5150Joker
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2005
- Messages
- 4,568
Just imagine a LAN party with everyone trying using a cloud service...
LMAO who the hell would do this?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Just imagine a LAN party with everyone trying using a cloud service...
Yea, it's better. You aren't limited to games available on the Geforce Now service, just the games on your PC which could be World of Warcraft to emulators playing Breath of the Wild.That moonlight service is nothing like GeForce now, it's self hosted for private use.
Guess what that means? Geforce Now is not equivalent to a high end gaming PC. 1080p is not high end, it's low end. For most people sure because most people haven't made the jump to 1440p let alone 4k, but that makes Geforce Now barely equivalent to a low end PC. Most cell phones today are capable of displaying beyond 1080p, but that isn't the first contradiction against the Geforce Now service. Like how Nvidia recommends an Ethernet connection or 5G Wifi to use Geforce Now, which means you aren't gaming on your cell phone on a bus.As for your other points, 360 Hz is esports tier, high end these days for most people can easily be a 1080 level of performance which this cloud service provides and more. Eurogamer tested it out and said this:
Oh good, I'm sure it'll match Stadia's fake 4k as well because like Stadia it isn't fiscully possible to run a service that uses that hardware for cheap. That's why Shadow charges so much for a service that uses a 4 year old GTX 1080.Oh btw, 4K is coming to GeForce Now as well.
Sure, for the first 4-5 years, until it isn't. Since Geforce Now works with services like Steam then ideally you should still have a gaming PC.I'll stick with my original point, this service is a good thing for people who lack the money to buy a new PC. Even if they up the price to $10/mo, that's $120/yr which is far cheaper than a console or PC.
All cloud gaming services are ill fated, or you think Stadia is the first and only cloud gaming service? Wasn't Geforce Now called Grid at some point? Geforce Now is like saying Grid is under new management for like the 3rd time now. Only Nvidia didn't have the stupidity to force users to have an Nvidia GPU, both on PC and mobile devices.P.S. NVIDIA had over a million people on a waiting list that wanted to get into the service when it was in beta. I suspect this service will be more successful than the ill fated Stadia.
Lol nvidia employee.. I wish, maybe I'd get a discount. But I'm an AMD stockholder instead ;p You seem to have a big tinfoil hat on regarding the success of a service that has no impact on you, whether or not it fails or succeeds.You are not a metric. For all I know you're an Nvidia employee who's paid to spread propaganda on Geforce Now, like Google did with Stadia. Not a joke, there were a number of Stadia employee's who would argue in favor of Stadia, and they'd use their own experience like it matters. I'll wait for Gamers Nexus to do a review, if they'll actually do it. Scoring high in Fortnite and claiming great success doesn't mean anything.
The problem with game streaming is that it can't buffer, and as such you can't alleviate lag spikes that typically doesn't effect services like NetFlix. At some point you'll hit a lag spike and suddenly the game stops for a slip second or longer.
Nvidia must have something better because they claim to have RTX on. So really Shadow should be dead by now, if it isn't already.
Starting to really sound like an Nvidia employee.
Another one of you guys... Ok...
- Firstly, cloud gaming will never match a high gaming PC. It just isn't fiscally possible. Wasn't Nvidia promoting 360 hz recently? How does that factor into Geforce Now being a "High End" PC? It doesn't even do 4k, I just found out. A GTX 1060 can do 4k... poorly but it can do it.
- Right now the price of GPU's is stupidly high, and Nvidia is mostly responsible for this, though AMD is also guilty for this as well. This is why the Steam Hardware Survey shows the 1060, 1050, and 1050 Ti as the most popular GPU's that people use in 2020. These are 4 year old GPU's, so I think its time that Nvidia drops some prices already.
- It won't be $5 for long, as Nvidia points this out on their website. Don't point it out as if that's the actual price for the service.
- Geforce Now will have access to your Steam library, but you know what else does, that doesn't cost a monthly fee? Moonlight for one.
You forget that compression takes a lot of the fidelity away, compare the RAW uncompressed output to a 30Mbit stream (best case scenario) and compare the differences.but it can outmatch my ~$2k gaming laptop with a 2070 GTX, 16gb of ram and an i7 in terms of quality / performance.
I've played about 25-30 hours of Doom and a few hours of Dark souls III via streaming, I like to think I have pretty decent eye sight and color palette, I've also played both of those on "real hardware" prior to my system dying. I can't tell any discernible difference, but I'll try and remember to check them again this weekend now that you mention it.You forget that compression takes a lot of the fidelity away, compare the RAW uncompressed output to a 30Mbit stream (best case scenario) and compare the differences.
You'll have artifacts and blurryness, I can't image what dark themed games would seem like...
Why do you think so many organizations are moving towards cloud computing / server hosting such as AWS? they are much cheaper than maintaining your own systems and the hardware is always the latest and greatest. It's a service that demands high reliability and functionality, while game streaming like GFN is new, I suspect it will become more mainstream, especially with hardware costs.
110% accurate...Actually I need to correct you on this one point. Companies are going with the cloud services because of the type of expense they are being capex or opex. That matters on the bottom line come tax reporting.
Companies who have all of their infrastructure in the cloud are discovering it is MORE expensive (imagine that) than having their own once their need is large enough.
there is a time in the growth of a company where having a heavy cloud presence makes sense. Eventually when a company gets large enough retratcing from the cloud becomes a major expense they have to invest in. I believe it was Uber who made the news on that not so long ago.
Here is a recent article comparing Uber and Lyft. It's worth a read, though the author leans toward cloud because that's their preference you can read enough to understand.
https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/opinions/buying-cloud-scale-lessons-lyft-and-uber/
Otherwise I agree much with what you are saying and with licensing costs for games and everything else I think the cloud gaming will be the middle tier going forward.. but that time is at least 5-10 years away and will require a LOT more internet infrastructure supporting a broader swath of the target markets.
