: SSD NVMe Samsung 850 Pro 512GB, DCS Storage: SSD SATAIII Crucial MX300 750GB | Device: Multipurpose-UFC, VirPil T-50, TM WARTHOG Throttle, TrackHat, MFD Cougar with screen.

Our Servers => [ITA] Banshee | Krasnodar - PvE | PersianConquest PvE Live Map&Stats | Syria Liberation PvE Conquest

Support us on twitch subscribing with amazon prime account linked, it's free!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if SSE4.1 is required for them to move forward, but eventually a developer needs to minimize its requirements to a given instruction set to enable newer features and efficiencies.

 

Everyone cries for better performance, but on the flip side wants 100% compatibility. Unrealistic.

 

Not sure where you get 70% of available space in datacenters don't support sse4.1. It's an intel instruction set that goes back to 2006/07 era, and only recently has amd (2019) sold 15% of the datacenter processors. (doesn't mean that 15% of the processors are AMD, just means they sold that percentage in 2019), majority are intel, and the sse4.1 instruction set are supported on consumer processors going back to duo core 2 or something like that. If you are trying to run DCS on a duo core 2, this instruction set is not your biggest problem. AMD has had lesser support for intel instruction sets over the years (slow to adopt), but that is the price you pay for adopting a second class processor. Don't get me wrong, I have a 3900x this year, one of the first times I've moved off Intel, but I fully realize for the 50% or more savings that I have made comes with some lesser know concessions. We have dozens of on premise and hosted systems that I bet it would be hard to find one without this support.

 

I'm guessing all but the earliest x64 processors support sse4.1

 

Just took a quick look at the XEON based processors, sse4 was introduced in 2007. Everything 2008 and later has this. I'd say that ED is moving slowly to ensure compatibility. If anything I'd say step it up. Any tech older than 10 years cannot be expected to be supported in industry let alone gaming which always moves faster. I know less about AMD because few datacenters that are worth their weight have ever implemented AMD anything. I get that this is changing of recent (and for good reason), but anything recent from AMD would also support this.


Edited by nosaMtrevoC

Modules: Persian Gulf | Normandy | Channel | Nevada | Supercarrier | WWII Assets | FC3 | Spitfire | P-51D | P-47D | F-86F | L-39 | AV-8B | F-16C | F/A-18C | A-10C | F-14B | A-4E-C | BS2

 

System: X570 AMD-3900X | 32GB DDR4 3000 | 2TB Gen 4x4 5GB/s NVME | Dual 1070 TI | 4k 32" Samsung

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found this problem too.

 

I run on VPS (Windown Server 2012 R2)

 

0150ed1e927f64186c71ab4b3e747b7c.png

 

As for Sevenfox, your problem is more likely because of your VPS setup. (may be thats the OP's problem also)

 

Most likely you are running on a processor that supports sse4.1, but your virual environment (depending on what they use) has not enabled or compiled your vps to run sse4.1

 

This may either be the level or tier that you are paying for, but it may be as simple as requesting it.

 

Most of my virtual machines (core only) are compiled with a minimum attack surface which means you only compile the features that are necessary, unlike consumer OS's that have all features (essentially) available from the outset.

 

If I need a feature, I need to compile a machine with it, otherwise it's off by default to minimize the potential of an exploit that may be introduced by SSE4.1 for example.

 

I'd reach out to your provider.

Modules: Persian Gulf | Normandy | Channel | Nevada | Supercarrier | WWII Assets | FC3 | Spitfire | P-51D | P-47D | F-86F | L-39 | AV-8B | F-16C | F/A-18C | A-10C | F-14B | A-4E-C | BS2

 

System: X570 AMD-3900X | 32GB DDR4 3000 | 2TB Gen 4x4 5GB/s NVME | Dual 1070 TI | 4k 32" Samsung

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure where you get 70% of available space in datacenters don't support sse4.1.

 

You are talking about physical CPUs. You are not considering virtualization environments (like ED probably didn't consider them, thinking only in physical terms while patching).

 

Though a CPU inside the physical server does usually have SSE 4.x instruction set (they are almost always modern CPUs, after all), very few providers enable it and make the instruction set transparent to the virtualized environments they provide on a single server machine, so DCS, inside a virtualized VPS, cannot usually see the instruction set although physical CPU does support it.

 

Provider's fault? Of course, they are a bit lazy and they are the ones to blame for this, but, since the issue concerns the great vast majority of virtualized environments, this change could have been thought a bit deeper by ED before applying it in the patch. For example, ED could have provided a real dedicated server .exe, that is, a command-line only dedicated server specifically aimed to virtualized VPS.


