GeForce NOW Open for All

DukenukemX

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
4,593
This is where you are missing the point.

It doesn't really fucking matter. The masses can't see the difference... and if they can they still don't care.
Maybe, but keep in mind that's at an optimal setup, where most people are running 2G WiFi from a router that barely functions. Regardless you can't make the claim that it's equivalent to any mid range or high end PC when it objectively looks worse than a PS4. If you can see High or Ultra quality settings then you can certainly see the color banding.
Also I'm sorry but a little bit of banding in a moving image in the SKY. Really average gamers can't see that if you plunk them down in front of it. Yes streaming on a good connection is as good as a $1-2k mid range gaming PC to the eyes of the vast majority of average gamers.
That's a lie and you know it. A $1k-$2k PC (which btw is not mid range) will get over 60fps and run at 1440p or better. You're not getting 120fps in Doom 2016 with Geforce Now, but I can achieve that on a RX 480. Also the only thing that makes Geforce Now equivalent to a mid to high PC is graphic settings, and unless there's a feature in Geforce Now to turn off color banding then its not equivalent to a mid to high end PC. It's actually worse than gaming on a Xbox One or PS4. Also, we don't even know if the games on Geforce Now run at max settings. Most of the games people have been testing are made like 5 years ago. Run Borderlands 3 and try that at max settings, cause I'm certain you'll see a difference. Either in input lag or image quality.
Streaming is going to make us cry the same tears the Audio and Video people did before us.
Yea except input lag is still the primary problem, and will always be the primary problem. The lower image quality is just the extra shit sauce to the cloud gaming sandwich. In time you can fix the color banding with more bandwidth but the input lag is never going away. While you could ignore image quality, you can't ignore input lag.
 

DukenukemX

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
4,593
1. OMG Limited time offer, get it now before it goes up in price!! guess how many companies in the history of advertising use this marketing, when in fact, it doesn't. However, I do anticipate this price increasing at some point, but I suspect not within the next 6-12 months. What will it go up to?? who knows, but even if it goes up to $25 a month it's a good deal for those with good internet.
$25 is a lot of money that can be used to buy a PC. That's like $300 a year, which in two years you could save the money and buy a PC. OR... pay it off monthly as even NewEgg shows you could get that PC for $52 per month.
2. You literally linked a PC build, I said I you haven't utilized either the PC linked.. or GFN, simple to follow.
Why would that matter? A PC is a PC. So long as you're familiar with the OS it won't matter besides image quality.
3. Yet again more garbage speculation. Just so we're on the same page: I say garbage because obviously you've never tried stadia either (don't get me wrong, stadia is absolutely garbage.. and I've never used it, I say that because they make you buy the games and they only work on stadia).
So you know Stadia is hot garbage but upset that I never tried it? Ok...

You have yet to even use GFN, and are basing your.. opinion ...on supposed theory by picking and choosing reviews, or attempting to utilize your misinformed education on networking.
Speed of Light is not misinformation. Even though technically it's the speed of electricity, but you get the idea.
I've been quite open, yeah it's not going to be perfect for everyone, but it's very viable, and it absolutely can outplay my 1070m.
Except with color banding and input lag. We'll just ignore those two flaws because it supports your argument.
I did.. but I don't think you managed to grasp the article, or know anything of how NVIDIA operates. Also, nvidia hasn't been a service provider until GFN came out... here you go, look at the full financial report... guess what.. still no service revenue.
Here ya go, full financial report:
So now you want me to read that and determine if Nvidia makes more money from selling gamer graphic cards compared to their server GPU's? I'm not doing your homework, and that looks like one big PDF. You find the section where it says Nvidia makes more money selling GPU's to gamers than to the server market.
Your entire argument is a fallacy. None of it is based on your experience and it's just theory.
Actually I'm going by what Gamer Nexus has shown in their review of Stadia. At around 12:26 they show that PC games have input lag at around 70ms.


Yet again.. given multiple sources of empirical evidence... with screenshots, videos and a whole damn internet worth of reviews. As I've said before, it's absolutely not perfect for everyone, but based off of a shit ton of reviews on reddit and other sources, it works remarkably well and there is so little latency for those in which it does work, they are capable of competitively playing FPS type games.. which REQUIRES low latency.
Honestly, I can't find any reviews of Geforce Now that's recent. Most of it is old because this service has been around for years. Also reddit isn't a reliable source.
I just played two more rounds of fortnite, came in 2nd and 4th place in squads.. with multiple kills, if I had over 100ms latency that wouldn't be possible. There is literally no discernible difference between my physical system and the GFN playing.
3ont19.jpg



What I do notice is that GFN can run 2-3 levels higher in quality than my physical system (just for made up numbers purposes.. 25% better quality level). So even if there are compression issues, etc that reduce my visual experience by 10-15%... still ahead of my old broken physical system. I can absolutely tell the difference between low/medium and ultra. So if my ultra settings on GFN has some slight smoothing from compression, it still looks far better than my low/medium settings on a physical box.
You can tell the difference between low/medium and ultra, but the color banding is perfectly ignorable.... This is why I think you guys work for Nvidia because only something that stupid would come from a sales representative.
 

