Which DNS server is best for gaming?

Which DNS server is best for gaming?

This is a discussion on ?

Within the Windows Programming forums, part of the Platform Specific Boards category; So I'm setting up a PC for gaming purposes, and I'm going to be using Wine and PlayOnLinux. I've tried with .

So I'm setting up a PC for gaming purposes, and I'm going to be using Wine and PlayOnLinux. I've tried with both Google's Public DNS and OpenDNS. I can access OpenDNS via the in-game browser. Google's works fine except there is a small delay everytime I try to load an .exe game.

For some reason when I load up any .exe game, I always get a message saying that "Server not found". If I open up Google's DNS it works fine. However if I try to go to any of their games, it won't work. If I try to use their dns, it works fine, but if I load up any .exe game, it goes out.

So what DNS server should I use? What server should I use? My experience: Google's DNS is slow. It takes almost a second to resolve, compared to OpenDNS that is very fast (almost instant) - Google's DNS doesn't work with the latest games, so it is limited to older games. OpenDNS is much faster and I think it can handle all of the latest games, but I haven't tried it with the latest games. It takes almost a second to resolve, compared to OpenDNS that is very fast (almost instant)

Is 1.1 1.1 good for gaming?

(and what about 2.)

The recent release of the DX10 (1.1) version of DirectX has many gamers excited, while it is important to note that many developers are not pleased with this latest iteration of Microsoft's graphics API. In fact, the DirectX team has stated that Windows XP users may experience performance problems when using DX10.

Will these problems be resolved with the next generation version of DirectX? If I had to guess I'd say "no." DirectX 10 is not much of a leap from DirectX 9. The big difference is that its developer interface is simpler and there are some new features, but most of the functionality is still hidden behind an arcane, convoluted interface full of unnecessary programming details. While DX10 offers some improvements to the interface, if all we get are these trivial changes then DX10 is a major disappointment.

I'm excited by the change to hardware-accelerated texture handling in DX10, for example, but in order for all our lovely hardware-backed 3D goodness to come to fruition, we really need good DX10 code. For instance, I'd like to see the use of more modern tessellation shaders and directX-based volume light systems, which are missing from DX10 right now. Without DX10 there will always be a trade-off - either powerful graphics or great gaming performance.

To this end, we have our work cut out for us. We need to be sure that Direct3D 10 games (both commercial and indie) are of great quality on the PS3, Xbox360 and PC platforms. However, since it is so early in the 3.0 release cycle, we are in a sort of no-man's land. There is no good DX10 game to show off just yet. On the Xbox360 and PlayStation3, we can use our old game code on the latest game software - just as a proof of concept. Since the PS3/Xbox 360 also have the benefit of having an older hardware driver stack (the current versions don't even support 8xx cards), it is much more simple to show off a working DX10 application using our older legacy code. On the PC, the latest DX9 and DX10 drivers may not play nice together, but the situation is much easier. There's no legacy code to worry about, so we can focus entirely on the new APIs.

Is 1.1 1.1 still the fastest DNS?

As you know I'm doing benchmarking on the new DNS system that I'm adding to a new release.

The latest result shows, as I expected, IPv6 is still the best. But also it's not. That surprises me since 1.1 was really fast and stable for me in the past. So can anyone explain what has happened in the past?

From what I can tell, at least some of the changes mentioned in my comments were probably rolled back. As a result, it should be fairly close to how it was in 1.1 for 1.2 - ie, much faster than IPv6.

I don't know what the exact reasons for the change are. In particular, one of the changes made was removing the ability for an IP address and a name to point to the same IP address - and IPv6 requires that to be able to work well (by being able to use NAT).

For an example of working with 1.1, see this question on a couple of ways you can use it.

But as the comment said, all of this is just guessing on my part.

Related Answers

Should we use a VPN for gaming?

When it comes to gaming, there are a few things that you want to be sure of. Fi...

Is there a 100% free VPN?

If you are like me and play a lot of games, you know that there are so...

Is a VPN good for gaming?

If you're looking for a solid VPN to use while gaming, here's a complete gui...