Context From Post
So I have an issue with packet choke. Every time I get packets ~1300 bytes or higher, they choke up. I tried setting the MTU size to 1464, but I could not change it on my router. I think it's something else instead, and if it is the MTU size, then well fuck. Also my cmdrate usually dips below 66, while my updaterate stays near 66, and I'm uncertain if that is normal behavior.
Keep in mind that I use mastercomfig and already tried running default tf2 and changing my modules.cfg a bit. I hope to soldier that this is not a hardware issue…
(12/27/2020) I moved the post here, since this is technically the wrong forum to post this in.
[url=https://old.reddit.com/r/tf2techsupport/comments/kj86lu/re_packet_choke/?depth=4]Context From Post[/url]
So I have an issue with packet choke. Every time I get packets ~1300 bytes or higher, they choke up. I tried setting the MTU size to 1464, but I could not change it on my router. I think it's something else instead, and if it is the MTU size, then well fuck. Also my cmdrate usually dips below 66, while my updaterate stays near 66, and I'm uncertain if that is normal behavior.
Keep in mind that I use mastercomfig and already tried running default tf2 and changing [url=https://github.com/WhyIsEvery4thYearAlwaysBad/420weedsmoker69/blob/mastercoms/cfg/config/home.cfg]my modules.cfg[/url] a bit. I hope to soldier that this is not a hardware issue…
(12/27/2020) I moved the post [url=https://www.teamfortress.tv/58143/packet-choke-issues]here[/url], since this is technically the wrong forum to post this in.
thought the title was Parent Choke issues. at first hahaha
sadly don't have a solution for your issue tho
thought the title was Parent Choke issues. at first hahaha
sadly don't have a solution for your issue tho
I doubt changing the MTU would fix that, default is 1500 for pretty much everything, unlikely that your router would have it set lower. Also TF2 should start splitting packets at 1260 Bytes (net_maxfragments and net_maxroutable) so that and a combination of other settings is probably what you're choking on.
You just need to figure out which mastercomfig setting is biting you in the ass.
Try net_splitrate 2, net_splitpacket_maxrate 200000 and for the hell of it net_compresspackets_minsize 1024 one after the other (revert the others back to what you used before, should be 1, 50000 and 1260 according to your presets) and see which one helps.
I doubt changing the MTU would fix that, default is 1500 for pretty much everything, unlikely that your router would have it set lower. Also TF2 should start splitting packets at 1260 Bytes (net_maxfragments and net_maxroutable) so that and a combination of other settings is probably what you're choking on.
You just need to figure out which mastercomfig setting is biting you in the ass.
Try net_splitrate 2, net_splitpacket_maxrate 200000 and for the hell of it net_compresspackets_minsize 1024 [b]one after the other[/b] (revert the others back to what you used before, should be 1, 50000 and 1260 according to your presets) and see which one helps.
SetsulI doubt changing the MTU would fix that, default is 1500 for pretty much everything, unlikely that your router would have it set lower. Also TF2 should start splitting packets at 1260 Bytes (net_maxfragments and net_maxroutable) so that and a combination of other settings is probably what you're choking on.
You just need to figure out which mastercomfig setting is biting you in the ass.
Try net_splitrate 2, net_splitpacket_maxrate 200000 and for the hell of it net_compresspackets_minsize 1024 one after the other (revert the others back to what you used before, should be 1, 50000 and 1260 according to your presets) and see which one helps.
I set the settings to yours. No change.
Sidenote: TF2 seems to have a hardcoded MTU size of 1200 bytes. I'm unsure if it changes anything, but something to note just in case.
P.S Choke still occurred in the exact same pattern when running default TF2.
[quote=Setsul]I doubt changing the MTU would fix that, default is 1500 for pretty much everything, unlikely that your router would have it set lower. Also TF2 should start splitting packets at 1260 Bytes (net_maxfragments and net_maxroutable) so that and a combination of other settings is probably what you're choking on.
You just need to figure out which mastercomfig setting is biting you in the ass.