DukenukemX

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
4,593
Thats an impressive number of arbitrary and incorrect assumptions for one paragraph. Having a fast internet connection has no obvious correlation with owning a console or gaming PC.
If you're gaming off the cloud then your cheap internet is useless at any other task. So if you're playing Fortnite off the cloud and someone in your home wants to watch The Witcher off Netflix then issues will arise. So you either pay for a faster connection or deal with image artifacts that will pop up from the lower quality stream. Basically if you can afford a faster internet connection then you can probably afford a console or PC.
 

zrikz

Gawd
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
878
Not sure why I keep wasting like 10 minutes for these responses, but I guess it's a boring weekend and has been snowing and raining.. why not.

$25 is a lot of money that can be used to buy a PC. That's like $300 a year, which in two years you could save the money and buy a PC. OR... pay it off monthly as even NewEgg shows you could get that PC for $52 per month.

Why would that matter? A PC is a PC. So long as you're familiar with the OS it won't matter besides image quality.
you're saying that $25 is a lot of money but then saying you should spend $52 a month for a PC or ~$800 is humorous. .. But again, we're getting ahead of ourselves. You can actually play for free, in 1 hour sessions, or you can pay $5 for unlimited play time. For the casual gamer free 1 hour sessions is more than enough... worst case you log out after an hour and log immediately back in... for Free.
Guess what a server is.. a computer

So you know Stadia is hot garbage but upset that I never tried it? Ok...
Didn't say I was mad at you for judging stadia as such, but you implied GFN was hot garbage just because stadia is. GFN != Stadia.

Speed of Light is not misinformation. Even though technically it's the speed of electricity, but you get the idea.
Except with color banding and input lag. We'll just ignore those two flaws because it supports your argument.
Here is a fun article that seems to have some research on it: https://www.parksassociates.com/blog/article/the-truth-about-latency-in-cloud-gaming
You've yet to provide any evidence of input lag.. because I and multiple others in this thread have evidence to the contrary.
I've ready many reviews, absolutely there are people who do have issues here and there, some games seem to be not really playable (APEX) from what I've seen is a reoccurring problem for some reason, haven't tried it myself.

So now you want me to read that and determine if Nvidia makes more money from selling gamer graphic cards compared to their server GPU's? I'm not doing your homework, and that looks like one big PDF. You find the section where it says Nvidia makes more money selling GPU's to gamers than to the server market.
You tried to make the argument that NVIDA makes more money from selling server GPUs without any evidence. I just provided you the document that outlines their entire operations and how they make money. It is you that needs to do your homework.

Actually I'm going by what Gamer Nexus has shown in their review of Stadia. At around 12:26 they show that PC games have input lag at around 70ms.

yet again, you're trying to provide information showing how bad stadia is... but guess what, stadia is not GFN.
Here is the definition of 15 different common logical fallacies, of which you're easily hitting on about 5 of them: https://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/common-logical-fallacies I'll let you figure out which ones.

Honestly, I can't find any reviews of Geforce Now that's recent. Most of it is old because this service has been around for years. Also reddit isn't a reliable source.
here you go: https://lmgtfy.com/?q=geforce+now+reviews

pretty easy to find lots, also, google has a cool feature where you can sort by date.


Also, good job of ignoring all of my photos showcasing first place while utilizing GFN on my surface pro... on wifi, with sub 100ms latency. In the screenshots you can even see sub 10ms in game, with GFN being 10-15ms.
You can tell the difference between low/medium and ultra, but the color banding is perfectly ignorable.... This is why I think you guys work for Nvidia because only something that stupid would come from a sales representative.
If you actually used GFN and provided irrefutable proof that it was so bad and did direct comparisons between your sweet $800 rig and GFN, I'd gladly agree with you. Even the people who've posted screenshots and videos in this thread have show it works quite well and if you look hard, yeah you can see some banding... in 1 persons screenshots.
 
Last edited:

ChadD

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Feb 8, 2016
Messages
4,526
Maybe, but keep in mind that's at an optimal setup, where most people are running 2G WiFi from a router that barely functions. Regardless you can't make the claim that it's equivalent to any mid range or high end PC when it objectively looks worse than a PS4. If you can see High or Ultra quality settings then you can certainly see the color banding.

