github-repos/kcp
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/skywind3000/kcp.git synced 2024-12-28 08:00:07 +08:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Updated EN_KCP Benchmark (markdown)

winlin 2017-02-17 10:36:14 +08:00
parent 3da380e793
commit 01c09c2914
1 changed files with 5 additions and 5 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

10
EN_KCP-Benchmark.md

@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
# Benchmark # Benchmark
如果网络从来不丢包，那么你直接用 TCP就行了，甚至直接裸UDP都没关系，但是网络因为丢包造成卡顿，特别是高峰时期丢包会上到10%的情况，移动设备上这个情况更糟糕。 TCP is good enough when network is not heavy. But the experience is worse when packet is dropped for heavy network, for instance 10% packets dropped.
我自己评测过很多，[asio_kcp](https://github.com/libinzhangyuan/asio_kcp) 的作者做过比较详细的评测，在网络变糟糕的情况下，KCP的延迟比 libenet低三倍以上： I've done some benchmark. There is a detail benchmark [asio_kcp](https://github.com/libinzhangyuan/asio_kcp) for heavy network, which indicates the latency of KCP is 1/3 of `libenet`:
```cpp ```cpp
worst network lag happen: worst network lag happen:
@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ enet: 10:51.21
1563 1520 1470 1482 1438 1454 1412 1637 1588 1540 1563 1520 1470 1482 1438 1454 1412 1637 1588 1540
``` ```
更详细的评测可以看这里：[benchmark](https://github.com/libinzhangyuan/reliable_udp_bench_mark/blob/master/bench_mark.md)，感谢 asio_kcp 的作者 zhangyuan 详细对比了 UDT, libenet和 kcp，并给出结论如下： The detail data is here [benchmark](https://github.com/libinzhangyuan/reliable_udp_bench_mark/blob/master/bench_mark.md). Thanks the owner of `asio_kcp` `zhangyuan` to compare UDT, libenet and KCP:
* ASIO-KCP has good performace in wifi and phone network(3G, 4G). * ASIO-KCP has good performace in wifi and phone network(3G, 4G).
* The kcp is the first choice for realtime pvp game. * The kcp is the first choice for realtime pvp game.
@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ enet: 10:51.21
* The enet is a good choice if your game allow 2 second lag. * The enet is a good choice if your game allow 2 second lag.
* UDT is a bad idea. It always sink into badly situation of more than serval seconds lag. And the recovery is not expected. * UDT is a bad idea. It always sink into badly situation of more than serval seconds lag. And the recovery is not expected.
其他可以左右你选择的情况： And more:
* enet has the problem of lack of doc. And it has lots of functions that you may intrest. * enet has the problem of lack of doc. And it has lots of functions that you may intrest.
* kcp's doc is chinese. * kcp's doc is chinese.
@ -29,5 +29,5 @@ enet: 10:51.21
* The kcp is a simple thing. You will write more code if you want more feature. * The kcp is a simple thing. You will write more code if you want more feature.
* UDT has a perfect doc. UDT may has more bug than others as I feeling. * UDT has a perfect doc. UDT may has more bug than others as I feeling.
我当年主要测试了 KCP和 TCP/UDT的比较，扫了一眼 libenet觉得协议实现中规中矩，缺乏很多现代传输协议的技术，所以并没有详细测试。而 asio-kcp的作者同时给出了KCP/enet/udt三者的详细比较，为犹豫选择的人提供了更多指引。 I just compare the KCP with TCP/UDT, for I think `libenet` does not introduce modern transport techniques. The benchmark from owner of `asio-kcp` shows the difference of KCP/enet/UDT.