Try net_splitrate 2, net_splitpacket_maxrate 200000 and for the hell of it net_compresspackets_minsize 1024 [b]one after the other[/b] (revert the others back to what you used before, should be 1, 50000 and 1260 according to your presets) and see which one helps.[/quote]
I set the settings to yours. No change.
Sidenote: TF2 seems to have a hardcoded MTU size of 1200 bytes. I'm unsure if it changes anything, but something to note just in case.
P.S Choke still occurred in the exact same pattern when running default TF2.
And all at the same time?
The default is 1260, not 1200 (it's literally in the quote) and it is not hardcoded. The minimum is 576 Bytes, as is required by IPv4.
It is also utterly irrelevant for your problem. Packets are choked back either when exceeding packet rate or the bandwidth. Neither the size nor the number of packets changes, regardless of how many fragments one packet is split into it is still one packet and won't get larger.
Is this on one specific server or on any server?
How are "in" and "out" looking in the netgraph?
And all at the same time?
The default is 1260, not 1200 (it's literally in the quote) and it is not hardcoded. The minimum is 576 Bytes, as is required by IPv4.
It is also utterly irrelevant for your problem. Packets are choked back either when exceeding packet rate or the bandwidth. Neither the size nor the number of packets changes, regardless of how many fragments one packet is split into it is still one packet and won't get larger.
Is this on one specific server or on any server?
How are "in" and "out" looking in the netgraph?
SetsulAnd all at the same time?
The default is 1260, not 1200 (it's literally in the quote) and it is not hardcoded. The minimum is 576 Bytes, as is required by IPv4.
It is also utterly irrelevant for your problem. Packets are choked back either when exceeding packet rate or the bandwidth. Neither the size nor the number of packets changes, regardless of how many fragments one packet is split into it is still one packet and won't get larger.
Ah ok.
SetsulIs this on one specific server or on any server?
Any server.
SetsulHow are "in" and "out" looking in the netgraph?
"out" stays ~100 bytes, while "in" stays ~200-700 bytes and spikes to ~1200-3000 bytes.
[quote=Setsul]And all at the same time?
The default is 1260, not 1200 (it's literally in the quote) and it is not hardcoded. The minimum is 576 Bytes, as is required by IPv4.
It is also utterly irrelevant for your problem. Packets are choked back either when exceeding packet rate or the bandwidth. Neither the size nor the number of packets changes, regardless of how many fragments one packet is split into it is still one packet and won't get larger.[/quote]
Ah ok.
[quote=Setsul]Is this on one specific server or on any server?[/quote]
Any server.
[quote=Setsul]How are "in" and "out" looking in the netgraph?[/quote]
"out" stays ~100 bytes, while "in" stays ~200-700 bytes and spikes to ~1200-3000 bytes.
What about the next column (k/s), that's still part of it.
And the choke happens exactly when it goes above 1260? Yeah, could be the splitting, could be a coincidence.
What about the next column (k/s), that's still part of it.
And the choke happens exactly when it goes above 1260? Yeah, could be the splitting, could be a coincidence.
SetsulWhat about the next column (k/s), that's still part of it.
And the choke happens exactly when it goes above 1260? Yeah, could be the splitting, could be a coincidence.
Yes.
"in" is between 10k/s and 40k/s with the calculated average being 25k/s. "out" is between 5k/s and 30k/s with 17.5k/s being the calculated average.
[quote=Setsul]What about the next column (k/s), that's still part of it.
And the choke happens exactly when it goes above 1260? Yeah, could be the splitting, could be a coincidence.[/quote]
Yes.
"in" is between 10k/s and 40k/s with the calculated average being 25k/s. "out" is between 5k/s and 30k/s with 17.5k/s being the calculated average.
Yeah, definitely weird. There doesn't seem to be any reason for it to choke.
I forgot to ask but how high does the choke go?
Also a screenshot of the netgraph when it's choking might help.
If the choke is low I've got a theory that something really dumb might be happening, otherwise it's something complicated, either way the screenshot might help.
Yeah, definitely weird. There doesn't seem to be any reason for it to choke.
I forgot to ask but how high does the choke go?
Also a screenshot of the netgraph when it's choking might help.