That's a lie and you know it. A $1k-$2k PC (which btw is not mid range) will get over 60fps and run at 1440p or better. You're not getting 120fps in Doom 2016 with Geforce Now, but I can achieve that on a RX 480. Also the only thing that makes Geforce Now equivalent to a mid to high PC is graphic settings, and unless there's a feature in Geforce Now to turn off color banding then its not equivalent to a mid to high end PC. It's actually worse than gaming on a Xbox One or PS4. Also, we don't even know if the games on Geforce Now run at max settings. Most of the games people have been testing are made like 5 years ago. Run Borderlands 3 and try that at max settings, cause I'm certain you'll see a difference. Either in input lag or image quality.

Yea except input lag is still the primary problem, and will always be the primary problem. The lower image quality is just the extra shit sauce to the cloud gaming sandwich. In time you can fix the color banding with more bandwidth but the input lag is never going away. While you could ignore image quality, you can't ignore input lag.
I have run GFN on my parents basic (and it really is basic where I am... $40 a month Canadian internet) 35mbs. Was very acceptable. Nvidia makes a point of saying its not intended to be run on old G routers... they say right in their requirements 5ghz wifi or hardwired.From my hour or so on my mothers laptop I would say it looked better then any PS4 I have played on. Did I stop playing to take screen shots of the sky... fuck no. If you want screen shots a streaming service is not a good solutions. Did I notice any banding while I was actually playing... no. As I have said no its not going to replace anyones current gaming PC... if you laid out money for higher end or even mid range GPUs already your not the market for a streaming service, at least as a main option. As for lag... yes technically streaming introduces more lag... but your mouse choice does as well. I have played on GFN for 4 or 5 hours now 1 hour on a basic connection, and the rest on my fiber. Lag has not been an issue, and the service is I have to assume pretty busy right now. Perhaps I didn't pick the most lag sensitive games to play... but really if 95% of games run fine for 95% of the population that is all streaming needs to do.

Personally I see myself using streaming a lot... and here is why. I spend a couple days a week away from home. I have a decent gaming PC and no I wouldn't stream to it.... but when I'm away I either have a laptop or a older desktop. Neither is a great gamer unless I feel like playing an old Civ or something. However I always have good to excellent internet. I can see myself using a streaming service at least a few days a week. As for the masses we have to accept that 80% of the gaming market doesn't even own a PC... there on consoles. Your assertion that GFN doesn't look as good as a PS, is honestly silly. It looks better... and it allows you to play anything you own on steam. Turning console gamers into PC gamers... even if they are renting their gaming hardware on the cloud IS VERY VERY Good for PC gaming.

I don't know if Nvidia is going to market their service well... or if console gamers will move to it if MS and Sony are doing their own thing. However if a good chunk of the unwashed console masses do move to something like GFN and become stream customers, hopefully it means the end of console ports. I know plenty of people myself that love consoles... but have just never got into PC gaming. Between the expense and requirement to research hardware ect there is a large market of people that love games but just aren't PC people. GFN if it takes off pulls all of those types into the PC pool... that is good for us old time hardware lovers.
 

zrikz

Gawd
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
878
Run Borderlands 3 and try that at max settings, cause I'm certain you'll see a difference. Either in input lag or image quality.

Yea except input lag is still the primary problem, and will always be the primary problem. The lower image quality is just the extra shit sauce to the cloud gaming sandwich. In time you can fix the color banding with more bandwidth but the input lag is never going away. While you could ignore image quality, you can't ignore input lag.
Here you go. Borderlands 3 at "Badass" quality everything turned to max.

average between 50-110 fps the whole time. Still only averaging 25-35mbs

1581274409990.png

1581274425249.png

1581274497681.png

1581274565240.png

1581274583274.png

1581274609177.png

1581274695294.png

1581274779465.png




it's quite a pretty game.
 
Last edited:

5150Joker

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
3,578
Here you go. Borderlands 3 at "Badass" quality everything turned to max.

average between 50-110 fps the whole time. Still only averaging 25-35mbs

View attachment 222188
View attachment 222189
View attachment 222192
View attachment 222193
View attachment 222194
View attachment 222195
View attachment 222196
View attachment 222197



it's quite a pretty game.
This can't be real. The imaginary laws of physics, made up latency numbers and network degree from the Cap'n crunch cereal box say it's unpossible!!
 

MangoSeed

Gawd
Joined
Oct 15, 2014
Messages
677
If you're gaming off the cloud then your cheap internet is useless at any other task. So if you're playing Fortnite off the cloud and someone in your home wants to watch The Witcher off Netflix then issues will arise. So you either pay for a faster connection or deal with image artifacts that will pop up from the lower quality stream. Basically if you can afford a faster internet connection then you can probably afford a console or PC.
Well that’s certainly not true since many people would find a few dollars a month easier to swallow than the large outlay required to buy/build a gaming PC.