Edited by Saruman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are talking about physical CPUs. You are not considering virtualization environments (like ED probably didn't consider them, thinking only in physical terms while patching).

 

Though a CPU inside the physical server does usually have SSE 4.x instruction set (they are almost always modern CPUs, after all), very few providers enable it and make the instruction set transparent to the virtualized environments they provide on a single server machine, so DCS, inside a virtualized VPS, cannot usually see the instruction set although physical CPU does support it.

 

Provider's fault? Of course, they are a bit lazy and they are the ones to blame for this, but, since the issue concerns the great vast majority of virtualized environments, this change could have been thought a bit deeper by ED before applying it in the patch. For example, ED could have provided a real dedicated server .exe, that is, a command-line only dedicated server specifically aimed to virtualized VPS.

 

Your reply is on point, but I think I said exactly this above your post.

 

I was however responding in this exact post to the OP who said "70% of CPU available to rent in datacenter" which IMO is specifically physically related to hardware.

 

I do understand the need to consider their options with an upgrade like this, but as a developer myself, you have to understand the frustration of not being able to implement modern code when your users are screaming for more fps, and then as soon as you do they scream compatibility. The SSE4 instruction set is more than a decade old and well supported. Time for a new host IMO.

 

The providers don't enable it mostly because its not required by most. I'm betting any provider worth their weight would enable this if asked.

Modules: Persian Gulf | Normandy | Channel | Nevada | Supercarrier | WWII Assets | FC3 | Spitfire | P-51D | P-47D | F-86F | L-39 | AV-8B | F-16C | F/A-18C | A-10C | F-14B | A-4E-C | BS2

 

System: X570 AMD-3900X | 32GB DDR4 3000 | 2TB Gen 4x4 5GB/s NVME | Dual 1070 TI | 4k 32" Samsung

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm guessing OP didn't differentiate or know the difference between renting "CPU" which would be a single physical processor that you could enable anything you want on it and what he is most likely renting which is a shared vm environment of some type either renting cycles or just straight out share x4 type.

Modules: Persian Gulf | Normandy | Channel | Nevada | Supercarrier | WWII Assets | FC3 | Spitfire | P-51D | P-47D | F-86F | L-39 | AV-8B | F-16C | F/A-18C | A-10C | F-14B | A-4E-C | BS2

 

System: X570 AMD-3900X | 32GB DDR4 3000 | 2TB Gen 4x4 5GB/s NVME | Dual 1070 TI | 4k 32" Samsung

Link to comment
Share on other sites

irrelevant now, the new update removes the requirement.

Modules: Persian Gulf | Normandy | Channel | Nevada | Supercarrier | WWII Assets | FC3 | Spitfire | P-51D | P-47D | F-86F | L-39 | AV-8B | F-16C | F/A-18C | A-10C | F-14B | A-4E-C | BS2

 

System: X570 AMD-3900X | 32GB DDR4 3000 | 2TB Gen 4x4 5GB/s NVME | Dual 1070 TI | 4k 32" Samsung

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just don't update :)

Of course it can not be a solution.......

 

irrelevant now, the new update removes the requirement.

That means that basically it was useless, at least for server side, so didn't get why should have to force it as "requirement". we spent years ask for a dedicated server to have this? not thanks!

 

By the way, going in depth with the problem, it was not really a missing feature on XEON CPU, but it was something more related to "security" of virtualized environment. I was finally able to run ( even with old build ) the DCS on our VM infrastructure enabling flag.

FlighRIG => CPU: RyZen 5900x | RAM: 64GB Corsair 3000Mhz | GPU: nVIDIA RTX 4090 FE | OS Storage: SSD NVMe Samsung 850 Pro 512GB, DCS Storage: SSD SATAIII Crucial MX300 750GB | Device: Multipurpose-UFC, VirPil T-50, TM WARTHOG Throttle, TrackHat, MFD Cougar with screen.

Our Servers => [ITA] Banshee | Krasnodar - PvE | PersianConquest PvE Live Map&Stats | Syria Liberation PvE Conquest

Support us on twitch subscribing with amazon prime account linked, it's free!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, going in depth with the problem, it was not really a missing feature on XEON CPU, but it was something more related to "security" of virtualized environment. I was finally able to run ( even with old build ) the DCS on our VM infrastructure enabling flag.

 

As stated below, yes, most likely your virtual environment. You'd be hard pressed to find a 64 bit Intel processor that doesn't have this support.

 

your problem is more likely because of your VPS setup. (may be thats the OP's problem also)

 

Most likely you are running on a processor that supports sse4.1, but your virual environment (depending on what they use) has not enabled or compiled your vps to run sse4.1

 

This may either be the level or tier that you are paying for, but it may be as simple as requesting it.