If the choke is low I've got a theory that something really dumb might be happening, otherwise it's something complicated, either way the screenshot might help.
My choke goes as high as 25. Images of net_graph.
My choke goes as high as 25. [url=https://postimg.cc/gallery/XJYZQS1]Images of net_graph.[/url]
Yeah, I don't think you're getting choke because the packets jump to twice the normal size, you're getting packets twice the normal size because half of them are choked back so you get twice the data in the next packet.
Also solved the mystery of why your cmdrate drops: Your fps are dropping below 66. Makes no sense to send multiple packets per frame.
Do you get fps drops when the choke occurs?
Honestly I don't know how to solve your choke problem (not sure if it is solvable) but things are always going to be weird if your fps drop below your rates. Unless you've got a way to get more fps I'd say dropping your rates is actually a good idea for once. Maybe 40 or 33.
Yeah, I don't think you're getting choke because the packets jump to twice the normal size, you're getting packets twice the normal size because half of them are choked back so you get twice the data in the next packet.
Also solved the mystery of why your cmdrate drops: Your fps are dropping below 66. Makes no sense to send multiple packets per frame.
Do you get fps drops when the choke occurs?
Honestly I don't know how to solve your choke problem (not sure if it is solvable) but things are always going to be weird if your fps drop below your rates. Unless you've got a way to get more fps I'd say dropping your rates is actually a good idea for once. Maybe 40 or 33.
SetsulYeah, I don't think you're getting choke because the packets jump to twice the normal size, you're getting packets twice the normal size because half of them are choked back so you get twice the data in the next packet.
Also solved the mystery of why your cmdrate drops: Your fps are dropping below 66. Makes no sense to send multiple packets per frame.
I don't know how to solve it either.
SetsulDo you get fps drops when the choke occurs?
Honestly I don't know how to solve your choke problem (not sure if it is solvable) but things are always going to be weird if your fps drop below your rates. Unless you've got a way to get more fps I'd say dropping your rates is actually a good idea for once. Maybe 40 or 33.
No FPS drops it seems. I only lose about ~10fps but that's probably coming from the net_graph's display.
Also when I set my updaterate and cmdrate to 33, now my game doesn't choke up often on packet sizes 1260-~1900. It only chokes up at packet sizes ~3000-~6000 bytes.
EDIT: When I'm near no one I usually get ~100fps.
[quote=Setsul]Yeah, I don't think you're getting choke because the packets jump to twice the normal size, you're getting packets twice the normal size because half of them are choked back so you get twice the data in the next packet.
Also solved the mystery of why your cmdrate drops: Your fps are dropping below 66. Makes no sense to send multiple packets per frame.[/quote]
I don't know how to solve it either.
[quote=Setsul]Do you get fps drops when the choke occurs?
Honestly I don't know how to solve your choke problem (not sure if it is solvable) but things are always going to be weird if your fps drop below your rates. Unless you've got a way to get more fps I'd say dropping your rates is actually a good idea for once. Maybe 40 or 33.[/quote]
No FPS drops it seems. I only lose about ~10fps but that's probably coming from the net_graph's display.
Also when I set my updaterate and cmdrate to 33, now my game doesn't choke up often on packet sizes 1260-~1900. It only chokes up at packet sizes ~3000-~6000 bytes.
EDIT: When I'm near no one I usually get ~100fps.
Yeah, fewer packets mean they're larger. Sort of confirms that the packet size isn't the problem, you're simply getting larger packets after a choke to transmit the missing data.
Well do you get choke when you're near no one and get 100 fps?
Yeah, fewer packets mean they're larger. Sort of confirms that the packet size isn't the problem, you're simply getting larger packets after a choke to transmit the missing data.
Well do you get choke when you're near no one and get 100 fps?
SetsulYeah, fewer packets mean they're larger. Sort of confirms that the packet size isn't the problem, you're simply getting larger packets after a choke to transmit the missing data.
Well do you get choke when you're near no one and get 100 fps?
updaterate 66: I still get packet choke sometimes even when I'm near no one, and my fps does drop, but not long enough to be measured. Also fps does seem to drop by ~20fps each time the choke occurs, but that could be from the net_graph itself.
updaterate 33: No packet choke or fps drops when no one is near me. fps still drops by ~20fps when it occurs though.