We don’t have the Netflix equivalent of game streaming yet but it will happen. Not sure why you’re expending so much energy reminding everyone that latency sucks. We know that already.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Official Forum Curmudgeon
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
29,467
There is absolutely nothing any company can do to make me use a cloud streaming gaming service.

Even if it were absolutely free.

Local gaming on a high end PC or no gaming at all.
 

DukenukemX

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Jan 30, 2005
Messages
4,593
you're saying that $25 is a lot of money but then saying you should spend $52 a month for a PC or ~$800 is humorous. ..
It's a lot for something you lose a lot of freedom for. Also, you don't pay $52 forever. At some point the PC will get paid off and then it's yours. You don't stop paying the $25 per month unless you stop gaming.
You can actually play for free, in 1 hour sessions, or you can pay $5 for unlimited play time.
1 hour you say? That's almost enough time to create a character in some RPGs. Also... it isn't unlimited play time. Again, Nvidia's website clearly states "Extended Session Length " and not unlimited. That isn't a mistake, they will limit your play time if you use it excessively. Another thing they point out on the website is "Priority Access" which means there maybe a line to get in and use the service. So they can boot you off whenver they want and limit your access if there's a high demand. Cloud gaming is fun, isn't it?
Didn't say I was mad at you for judging stadia as such, but you implied GFN was hot garbage just because stadia is. GFN != Stadia.
Cloud gaming is hot garbage and Stadia is used for comparison because it was the most recent failure.
Here is a fun article that seems to have some research on it: https://www.parksassociates.com/blog/article/the-truth-about-latency-in-cloud-gaming
You've yet to provide any evidence of input lag.. because I and multiple others in this thread have evidence to the contrary.
Again, I'm not reading that. Quote something they said and explain to me how that's relavent to why I'm wrong. Also Nvidia's CEO even agrees with me. Latency is always there and always perceivable, the key to getting Cloud Gaming to work is teaching players to be tolerable to the lag. The input lag itself can't be fixed, so instead they try to fix the players with propaganda.

yet again, you're trying to provide information showing how bad stadia is... but guess what, stadia is not GFN.
Here is the definition of 15 different common logical fallacies, of which you're easily hitting on about 5 of them: https://blog.hubspot.com/marketing/common-logical-fallacies I'll let you figure out which ones.
My point is that all games have input lag, and the baseline is around 60ms-80ms. Once you go beyond 100ms then the game is noticeably laggy. Nvidia doesn't have much room to work with to avoid the 100ms input lag mark.

here you go: https://lmgtfy.com/?q=geforce+now+reviews

pretty easy to find lots, also, google has a cool feature where you can sort by date.
**Sigh** Did anyone do a latency test? That's why I'm waiting to see if Gamers Nexus or Digital Foundry does a input lag test.
 
Joined
Apr 11, 2017
Messages
522
Ok, so same as me except I would say your local network is more robust than mine... I'm actually surprised your experience is better than mine, anything faster paced than ARK is almost unplayable for me and hard for me to actually be good, and I'm also a Quake Live player so I'm very sensitive to lag...
 

zrikz

Gawd
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
878
Ok, so same as me except I would say your local network is more robust than mine... I'm actually surprised your experience is better than mine, anything faster paced than ARK is almost unplayable for me and hard for me to actually be good, and I'm also a Quake Live player so I'm very sensitive to lag...
I duno, maybe I'm just lucky.. probably the youngest living in an old old neighborhood.. probably the only person using the internet ;p.

Perhaps if I still lived in my old neighborhood of 500+ houses it may be a different story, couldn't tell you for sure. I've been looking for an excuse to buy a physical system for about 8 months now that my primary gaming rig died, but with GFN and shadow, I haven't seen the point. 99% of the time it works perfectly enough for me to even casually play FPS games online.

I did try out Apex this evening.. graphics and input were perfect, audio however was.. choppy and seemed to skip a bit, not the best experience. Was monitoring network traffic and it oddly never went above about 20mb... most games average 25-30.

Moving in a few months and I legitimately want to buy a sweet 1440p 28-32" monitor.. so that'll probably be the catalyst to buy a new rig.
 

Derangel

[H]ard as it Gets
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
18,529
Decided to run a few tests to see how things work on my end.

Networking Hardware: ASUS RT-66U running Asuswrt-Merlin (I know it's a crappy router, but it's what I've got for the moment) connected the Zyxel C1100Z DSL modem that CenturyLink uses.

