Game File Transfer over Local Network?

[Lord Flashheart]

Who is using it?
I understand it is used to help with internet bandwidth issues & to speed up game downloads if it is already on a PC in the local network.
It is accessed through Steam->Settings->Downloads
How much does it improve download speeds?

I am presently using this: https://lancache.net
It is running as a container on my server. It helps a lot The problem is it caches the compressed game download data, but not the uncompressed game data.

Does anyone know which specific network port(s) that steam needs to be open, on each gaming machine?

Useful info appreciated.

Thanks

[Viking2121]

M. Rockatansky님이 먼저 게시:

xSOSxHawkens님이 먼저 게시:

Re the local network transfer built into the client, yes it works, yes its more or less seamless, if you have multiple PC's in the same home with the same game one will get it the rest will copy from it. EZ-PZ.

Yep. The only downside is that another PC with steam installed & the games must be on when updating.
That is why I suggested an always on low power machine, with windows, steam & appropriate games. It is not to play them, but to just be a cache & backup.

I got a server I already run Jellyfin on Im going to setup steam and my collection on, less janky than them other solutions for this kind of thing.

[Lord Flashheart]

Viking2121님이 먼저 게시:

M. Rockatansky님이 먼저 게시:

Yep. The only downside is that another PC with steam installed & the games must be on when updating.
That is why I suggested an always on low power machine, with windows, steam & appropriate games. It is not to play them, but to just be a cache & backup.

I got a server I already run Jellyfin on Im going to setup steam and my collection on, less janky than them other solutions for this kind of thing.

Sounds like a good plan.
For games on a NAS, using ISCSI is instead of windows share is a far better idea.
When setting up,I suggest looking into this also - https://www.romexsoftware.com/en-us/primo-cache/

My games are presently on my server, hosted with a truenas scale virtual machine.
There are multiple copies my games library, with multiple ISCSI shares. It makes good use of deduplication, which is tricky to set up right though.
A low spec windows virtual machine automates the updates, which is connected to one of the ISCSI shares.

Some people it seems move games over to faster storage if the play it a lot. I have a 1/2TB nvme as cache on the games machine. The primocache software automates that.
Also my game updates are usually available on the local LAN, so fast & automated also.

Oh and are using jellyfin also., along with various containers, windows and linux virtual machines.

[Viking2121]

M. Rockatansky님이 먼저 게시:

Viking2121님이 먼저 게시:

I got a server I already run Jellyfin on Im going to setup steam and my collection on, less janky than them other solutions for this kind of thing.

Sounds like a good plan.
For games on a NAS, using ISCSI is instead of windows share is a far better idea.
When setting up,I suggest looking into this also - https://www.romexsoftware.com/en-us/primo-cache/

My games are presently on my server, hosted with a truenas scale virtual machine.
There are multiple copies my games library, with multiple ISCSI shares. It makes good use of deduplication, which is tricky to set up right though.
A low spec windows virtual machine automates the updates, which is connected to one of the ISCSI shares.

Some people it seems move games over to faster storage if the play it a lot. I have a 1/2TB nvme as cache on the games machine. The primocache software automates that.
Also my game updates are usually available on the local LAN, so fast & automated also.

Oh and are using jellyfin also., along with various containers, windows and linux virtual machines.

Got TrueNAS Core installed on an old dual xeon server, I refuse to move to scale right now, I tried it and ended up breaking a bunch of things so I moved back so if and when I decide I redo it I will then move to scale, I plan to upgrade my server anywan, these old e5-2470's are showing its age, and it has issues with x16 length cards, I have to tape up the Vega 64 to make it x8 for the system to even boot with it, thats any x16 electrical card lol

I got Jellyfin on a Windows VM only because I know Windows and its file system more compared to Linux, and a Vega 64 for transcoding if needed with PCI-E Passthrough, just less frustrating for me even if its not ideal, I may install Steam on it, I already got a games backup drive in the same box with most of my steam games backed up to it among other games from other launchers.

[Lord Flashheart]

Viking2121님이 먼저 게시:

M. Rockatansky님이 먼저 게시:

Sounds like a good plan.
For games on a NAS, using ISCSI is instead of windows share is a far better idea.
When setting up,I suggest looking into this also - https://www.romexsoftware.com/en-us/primo-cache/

My games are presently on my server, hosted with a truenas scale virtual machine.
There are multiple copies my games library, with multiple ISCSI shares. It makes good use of deduplication, which is tricky to set up right though.
A low spec windows virtual machine automates the updates, which is connected to one of the ISCSI shares.