[quote=Setsul]Yeah, fewer packets mean they're larger. Sort of confirms that the packet size isn't the problem, you're simply getting larger packets after a choke to transmit the missing data.
Well do you get choke when you're near no one and get 100 fps?[/quote]
updaterate 66: I still get packet choke sometimes even when I'm near no one, and my fps does drop, but not long enough to be measured. Also fps does seem to drop by ~20fps each time the choke occurs, but that could be from the net_graph itself.
updaterate 33: No packet choke or fps drops when no one is near me. fps still drops by ~20fps when it occurs though.
I'm pretty sure the fps drops cause the choke, not the other way around and I don't think I can do anything about it.
Did you only change the updaterate or cmdrate as well? I doubt it's going to do anything but I'm out of ideas beyond "it's the fps drops".
I'm pretty sure the fps drops cause the choke, not the other way around and I don't think I can do anything about it.
Did you only change the updaterate or cmdrate as well? I doubt it's going to do anything but I'm out of ideas beyond "it's the fps drops".
SetsulI'm pretty sure the fps drops cause the choke, not the other way around and I don't think I can do anything about it.
Did you only change the updaterate or cmdrate as well? I doubt it's going to do anything but I'm out of ideas beyond "it's the fps drops".
I did change the updaterate and cmdrate to both 33. Looks like I'll need to increase my FPS even further. Any tips to do so? I already:
- Have the No Hats Mod. (I'll always have this regardless of if I need FPS, because TF2 cosmetics ruin the game.)
- Excluded steam/appcache/stats from my Anti-Virus (Windows Security). Any more constantly written to files that I need to exclude?
- Am using DX81.
- Defragged my SSD *multiple times*. (I know it's generally not necessary, but you never know with how much misinformation is online.)
My resolution is 1600x900. I can reduce it further up to 720p. After that it's diminishing returns and I hate resolutions lower than that. I haven't disabled the Steam Overlay, because I commonly check profiles through the scoreboard. (Set tf_scoreboard_mouse_mode to 1 or 2 if you want this feature.)
Also note that I forced the maximum processor usage to 88%, because I value longevity.
[quote=Setsul]I'm pretty sure the fps drops cause the choke, not the other way around and I don't think I can do anything about it.
Did you only change the updaterate or cmdrate as well? I doubt it's going to do anything but I'm out of ideas beyond "it's the fps drops".[/quote]
I did change the updaterate and cmdrate to both 33. Looks like I'll need to increase my FPS [i]even further[/i]. Any tips to do so? I already:
[list]
[*] Have the No Hats Mod. (I'll always have this regardless of if I need FPS, because TF2 cosmetics ruin the game.)
[*] Excluded steam/appcache/stats from my Anti-Virus (Windows Security). Any more constantly written to files that I need to exclude?
[*] Am using DX81.
[*] Defragged my SSD *multiple times*. (I know it's generally not necessary, but you never know with how much misinformation is online.)
[/list]
My resolution is 1600x900. I can reduce it further up to 720p. After that it's diminishing returns and I hate resolutions lower than that. I haven't disabled the Steam Overlay, because I commonly check profiles through the scoreboard. (Set tf_scoreboard_mouse_mode to 1 or 2 if you want this feature.)
Also note that I forced the maximum processor usage to 88%, because I value longevity.
AimIsADickAlso note that I forced the maximum processor usage to 88%, because I value longevity.
That should have no/negligible effect on longevity so if that's the only reason you have it set to 88% then you can go ahead and put it on 100%.
[quote=AimIsADick]Also note that I forced the maximum processor usage to 88%, because I value longevity.[/quote]
That should have no/negligible effect on longevity so if that's the only reason you have it set to 88% then you can go ahead and put it on 100%.
Defragging actually "damages" SSDs, but you do you. They can only sustain a limited number of write cycles and there are no mechnical parts so unlike with an HDD it really does not matter where the data is located. Not that defragging could do anything about that since they lie to the OS about where they put the data anyway. Wouldn't help with fps either, only loading times, but you do you.