Tests 1 and 2 were done on my 2019 Fire HD 10 tablet (which has pretty abysmal wifi)

Test 1: Over 5Ghz wireless to my router. My connection is pretty terrible. CenturyLink DSL at 30Mbps (HA!) that isn't terribly stable. Xbox One controller connected via bluetooth.

Test 2: Verizon 4G connected to my iPhone 11 Pro via Hotspot. 2Ghz connection (only option). Full signal strength on iPhone. Phone sitting right next to the tablet. Xbox One controller connect via bluetooth.

Test 3: On my gaming PC over 5Ghz Wifi (PC is on the other side of the room from my router and I don't have a free Cat5 cable long enough to reach atm). Using the Wifi that came with my motherboard. Keyboard and mouse.

Game: Doom. 1080p, custom max settings with film grain, motion blur, and chromatic aberration turned off. Game stayed pegged at 60fps at all times across all three tests. Would hit 200 when I tried turning off v-sync.

Test parameters: New game, from opening until exiting the elevator.

Test 1- Good picture quality throughout the test. I didn't notice a ton of compression artifacts and it didn't get fuzzy. Would hit 200 if I turned off v-sync. Only one small spot of lag early on, otherwise the stream ran good. HOWEVER the input latency was VERY noticeable. Half a second delay, or more, on each button press. Nearly unplayable. Barely got through the first arena due to it. This first test is why the test runs were only that long, I couldn't stand playing any more.

Test 2- Well, this was a HUGE improvement for latency. It was still noticeable, but it was right on the edge. Picture quality and stability took a nose-dive however. Noticable compression artifacts and occasional bursts of fuzzyness. However, it was totally playable. Outside of my usual issues playing twitchy shooters with a controller (aka I suck at it) I'd say it played well. If Apple pulled their heads out of their asses and supported 5Ghz hotspots on the iPhone I feel like it would have provided a solid experience.

Test 3- Whenever I play Doom on my PC I'm used to playing it at 144hz with a G-Sync Compatible monitor. So there is already an issue when playing at 60fps. I definitely noticed latency here. It was entirely playable, but everything felt a little sluggish. I could tell it was throwing off my aim just a tad. It was still fun, but not ideal. I could totally see someone really enjoying their time with the game running like this, as long as they're not already used to a far superior experience. No big lag spikes and image quality remained okay throughout. Running the 1080p stream on my 32" 1440p monitor made the quality sacrifices required to streaming to work a lot more noticable, but I didn't have any moments of extreme fuzzyness it was just obviously of a lower quality than playing locally.

Over-all impression: Whatever Nvidia is doing behind the scenes is providing a much better game streaming experience than what I get through the Xbox Game Streaming beta. My set up is far from ideal and probably leans closer to what a lot of rural Americans have but, aside from test 1, it wasn't a terrible experience.
 

5150Joker

2[H]4U
Joined
Aug 1, 2005
Messages
3,578
Decided to run a few tests to see how things work on my end.

Networking Hardware: ASUS RT-66U running Asuswrt-Merlin (I know it's a crappy router, but it's what I've got for the moment) connected the Zyxel C1100Z DSL modem that CenturyLink uses.

Tests 1 and 2 were done on my 2019 Fire HD 10 tablet (which has pretty abysmal wifi)

Test 1: Over 5Ghz wireless to my router. My connection is pretty terrible. CenturyLink DSL at 30Mbps (HA!) that isn't terribly stable. Xbox One controller connected via bluetooth.

Test 2: Verizon 4G connected to my iPhone 11 Pro via Hotspot. 2Ghz connection (only option). Full signal strength on iPhone. Phone sitting right next to the tablet. Xbox One controller connect via bluetooth.

Test 3: On my gaming PC over 5Ghz Wifi (PC is on the other side of the room from my router and I don't have a free Cat5 cable long enough to reach atm). Using the Wifi that came with my motherboard. Keyboard and mouse.

Game: Doom. 1080p, custom max settings with film grain, motion blur, and chromatic aberration turned off. Game stayed pegged at 60fps at all times across all three tests. Would hit 200 when I tried turning off v-sync.

Test parameters: New game, from opening until exiting the elevator.

Test 1- Good picture quality throughout the test. I didn't notice a ton of compression artifacts and it didn't get fuzzy. Would hit 200 if I turned off v-sync. Only one small spot of lag early on, otherwise the stream ran good. HOWEVER the input latency was VERY noticeable. Half a second delay, or more, on each button press. Nearly unplayable. Barely got through the first arena due to it. This first test is why the test runs were only that long, I couldn't stand playing any more.

