Funny Idea

[Wolfmight]

Ok, I have 2 2.0ghz computers. Lets say I have one running in a barebone linux O/S useing less than 50mb of it's 512mb RAM. Now I have an entire 3D game shared on it's shared folder policy and the game is of a 3D class made a year or two ago.

Now I have the second 2.0ghz computer with a graphics card that's twice as fast. I remotely run the game over the network having the 1rst computer do File Processing, CPU loading, Ram Loading... then the second computer uses the power of it's graphics card and a somewhat CPU, RAM, Hardrive (small amounts).

With this setup, and let's say the game does run.. would it run faster?

I mean, with all the added up parts, I should get a combined power of:
4.0ghz CPU
1gb DDR Ram
128mb 8 pixel pipeline radeon 9500 Pro
400GB HD space total all running at 7200 RPM though

The network is a 10mbps speed so files literally copy at 9-10mb all the time normally.

Has anyone tried this? Any websites?



I heard of a guy who used his ol emachine 800mhz peice of crap as a 40gb Dedicated Digital Camera Photo Server. He completely had it formated and installed windows 2000 with all resource hogs turned off and everything. He's a major photographer, so he has tons and tons of burned DVDs of image backups etc not to mention already a few hundred on his emachine. Basicly it's shared through his 2Wire router. He says when his normal computer is running slow sometimes (no defrag for awhile and such).. the shared photo folder on the 800mhz loads much faster than everything else on his 1.4ghz. Heh, shows shareing with a barebone os with no programs installed hardly can give ya a fast folder to work with.

[apunkrockmonk]

I'm no expert but I believe the 10mbps would be a major bottleneck.

[mattesca]

im lost

[bigdawgfoxx]

Originally posted by mattesca@10 August 2004 - 11:57
im lost
hahaha

I dont really think that would work...

[SingaBoiy]

Y not just get dual xeons :rolleyes:

[Peerzy]

Originally posted by apunkrockmonk@10 August 2004 - 17:50
I'm no expert but I believe the 10mbps would be a major bottleneck.
100mbps is what i ahev and the standard, also what about the regestry?

[Twist3r]

most games done need registery for some reason, caz i transfered alot of games to another computer and they all worked

[lynx]

I don't think anyone has got around to designing games which will work that way. What you are effectively talking about is called load balancing, but the software has to be written to specifically handle that, and you have to have load balancing OS extensions.

All of that works out VERY expensive, and the likelyhood of the games makers selling many systems like that are so small they aren't going to bother.

Shame though, I like your thinking.

[tesco]

gigabytes of data go through the ram and cpu. gb's of it are going to the video card, some u don't see, and some mbs go to the hard drivees or other peripherals (or come in).
10mbps will do nothing. ;)

[TheDave]

ive tried it. it works on old games with atrocious loading times but ok gameplay(talkinng of rollercoaster tycoon and stronghold and various isometric games ;) ).


i think it writes what it needs on to the gaming pc's temp and RAM. and i'm pretty sure it does nothing other than load textures and sound and so on. so unless its an oldish game and you have no space on your hard-drive its pointless. on another note i think theres apps like truespace and vegas studio that have been designed to remotely use another pc's resources

[Wolfmight]

Windows XP says I have a 400Mbps connection on the network.

that's around 40MB (Mega Bytes) Per Second.

BTW, in the first post.. i ment 10MB (Mega Bytes) Per Second, not 10Mbps (Mega Bits Per Second).. that's slow as sh*t if I had that speed.


For instance.. I have an internet connection that's 1500-3000Mbps, it downloads from 300-500kb/s. and yes, I've gotten a 480-500kb/s download a few times.. pretty sweet

[TheDave]

3000 kbps is actually 375 kBps


what i wanna know is what if you had two pcs, each with 5 1000mbps ethernet cards and linked them together with crossover cables

[tesco]

Originally posted by TheDave@10 August 2004 - 22:36
3000 kbps is actually 375 kBps


what i wanna know is what if you had two pcs, each with 5 1000mbps ethernet cards and linked them together with crossover cables
hmm, well i think pci express allows only 133mb/s through the pci bus...no? and that is with all pci cards combined, no?
so basically only one would be useful, rest are bottlenecked. not to mention all the driveers uyou would need to be running to ahve all those cards+combine them.

[TheDave]

i find it hard to believe pci express, pci even can only transfer at 133megabits per second. think. all that data travveling round your motherboard is raw and has to find its way from harddrive to motherboard to ram to cpu to graphics card in milliseconds


i'm not an expert though :unsure:

:rolleyes: i think i may have been imagining K not M :helpsmile:

[Wolfmight]

Originally posted by TheDave@10 August 2004 - 21:36
3000 kbps is actually 375 kBps


what i wanna know is what if you had two pcs, each with 5 1000mbps ethernet cards and linked them together with crossover cables
how come I get atleast 400kb/s alot?
heh, isp must be giving more than described.. sweet

and I beilieve pcs dont act too well with more than one NIC card.
I have tried with both 2 NICs and a different computer with an Onboard NIC-n-PCI Nic Card. Both Systems booted up into windows, but eventually just froze without any recovery. When I took the extra NICs out, they didnt freeze.. never that bad! heh, hardware problems cause drastic things to happen like that mostly.

[apunkrockmonk]

Originally posted by Wolfmight+12 August 2004 - 00:20--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Wolfmight @ 12 August 2004 - 00:20)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-TheDave@10 August 2004 - 21:36
3000 kbps is actually 375 kBps


what i wanna know is what if you had two pcs, each with 5 1000mbps ethernet cards and linked them together with crossover cables
how come I get atleast 400kb/s alot?
heh, isp must be giving more than described.. sweet

and I beilieve pcs dont act too well with more than one NIC card.
I have tried with both 2 NICs and a different computer with an Onboard NIC-n-PCI Nic Card. Both Systems booted up into windows, but eventually just froze without any recovery. When I took the extra NICs out, they didnt freeze.. never that bad&#33; heh, hardware problems cause drastic things to happen like that mostly. [/b][/quote]
Pcs can work fine with two network cards (I set my friend&#39;s computer up like that, maybe you had a driver problem?) But yes, 400Mbps.... thats firewire (1394) not ethernet.

[Wolfmight]

ah, my onboard said firewire.. that&#39;s cool