Do you want the CPU to outlive you? I guess it's kind of old judging by the fps you're getting but anything not overclocked or otherwise abused should last for 20-30 years.
Defragging actually "damages" SSDs, but you do you. They can only sustain a limited number of write cycles and there are no mechnical parts so unlike with an HDD it really does not matter where the data is located. Not that defragging could do anything about that since they lie to the OS about where they put the data anyway. Wouldn't help with fps either, only loading times, but you do you.
Do you want the CPU to outlive you? I guess it's kind of old judging by the fps you're getting but anything not overclocked or otherwise abused should last for 20-30 years.
SetsulDefragging actually "damages" SSDs, but you do you. They can only sustain a limited number of write cycles and there are no mechnical parts so unlike with an HDD it really does not matter where the data is located. Not that defragging could do anything about that since they lie to the OS about where they put the data anyway. Wouldn't help with fps either, only loading times, but you do you.
Ah ok. I was unsure, but I'll stop defragging.
SetsulDo you want the CPU to outlive you? I guess it's kind of old judging by the fps you're getting but anything not overclocked or otherwise abused should last for 20-30 years.
It's one year old. (Yes, this is an intel laptop…) It's not overclocked.
[quote=Setsul]Defragging actually "damages" SSDs, but you do you. They can only sustain a limited number of write cycles and there are no mechnical parts so unlike with an HDD it really does not matter where the data is located. Not that defragging could do anything about that since they lie to the OS about where they put the data anyway. Wouldn't help with fps either, only loading times, but you do you.[/quote]
Ah ok. I was unsure, but I'll stop defragging.
[quote=Setsul]Do you want the CPU to outlive you? I guess it's kind of old judging by the fps you're getting but anything not overclocked or otherwise abused should last for 20-30 years.[/quote]
It's one year old. (Yes, this is an intel laptop…) It's not overclocked.
What cpu and gpu? Your fps seems extremely low for anything recent unless it's a celeron or something.
What cpu and gpu? Your fps seems extremely low for anything recent unless it's a celeron or something.
Oh, shitty laptop suffering. Either way, 100%, you need all the fps you can get. Unless it's overheating, but that would be kind of embarrassing for a laptop that new.
Oh, shitty laptop suffering. Either way, 100%, you need all the fps you can get. Unless it's overheating, but that would be kind of embarrassing for a laptop that new.
turbochad69What cpu and gpu? Your fps seems extremely low for anything recent unless it's a celeron or something.
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-10210U CPU
GPU: Integrated Graphics…
SetsulOh, shitty laptop suffering. Either way, 100%, you need all the fps you can get. Unless it's overheating, but that would be kind of embarrassing for a laptop that new.
Yeah it sucks.
[quote=turbochad69]What cpu and gpu? Your fps seems extremely low for anything recent unless it's a celeron or something.[/quote]
CPU: Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-10210U CPU
GPU: Integrated Graphics…
[quote=Setsul]Oh, shitty laptop suffering. Either way, 100%, you need all the fps you can get. Unless it's overheating, but that would be kind of embarrassing for a laptop that new.[/quote]
Yeah it sucks.
1.6 GHz baseclock sure is a treat huh. At least with only 15W it shouldn't overheat.
Could probably get more out of it if you manage to raise the TDP but laptop BIOS are usually fairly locked down.
Either way that goes beyond the scope of the choke problem.
1.6 GHz baseclock sure is a treat huh. At least with only 15W it shouldn't overheat.
Could probably get more out of it if you manage to raise the TDP but laptop BIOS are usually fairly locked down.
Either way that goes beyond the scope of the choke problem.
Setsul1.6 GHz baseclock sure is a treat huh. At least with only 15W it shouldn't overheat.
Could probably get more out of it if you manage to raise the TDP but laptop BIOS are usually fairly locked down.
Either way that goes beyond the scope of the choke problem.
Can't change the TDP from the BIOS. I would start working for a new PC…If teenage jobs didn't suck ass!