Test 2- Well, this was a HUGE improvement for latency. It was still noticeable, but it was right on the edge. Picture quality and stability took a nose-dive however. Noticable compression artifacts and occasional bursts of fuzzyness. However, it was totally playable. Outside of my usual issues playing twitchy shooters with a controller (aka I suck at it) I'd say it played well. If Apple pulled their heads out of their asses and supported 5Ghz hotspots on the iPhone I feel like it would have provided a solid experience.

Test 3- Whenever I play Doom on my PC I'm used to playing it at 144hz with a G-Sync Compatible monitor. So there is already an issue when playing at 60fps. I definitely noticed latency here. It was entirely playable, but everything felt a little sluggish. I could tell it was throwing off my aim just a tad. It was still fun, but not ideal. I could totally see someone really enjoying their time with the game running like this, as long as they're not already used to a far superior experience. No big lag spikes and image quality remained okay throughout. Running the 1080p stream on my 32" 1440p monitor made the quality sacrifices required to streaming to work a lot more noticable, but I didn't have any moments of extreme fuzzyness it was just obviously of a lower quality than playing locally.

Over-all impression: Whatever Nvidia is doing behind the scenes is providing a much better game streaming experience than what I get through the Xbox Game Streaming beta. My set up is far from ideal and probably leans closer to what a lot of rural Americans have but, aside from test 1, it wasn't a terrible experience.
I have a netgear Nighthawk xr500 with spectrum cable (400/30) with a 23 ms ping to nVidias server. So far every game but Apex has run really well at 60 fps solid. Apex had noticeable input lag and it threw me off. My normal gaming rig is a 9900k@5ghz and 2080 ti (both on custom watercooling) with a 27"144 hz 1440p monitor so I had to sacrifice image quality at 1080p. So this service is not meant for someone like me who uses top of the line gaming hardware but for the avg Joe sixpack who comes home from work and only has a few hours to play and is a casual gamer, this would do well.

If they start selling a controller like Stadia and custom interface that let's you sign up for steam, Origin etc it will do really well long term. So the service has a long way to go but on the technical front it's solid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zrikz
like this

Derangel

[H]ard as it Gets
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
18,529
I have a netgear Nighthawk xr500 with spectrum cable (400/30) with a 23 ms ping to nVidias server. So far every game but Apex has run really well at 60 fps solid. Apex had noticeable input lag and it threw me off. My normal gaming rig is a 9900k@5ghz and 2080 ti (both on custom watercooling) with a 27"144 hz 1440p monitor so I had to sacrifice image quality at 1080p. So this service is not meant for someone like me who uses top of the line gaming hardware but for the avg Joe sixpack who comes home from work and only has a few hours to play and is a casual gamer, this would do well.

If they start selling a controller like Stadia and custom interface that let's you sign up for steam, Origin etc it will do really well long term. So the service has a long way to go but on the technical front it's solid.
I'm hoping to move in the next handful of months, ideally somewhere with MUCH better internet. I'm really interested in trying it again on a better connection. Maybe I'll get around to buying a better router before hand as well and see what that does for it.

I'd love if they could make it connect to Origin and EGS. Be really nice to get in a quick session of some of the larger games I own without needing to spend several hours downloading them.
 

zrikz

Gawd
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
878
I'm hoping to move in the next handful of months, ideally somewhere with MUCH better internet. I'm really interested in trying it again on a better connection. Maybe I'll get around to buying a better router before hand as well and see what that does for it.

I'd love if they could make it connect to Origin and EGS. Be really nice to get in a quick session of some of the larger games I own without needing to spend several hours downloading them.
Works on a few Origin and EGS games, but it seem super selective, like they only picked the top 1-2 games off of each of those. EGS you can play fortnite and borderlands 3. Origin Apex.. haven't looked for anything else on origin.
 

limitedaccess

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
7,567
I'm curious has anyone compared the "free" vs "founder" stream just in terms of encoder performance?

If Geforce Now is just using the GPUs encoder as opposed to a separate dedicated hardware one than in theory the founder tier could be using the newer NVENC block released with Turing compared to the one with Pascal for the free tier.
 

zrikz

Gawd
Joined
May 29, 2006
Messages
878
My normal gaming rig is a 9900k@5ghz and 2080 ti (both on custom watercooling) with a 27"144 hz 1440p monitor so I had to sacrifice image quality at 1080p. So this service is not meant for someone like me who uses top of the line gaming hardware but for the avg Joe sixpack who comes home from work and only has a few hours to play and is a casual gamer, this would do well.

If they start selling a controller like Stadia and custom interface that let's you sign up for steam, Origin etc it will do really well long term. So the service has a long way to go but on the technical front it's solid.
Maybe that is why this seems like such a usable service to me. I haven't played a game over 1080p yet, and of the 1080p gaming I've done, I've only ever been able to do medium/high to high settings. GFN allows me to still maintain 1080p, but now I can crank it up to Ultra/max settings, which is quite a bump in quality from what my physical hardware could do. I've just been fortunate to not have any noticeable input lag, I'm less than an hour outside of atlanta, I'm assuming they probably have a data center there.
 