Some people it seems move games over to faster storage if the play it a lot. I have a 1/2TB nvme as cache on the games machine. The primocache software automates that.
Also my game updates are usually available on the local LAN, so fast & automated also.

Oh and are using jellyfin also., along with various containers, windows and linux virtual machines.

Got TrueNAS Core installed on an old dual xeon server, I refuse to move to scale right now, I tried it and ended up breaking a bunch of things so I moved back so if and when I decide I redo it I will then move to scale, I plan to upgrade my server anywan, these old e5-2470's are showing its age, and it has issues with x16 length cards, I have to tape up the Vega 64 to make it x8 for the system to even boot with it, thats any x16 electrical card lol

I got Jellyfin on a Windows VM only because I know Windows and its file system more compared to Linux, and a Vega 64 for transcoding if needed with PCI-E Passthrough, just less frustrating for me even if its not ideal, I may install Steam on it, I already got a games backup drive in the same box with most of my steam games backed up to it among other games from other launchers.

Oh well. Enjoy.
I looked into oldish server stuff, but was not really impressed, specifically the CPU power.
I just use less oldish hardware I once used for games.
It was simply easier and less expensive to get 64GB DDR4 to put with the equipment I had.
the only 'downside' is no ECC memory, but all my data has multiple backups, related to entertainment. I am not really concerned about the ECC situation.



The 3600X cpu in the server can handle transcoding very well. Way way down the track if it becomes and issue, maybe a second hard 5950X to replace it.
I have jellyfin on a linux virtual machine.

[Viking2121]

M. Rockatansky님이 먼저 게시:

Viking2121님이 먼저 게시:

Got TrueNAS Core installed on an old dual xeon server, I refuse to move to scale right now, I tried it and ended up breaking a bunch of things so I moved back so if and when I decide I redo it I will then move to scale, I plan to upgrade my server anywan, these old e5-2470's are showing its age, and it has issues with x16 length cards, I have to tape up the Vega 64 to make it x8 for the system to even boot with it, thats any x16 electrical card lol

I got Jellyfin on a Windows VM only because I know Windows and its file system more compared to Linux, and a Vega 64 for transcoding if needed with PCI-E Passthrough, just less frustrating for me even if its not ideal, I may install Steam on it, I already got a games backup drive in the same box with most of my steam games backed up to it among other games from other launchers.

Oh well. Enjoy.
I looked into oldish server stuff, but was not really impressed, specifically the CPU power.
I just use less oldish hardware I once used for games.
It was simply easier and less expensive to get 64GB DDR4 to put with the equipment I had.
the only 'downside' is no ECC memory, but all my data has multiple backups, related to entertainment. I am not really concerned about the ECC situation.



The 3600X cpu in the server can handle transcoding very well. Way way down the track if it becomes and issue, maybe a second hard 5950X to replace it.
I have jellyfin on a linux virtual machine.

I got this old thing from work, modded a Win XP era case to mount the board, and its been alright, got 32 threads to throw at things, but the CPU's are not much faster than AMD's old FX stuff, so as long as you don't need fast single core speed, its alright, 256GB of ECC ram though lol.

I got a B550 board, I need RAM and a CPU for it, thats what I plan to move to, but just haven't really put in the effort to move to it yet. just haven't found that deal yet for a r5 3600 or well I want a 5600g or 5700g personally for the onboard graphics but they are still a little more than what I'm willing to pay, DDR4 ram is stupid cheap though.

Future project, maybe I'll learn more about Linux and what it has to offer with my old stuff.

[Viking2121]

So playing around with this, it works well, though it hammers 1 cpu core, so my 32 threads at 3ghz turbo I really get like 600 - 700mbps over the network with a 2.5gbit Nic, Its vary single threaded. With a faster CPU Im sure this wont be an issue.

[xSOSxHawkens]

Viking2121님이 먼저 게시:

So playing around with this, it works well, though it hammers 1 cpu core, so my 32 threads at 3ghz turbo I really get like 600 - 700mbps over the network with a 2.5gbit Nic, Its vary single threaded. With a faster CPU Im sure this wont be an issue.