[quote=Setsul]1.6 GHz baseclock sure is a treat huh. At least with only 15W it shouldn't overheat.
Could probably get more out of it if you manage to raise the TDP but laptop BIOS are usually fairly locked down.
Either way that goes beyond the scope of the choke problem.[/quote]
Can't change the TDP from the BIOS. I would start working for a new PC…If teenage jobs didn't suck ass!
Doing things you don't like to get things you do like is an experience not necessarily limited to your teenage years.
Then again I found a job I did like to pay for my first pc, I very much recommend that option.
Anyway, that's the end of the line for me. Sorry I didn't do anything but spread despair about the inescapable suffering of TF2 on a laptop but that's just how it goes. I played TF2 on a laptop with a 1.4 GHz single core Celeron from 2004 so I can tell you it could be much worse.
Doing things you don't like to get things you do like is an experience not necessarily limited to your teenage years.
Then again I found a job I did like to pay for my first pc, I very much recommend that option.
Anyway, that's the end of the line for me. Sorry I didn't do anything but spread despair about the inescapable suffering of TF2 on a laptop but that's just how it goes. I played TF2 on a laptop with a 1.4 GHz single core Celeron from 2004 so I can tell you it could be [b]much[/b] worse.
SetsulDoing things you don't like to get things you do like is an experience not necessarily limited to your teenage years.
Then again I found a job I did like to pay for my first pc, I very much recommend that option.
Yeah. Even if I did find a job I liked, I'm still in highschool, so trying to focus on both would be hell. For now I'll focus on school (as in getting just enough to have a buffer from the bare minimum needed to pass to get into a high school job, not as in focus on getting all As because that is not happening ever), but after I graduate I'll immediately focus on getting a labored-based job.
SetsulAnyway, that's the end of the line for me. Sorry I didn't do anything but spread despair about the inescapable suffering of TF2 on a laptop but that's just how it goes. I played TF2 on a laptop with a 1.4 GHz single core Celeron from 2004 so I can tell you it could be much worse.
I dealt with this dilemma a while back, and it still keeps coming back, but in a much weaker state than the previous.
[quote=Setsul]Doing things you don't like to get things you do like is an experience not necessarily limited to your teenage years.
Then again I found a job I did like to pay for my first pc, I very much recommend that option.[/quote]
Yeah. Even if I did find a job I liked, I'm still in highschool, so trying to focus on both would be hell. For now I'll focus on school (as in getting just enough to have a buffer from the bare minimum needed to pass to get into a high school job, not as in focus on getting all As because that is not happening ever), but after I graduate I'll immediately focus on getting a labored-based job.
[quote=Setsul]Anyway, that's the end of the line for me. Sorry I didn't do anything but spread despair about the inescapable suffering of TF2 on a laptop but that's just how it goes. I played TF2 on a laptop with a 1.4 GHz single core Celeron from 2004 so I can tell you it could be [b]much[/b] worse.[/quote]
I dealt with this dilemma a while back, and it still keeps coming back, but in a much weaker state than the previous.
Ok so I tried pinging (windows command ping) while TF2 was running, and I got this:
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=72ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=16ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=170ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=118ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=273ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=170ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=38ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=65ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=296ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=326ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=322ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=138ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=323ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=106
…
omfg there's a word limit? Anyway at the lowest settings possible I consistently got ~120fps across the board with updaterate and cmdrate at 33, and the choke issue still occurred. I'm getting a strong feeling that it's either the NIC or my internet.
Ok so I tried pinging (windows command ping) while TF2 was running, and I got this:
[code]Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=72ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=16ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=170ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=118ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=273ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=170ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=47ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=38ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=46ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=65ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=296ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=326ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=322ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=138ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=323ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=27ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=106
Reply from 173.194.219.103: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=106
…
[/code]
omfg there's a word limit? Anyway at the lowest settings possible I consistently got ~120fps across the board with updaterate and cmdrate at 33, and the choke issue [i]still[/i] occurred. I'm getting a strong feeling that it's either the NIC or my internet.
I suspect that your ping jumping from 18ms to over 300 is neither ideal nor TF2's fault.
I suspect that your ping jumping from 18ms to over 300 is neither ideal nor TF2's fault.