Joined
Apr 11, 2017
Messages
522
I'm curious has anyone compared the "free" vs "founder" stream just in terms of encoder performance?

If Geforce Now is just using the GPUs encoder as opposed to a separate dedicated hardware one than in theory the founder tier could be using the newer NVENC block released with Turing compared to the one with Pascal for the free tier.
Thats a good question, and a quick way to figure that out is to see what GPU the VM is running. When I tried it on the free tier I had a Tesla P40, so Pascal. Do they have any Turing Teslas???
I do know that GPU encoding still has to go a long way as far as quality per birate when compared to CPU encoding, and if they were going for max quality in a limited bitrate I would imagine they would use CPU HEVC encoding. But who actually knows.....
 

limitedaccess

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
7,567
Thats a good question, and a quick way to figure that out is to see what GPU the VM is running. When I tried it on the free tier I had a Tesla P40, so Pascal. Do they have any Turing Teslas???
I do know that GPU encoding still has to go a long way as far as quality per birate when compared to CPU encoding, and if they were going for max quality in a limited bitrate I would imagine they would use CPU HVEC encoding. But who actually knows.....
I don't have the founder tier (only messed around with free for a bit) but from what I've read the GPU that gets exposed is labeled as Geforce RTX T10-8. The founder tier does have RTX support which suggests it has to be using a Turing generation GPU, but what NVENC block would be in (if it's custom) may not be as simple as TU117 doesn't use the latest NVENC block (although it's the only one). The newer Turing NVENC block is step up in quality, not sure about other features/performance however.

This is of course assuming they aren't using a separate encoder.

CPU encoding and CPU HEVC would have the best bitrate/size ratio but in this usage case you need to factor in performance and latency (this is different than throughput performance) on both the encode and decode side. CPU HEVC is nowhere close to being fast enough for real time encode, even decode can be challenging performance wise for quite a range of hardware still.

Nvidia's been investing resources in terms of minimizing latency and maximizing performance for GPU capture and encode. Even though I haven't used Geforce Now until now just to test it I've benefited from this via using them for Remote Gamestreaming.

As an aside this is an advantage Geforce Now will have Google Stadia. There hasn't been much testing on this but the limited amount does show a significant advantage in terms of latency and quality with Nvidia's capture and encode over alternatives at the moment. For example Parsec's (a company doing remote gamestreaming) testing showed a 10ms advantage with Pascal over Polaris in terms of encoder latency performance.
 

BeavermanA

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 27, 2006
Messages
2,329
Girl was annoyed I ignored her most of the day playing PC games. Had to work tonight, texted her this:

IMG_20200212_204813.jpg


She was not too amused.

So far I haven't been able to test/use the service really as my internet options are shit in the hotel, and mobile doesn't cut it either. May be going to Bay area for 1-2 months. Was thinking about bringing my pc, but would be nice to use GF Now temporarily.
 

Marees

Limp Gawd
Joined
Sep 28, 2018
Messages
198
Activision Blizzard, has withdrawn from the GeForce NOW program entirely.

That means no Call of Duty, Overwatch, World of Warcraft, & other Actvision titles


What’s worse is that Activision Blizzard wasn’t the only company that got cold feet, either. Games from Capcom, EA, Konami, Remedy, Rockstar, and Square Enix have seemingly gone missing, too.

The entire situation is unusual, since Activision Blizzard’s titles were available during GeForce NOW’s long and drawn-out beta run. What changed is a mystery, but it could have something to do with the fact that the cloud-gaming alternative is now a paid service.

NVIDIA points out that “hundreds” of games are still available to stream. There’s also “1,500 games that developers have asked to be on-boarded to the service.”
 

dandirk

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jun 5, 2004
Messages
1,831
Wonder if those title restrictions will affect the steam/cloud integration (assume local would not be).
 

Snowdog

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
10,041

RanceJustice

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Jun 9, 2003
Messages
6,087
There are reports that players of Activision/Blizzard games, notably World of Warcraft, are being BANNED for using GeForce NOW! It is being treated on the same level as botting, with bans of 6 months+ for first time offenses! Players affected are petitioning Blizz customer service, but this is very worrisome. I'm not a fan of a proprietary service/platform requiring a certain GPU, but I don't think this is fair even regarding Nvidia.
 

vegeta535

2[H]4U
Joined
Jul 19, 2013
Messages
3,688
There are reports that players of Activision/Blizzard games, notably World of Warcraft, are being BANNED for using GeForce NOW! It is being treated on the same level as botting, with bans of 6 months+ for first time offenses! Players affected are petitioning Blizz customer service, but this is very worrisome. I'm not a fan of a proprietary service/platform requiring a certain GPU, but I don't think this is fair even regarding Nvidia.
It is not limited to Nvidia GPUs. I think the only requirement is DX11.
 

