this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2025
26 points (93.3% liked)
Selfhosted
59939 readers
295 users here now
A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.
Rules:
-
Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.
-
No spam.
-
Posts here are to be centered around self-hosting. Please ensure it is clear in your post how it relates to self-hosting.
-
Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or git here. Just post the link for folks to click.
-
Submission headline should match the article title.
-
No trolling.
Resources:
- selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
- awesome-selfhosted software
- awesome-sysadmin resources
- Self-Hosted Podcast from Jupiter Broadcasting
Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.
Questions? DM the mods!
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't think there are benchmarks specifically for hosting minecraft, but I guess general purpose benchmarks can give you a pretty good estimate. You could spin up a server on your homelab and just stress-test it a bit to see if it is noticeably worse than the other instance. You'll have to weigh the saved costs against the (likely) worse performance. on a side note: there are great options to make minecraft playable on servers with less CPU power, like using i.e. a paper server, performance mods, or lowering the renderdistance and 'faking' more renderdistance with client-side mods like bobby or distant horizons.
Minecraft loves single core performance, so it will likely behave differently to most general benchmarks.
But that also makes dedicating a few cores to it and everything else to other services.