Yeh, thats steam for you, so much of the client and its services are still single threaded : /

[Lord Flashheart]

Viking2121님이 먼저 게시:

So playing around with this, it works well, though it hammers 1 cpu core, so my 32 threads at 3ghz turbo I really get like 600 - 700mbps over the network with a 2.5gbit Nic, Its vary single threaded. With a faster CPU Im sure this wont be an issue.

There is little incentive for steam to do anything about it.
It seems most gamers have slow internet, and so the CPU would not even have an issue.

[_I_]

do you have 2.5/10gb hub/router and client nic?
else it would be limited to 1gigabit
may also be limited by write speed on the client

try a regular file copy, that also takes a single core read/transfer the files

[Viking2121]

_I_님이 먼저 게시:

do you have 2.5/10gb hub/router and client nic?
else it would be limited to 1gigabit
may also be limited by write speed on the client

try a regular file copy, that also takes a single core read/transfer the files

Yes, im not stupid, read brother

[Timmos]

I just bought a new PC with 2TB SSD, finally I'm able to hold all my games on one drive. So I transfered like 25 games from 2 other PC's using this feature. What can I say. It is... so awesome... Done with the hassle of making slow backups, which sometimes just didn't work in the end upon restoring them, therefore still downloading the entire game, ...

This is such a good, useful, well implemented feature, I just can't believe this was only added to Steam in 2023. I noticed transfer speeds up to 600+ Mbps. Peak was 684.1 Mbps. (entire home has gigabit LAN).

I put my games in the download queue (for each game I needed to switch 'Stream' option to 'This computer' so the button would show 'Play'. Every single game was downloaded over LAN, only the updates required to them were then downloaded over internet (games were downloaded from a 2013 PC that didn't have the up to date games).

I think it's awesome.

I noticed one thing and that is that you need to set the option in Steam Settings to 'Steam Friends' otherwise it won't work. Or it has something to do with touching the option on every device involved in order to make it work. Other than that, it works flawlessly.

[alamoscouts]

Timmos님이 먼저 게시:

I just bought a new PC with 2TB SSD, finally I'm able to hold all my games on one drive. So I transfered like 25 games from 2 other PC's using this feature. What can I say. It is... so awesome... Done with the hassle of making slow backups, which sometimes just didn't work in the end upon restoring them, therefore still downloading the entire game, ...

This is such a good, useful, well implemented feature, I just can't believe this was only added to Steam in 2023. I noticed transfer speeds up to 600+ Mbps. Peak was 684.1 Mbps. (entire home has gigabit LAN).

I put my games in the download queue (for each game I needed to switch 'Stream' option to 'This computer' so the button would show 'Play'. Every single game was downloaded over LAN, only the updates required to them were then downloaded over internet (games were downloaded from a 2013 PC that didn't have the up to date games).

I think it's awesome.

I noticed one thing and that is that you need to set the option in Steam Settings to 'Steam Friends' otherwise it won't work. Or it has something to do with touching the option on every device involved in order to make it work. Other than that, it works flawlessly.

It is actually vastly inferior to something like nitroshare; and in some cases can cause lockups on PCs due to how badly the valve version is implemented in terms of networking. When working with multiple PCs; i.e. 6+ you start getting a much clearer picture how poor the quality control is on this halfass valve version; error code 70 is a signature of this valve file transfer method. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/67634538/the-tls-protocol-defined-fatal-alert-code-is-70 .
Never happens with nitroshare.

[Shisno]

Only getting like 12MB yet on download getting 50 mb. No other device using the bandwith...

[_I_]

just share steams install or library folder, and copy the games to the client
run steam on client, install game, it will find existing files and verify them

its probably limited by something other than network
cpu/drive on host or client, since it copying and verifying at the same time

[PopinFRESH]

alamoscouts님이 먼저 게시:

...
It is actually vastly inferior to something like nitroshare; and in some cases can cause lockups on PCs due to how badly the valve version is implemented in terms of networking. When working with multiple PCs; i.e. 6+ you start getting a much clearer picture how poor the quality control is on this halfass valve version; error code 70 is a signature of this valve file transfer method. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/67634538/the-tls-protocol-defined-fatal-alert-code-is-70 .
Never happens with nitroshare.

So Valve still using TLS to secure the transfer vs you using Nitroshare without TLS.. and "never happens with Nitroshare" seems better to you? If you enable the "Optional TLS" encryption it will "absolutely happen" with Nitroshare.

Also, afaik Nitroshare has been dead/abandoned and the developer is no longer updating nor maintaining it anymore. IIRC the last beta build that was uploaded was back in 2019.