Derangel

[H]ard as it Gets
Joined
Jan 31, 2008
Messages
18,529
There are reports that players of Activision/Blizzard games, notably World of Warcraft, are being BANNED for using GeForce NOW! It is being treated on the same level as botting, with bans of 6 months+ for first time offenses! Players affected are petitioning Blizz customer service, but this is very worrisome. I'm not a fan of a proprietary service/platform requiring a certain GPU, but I don't think this is fair even regarding Nvidia.
You're confusing Geforce Now with Nvidia's in-home streaming tech. GFN has zero GPU requirements. You don't even need a dedicated GPU to use it.
 

Stoly

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
6,482
There are reports that players of Activision/Blizzard games, notably World of Warcraft, are being BANNED for using GeForce NOW! It is being treated on the same level as botting, with bans of 6 months+ for first time offenses! Players affected are petitioning Blizz customer service, but this is very worrisome. I'm not a fan of a proprietary service/platform requiring a certain GPU, but I don't think this is fair even regarding Nvidia.
Really? I don't know how could Blizzard know the game is being streamed...
 

Darunion

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 6, 2010
Messages
3,952
Really? I don't know how could Blizzard know the game is being streamed...
This is interesting as I am a WoW player, only stuff I could find were reddit posts from 10 months ago.

That said, I know they actively try to catch automations and bots in the game to ban them, wonder if the service just created false positives?
 

Stoly

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
6,482
This is interesting as I am a WoW player, only stuff I could find were reddit posts from 10 months ago.
I'm not really a WoW player, but I did play overwatch and SC 1 & 2, and never had an issue running them in GeforceNow while they were in the Beta
 

RanceJustice

[H]ardness Supreme
Joined
Jun 9, 2003
Messages
6,087
It is not limited to Nvidia GPUs. I think the only requirement is DX11.
You're confusing Geforce Now with Nvidia's in-home streaming tech. GFN has zero GPU requirements. You don't even need a dedicated GPU to use it.
You're right, I didn't make it clear I was talking about both of their efforts. I am concerned about those that require the "in-home" (though, often used over the Internet) streaming that requires a Nvidia GPU for the broadcasting point because of the proprietary nature (ie Even the reverse engineered opensource Moonlight only offers, last I checked, an alternative FLOSS client possibility - it still requires the official proprietary application for the server and of course, an Nvidia GPU). I favor more open ways to go about things here.

When it comes to services like GeForce NOW and Google Stadia, where you're essentially renting a "virtual cloud PC" , that has major ramifications dealing with player license/ownership/, DRM, and Platform/network. Stadia is a good example of how some want you to buy the games from them specifically, as if they're another store/community/platform. GeForce Now and Parsec are, to my understanding, not like this and you can use existing games etc... but that does create concerns about security and the like, logging in on your accounts using a virtual PC somewhere. Worse, all of these seem to have their own unique way of implementing "cloud gaming" streaming which leaves companies like Activision open to claiming some are "unsupported".

In my mind, the best way forward for cloud gaming is to split it wholeheartedly between the "Connecting to a device you own/control, in your house or elsewhere" vs the "renting access to a cloud system", each with standardized, open (source, spec) protocols. That way it won't be an issue of Provider A Cloud Gaming is looked out suspiciously while Provider B is not, as all the technical implementations will be within a codified spec. This will also make it easier for more people to offer cloud services. Meanwhile, an open spec for streaming itself will mean an easy way to gauge accessibility, features, and support.
 

blackmomba

Limp Gawd
Joined
Dec 5, 2018
Messages
147
I'm sure they can tell that their game server is communicating with Geforce Now and not an end user's personal PC.
I used to bot WoW for awhile and you'd be surprised the amount of information they collect from the runtime environment in the name of catching cheaters. Pretty disgusting

They've always been pretty bad at catching botters and cheaters so I'm sure this is them being bad at what they do
 

HAL_404

Gawd
Joined
Dec 16, 2018
Messages
672
You will know you've crossed the line regarding gaming when you're willing to whore yourself out as follows:

"Unfortunately due to limited resources compared to Stadia at this time free users are limited to 1-hour playing sessions and you may need to wait in a queue.

why would anyone in their right mind wait in cue and limit themselves to 1 hr play time when all they are able to play are TITLES THEY ALREADY OWN and don't have to wait in cue to play before this "free" offer was made?
 
Top