 

Most of my virtual machines (core only) are compiled with a minimum attack surface which means you only compile the features that are necessary, unlike consumer OS's that have all features (essentially) available from the outset.

 

If I need a feature, I need to compile a machine with it, otherwise it's off by default to minimize the potential of an exploit that may be introduced by SSE4.1 for example.

 

I'd reach out to your provider.

 

 

That means that basically it was useless, at least for server side, so didn't get why should have to force it as "requirement".

 

It doesn't necessarily mean this at all. They could be wanting to use some of these instruction sets in a future update, and are flagging the requirement when compiling now so that they can slowly get every one on board with the new requirements before rolling out the code that needs it. That way it's easy to roll back if you get a lot of kick back from the community as no actual code has implemented this instruction set yet. If you want efficiency gains (read fps), it's instruction sets like these that allow you to garner them.

 

That being said, it could have been as simple as having compiled the code with this requirement flagged by mistake.

Modules: Persian Gulf | Normandy | Channel | Nevada | Supercarrier | WWII Assets | FC3 | Spitfire | P-51D | P-47D | F-86F | L-39 | AV-8B | F-16C | F/A-18C | A-10C | F-14B | A-4E-C | BS2

 

System: X570 AMD-3900X | 32GB DDR4 3000 | 2TB Gen 4x4 5GB/s NVME | Dual 1070 TI | 4k 32" Samsung

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm guessing ED is toying with the idea of implementing SSE at some level (4 or greater) to allow parrallel processing on multiple cores on a single CPU which SSE can help you do.

 

I'm betting the majority of the community would prefer the efficiencies gained with parrallel processing (even on the server side) than having older processors work.

 

Especially on the server side where it's more common to see 20 core 2.8 GHz machines than it is to find 4.8GHz machines (usually less cores)

 

Anyways, just my 2 cents. Hard to guess what they are actually up to.

Modules: Persian Gulf | Normandy | Channel | Nevada | Supercarrier | WWII Assets | FC3 | Spitfire | P-51D | P-47D | F-86F | L-39 | AV-8B | F-16C | F/A-18C | A-10C | F-14B | A-4E-C | BS2

 

System: X570 AMD-3900X | 32GB DDR4 3000 | 2TB Gen 4x4 5GB/s NVME | Dual 1070 TI | 4k 32" Samsung

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm guessing ED is toying with the idea of implementing SSE at some level (4 or greater) to allow parrallel processing on multiple cores on a single CPU which SSE can help you do.

 

I'm betting the majority of the community would prefer the efficiencies gained with parrallel processing (even on the server side) than having older processors work.

 

Especially on the server side where it's more common to see 20 core 2.8 GHz machines than it is to find 4.8GHz machines (usually less cores)

 

Anyways, just my 2 cents. Hard to guess what they are actually up to.

While I'm totally agree to "loose" old CPU support if its can bring benefits to the game, I'm not sure reliant to SSE or any other tech that can be potentially unavailable on virtualized technology is a good move, at least for server side application.

Any other game server can run on really small ( even linux ) VPS with great performance, while on DCS we're forced to have powerful dedicated machine.

Coding the server engine on SSE or any other instruction set means make some step back.

FlighRIG => CPU: RyZen 5900x | RAM: 64GB Corsair 3000Mhz | GPU: nVIDIA RTX 4090 FE | OS Storage: SSD NVMe Samsung 850 Pro 512GB, DCS Storage: SSD SATAIII Crucial MX300 750GB | Device: Multipurpose-UFC, VirPil T-50, TM WARTHOG Throttle, TrackHat, MFD Cougar with screen.

Our Servers => [ITA] Banshee | Krasnodar - PvE | PersianConquest PvE Live Map&Stats | Syria Liberation PvE Conquest

Support us on twitch subscribing with amazon prime account linked, it's free!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I'm totally agree to "loose" old CPU support if its can bring benefits to the game, I'm not sure reliant to SSE or any other tech that can be potentially unavailable on virtualized technology is a good move, at least for server side application.

Any other game server can run on really small ( even linux ) VPS with great performance, while on DCS we're forced to have powerful dedicated machine.

Coding the server engine on SSE or any other instruction set means make some step back.

 

I think you'll find (I'm guessing) that if they wanted to use some instruction set moving forward to improve gameplay for client side, the server side requirement is more out of not having a dedicated server side host, but rather a stripped down client side that just isn't rendering, therefore the requirements stay simliar.

 

Most tech is available in Virtual Environments. It's just not necessarily enabled by default. This is by design (VM Design) for a multitude of reasons.

 

DCS Server side is relatively new, I'm guessing they would be working on a dedicated server host application at some point allowing them to fork the two (maybe the current itteration is the first steps in that fork). You can't have them sharing the same code base moving forward and then try to drive differences in requirements from two angles. They need to move to some type of client/server api that is independent of the client/server (like odbc is for databases) allowing each side to not break the other each time they want to implement something new on only one of the sides (like sse if thats was their intention).

 

Using said logic of not including SSE to keep server requirements low would be the same as saying lets remove any other feature of DCS (3d models for a ridiculous extreme example) to keep server requirements low. From my perspective, using DCS more for SP than MP, I prefer them to move forward with the tech in the DCS Game itself, using the current solution (which is some what of a band aid) to run DCS with no render to get some semblence of a dedicated server until they come out with something that is properly only handling and hosting the server required elements. These would be very small if done properly. The current solution is not ideal, and just better than what they had before, but I'm guessing is just an improvement for the community until something else is released.


Edited by nosaMtrevoC

Modules: Persian Gulf | Normandy | Channel | Nevada | Supercarrier | WWII Assets | FC3 | Spitfire | P-51D | P-47D | F-86F | L-39 | AV-8B | F-16C | F/A-18C | A-10C | F-14B | A-4E-C | BS2

 

System: X570 AMD-3900X | 32GB DDR4 3000 | 2TB Gen 4x4 5GB/s NVME | Dual 1070 TI | 4k 32" Samsung

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly I'm with the crowd saying let it be done and people adjust for it.. it's painful yes but on the other hand Eagle Dynamics has always said that VPS and heck even windows server that the majority of us even on dedicated server boxes use is not supported. We need the newer instruction sets if DCS is to move forwards and the reason it was 'removed' as a requirement wasn't due to VPS etc but because the older FX series AMD processors literally don't support it and AMD didn't start supporting 4.1 & 4.2 until like 2016/17 or some time around there, despite both instruction sets being given the stamp.

 

For server operators though yeah it's a pain, but eventually it's gonna happen you can't expect any company not to leverage CPU instructions that have been STANDARDIZED now for over 10 years. (Part of the blow back AMD got for the FX series not having them). It means that yeah a lot of the 'cheap' VPS options and even some of the cheap AMD based dedicated server options might run into issues.. Though most data centres are running on chipsets that support SSE on dedicated hardware now.

 

It's kinda like the 1.5.x - 2.5 'issue' were the hardware requirements changed.. It's gonna happen, it's not a case of if, but when and all we can do is roll with it and move our kit.

i7 12700k, 32gbDDR5, Warthog HOTAS, HP Reverb VR, trackir, win 10, RTX 3070

TGW Dedicated Server Admin, Australian PVE/PVP gameplay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly I'm with the crowd saying let it be done and people adjust for it.. it's painful yes but on the other hand Eagle Dynamics has always said that VPS and heck even windows server that the majority of us even on dedicated server boxes use is not supported. We need the newer instruction sets if DCS is to move forwards and the reason it was 'removed' as a requirement wasn't due to VPS etc but because the older FX series AMD processors literally don't support it and AMD didn't start supporting 4.1 & 4.2 until like 2016/17 or some time around there, despite both instruction sets being given the stamp.

 

For server operators though yeah it's a pain, but eventually it's gonna happen you can't expect any company not to leverage CPU instructions that have been STANDARDIZED now for over 10 years. (Part of the blow back AMD got for the FX series not having them). It means that yeah a lot of the 'cheap' VPS options and even some of the cheap AMD based dedicated server options might run into issues.. Though most data centres are running on chipsets that support SSE on dedicated hardware now.

 

It's kinda like the 1.5.x - 2.5 'issue' were the hardware requirements changed.. It's gonna happen, it's not a case of if, but when and all we can do is roll with it and move our kit.

 

 

Exactly. We can't have a Triple A quality title moving forward while also trying to support the lowest common denominator.

 

I get that people with lesser hardware might be left behind, but I think DCS does a great job in supporting them by offering prior versions of DCS (1.5 for eg).

 

There will be incompatibilities moving forward with certain hardware. It's just the reality of living with a PC. Let's move forward IMO.

Modules: Persian Gulf | Normandy | Channel | Nevada | Supercarrier | WWII Assets | FC3 | Spitfire | P-51D | P-47D | F-86F | L-39 | AV-8B | F-16C | F/A-18C | A-10C | F-14B | A-4E-C | BS2

 

System: X570 AMD-3900X | 32GB DDR4 3000 | 2TB Gen 4x4 5GB/s NVME | Dual 1070 TI | 4k 32" Samsung

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...