Good article, interesting to hear that. I'd done research on it long ago, but only with regards to smaller businesses / start ups, so perhaps I was basing it on old data. My organization is moving towards a hybrid approach later this year, we'll see how it goes, in theory the finance department has done their job and deemed it a smart move. However, we're also not thousands of people.Actually I need to correct you on this one point. Companies are going with the cloud services because of the type of expense they are being capex or opex. That matters on the bottom line come tax reporting.
Companies who have all of their infrastructure in the cloud are discovering it is MORE expensive (imagine that) than having their own once their need is large enough.
there is a time in the growth of a company where having a heavy cloud presence makes sense. Eventually when a company gets large enough retratcing from the cloud becomes a major expense they have to invest in. I believe it was Uber who made the news on that not so long ago.
Here is a recent article comparing Uber and Lyft. It's worth a read, though the author leans toward cloud because that's their preference you can read enough to understand.
https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/opinions/buying-cloud-scale-lessons-lyft-and-uber/
Otherwise I agree much with what you are saying and with licensing costs for games and everything else I think the cloud gaming will be the middle tier going forward.. but that time is at least 5-10 years away and will require a LOT more internet infrastructure supporting a broader swath of the target markets.
Good article, interesting to hear that. I'd done research on it long ago, but only with regards to smaller businesses / start ups, so perhaps I was basing it on old data. My organization is moving towards a hybrid approach later this year, we'll see how it goes, in theory the finance department has done their job and deemed it a smart move. However, we're also not thousands of people.
Well you know combination of finance and IT leads and engineering, because you can definitely never just count on finance lol.Never count on your finance department to actually know.
You say this but then...Lol nvidia employee.. I wish, maybe I'd get a discount. But I'm an AMD stockholder instead ;p You seem to have a big tinfoil hat on regarding the success of a service that has no impact on you, whether or not it fails or succeeds.
So you're an AMD stockholder and you own a GTX 2070 laptop and you know 4k Geforce Now's performance, which doesn't exist yet, will outperform your $2k gaming laptop. See the contradictions you just introduced? I count at least four contradictions.1. Can it do 4k? no not currently, but it can outmatch my ~$2k gaming laptop with a 2070 GTX, 16gb of ram and an i7 in terms of quality / performance. Many games I couldn't max out on my laptop, GFN/Shadow allow me to do that.
That's the same shit Stadia promoters were saying. And no, local gaming doesn't have delayed keyboard strokes unless your $2k laptop has serious issues.Is it perfect? no definitely not, maybe once a week or so I'll have a latent mouse movement or delayed keyboard stroke that lasts for <=1-2 seconds. But that can happen regardless of it being streamed or local
Nobody buys $2k gaming systems, and if you do then I'm sorry for you. My Vega 56 + Ryzen 2700X system was $800 and it would destroy Geforce Now in everything. I could build a PC with a Ryzen + RX 580 for $500 that would destroy Geforce Now. This is why I think you're a Nvidia employee because you act like $2k PC's are the norm when most people on Steam's Hardware survey are using a GTX 1060 or lower. Expensive PC's with expensive graphic cards are not the norm. Also never run games at Ultra settings because in most games it offers little in image quality but a massive drop in performance.3. Regardless if it goes up in price (I think shadow in it's peak was $24 a month?) ~140-300 a year is far cheaper than a $1-2k gaming system. Lets compare apples to apples here. a good "top of the line NOT 4k" 1080p gaming system that can actually max out all present day games is probably on average 1200? Lets say the price jumps up to $25 a month for GFN ~$300 a year. It would take 4 years of paying for the service to recoup the costs in the gaming system purchase. But by the time those 4 years are up the latest and greatest is out, and presumably the cloud streaming service will most likely upgrade to even newer hardware during that time or about the time a typical gamer would want to upgrade either their CPU or GPU, and so the cycle continues.
Because it makes them far more money in terms of game sales. Just like Steam, Origin, and etc they'll take a cut of game sales. Ultimate form of DRM with a walled garden so that you can't move to competing services without losing your existing library.Why do you think so many organizations are moving towards cloud computing / server hosting such as AWS?
No it fucking isn't because it obviously can't do higher frame rates with higher resolutions. Until 4k is released I'm going to assume it's just DLSS 4k because cloud gaming isn't cheap to sustain. I'm calling it right now that Geforce Now's 4k is going to be with DLSS. Same crap as Stadia.they are much cheaper than maintaining your own systems and the hardware is always the latest and greatest.
Again, no it fucking isn't because no internet connection is reliable.It's a service that demands high reliability and functionality,
Which is why I can't wait for Intel to be making GPU's because we clearly need more competition in the GPU market. Again, Nvidia's Geforce Now is fixing a problem that Nvidia caused with higher priced GPU's. Which is why Steam hardly shows any RTX cards. Even the GTX 1660's are hardly there.while game streaming like GFN is new, I suspect it will become more mainstream, especially with hardware costs.
Take snapshots of the game running on Gefroce Now so we can compare. Game action will create less detail than standing still in the game. Don't know if you can run benchmarks on Geforce Now?I've played about 25-30 hours of Doom and a few hours of Dark souls III via streaming, I like to think I have pretty decent eye sight and color palette, I've also played both of those on "real hardware" prior to my system dying. I can't tell any discernible difference, but I'll try and remember to check them again this weekend now that you mention it.
You say this but then...
So you're an AMD stockholder and you own a GTX 2070 laptop and you know 4k Geforce Now's performance, which doesn't exist yet, will outperform your $2k gaming laptop. See the contradictions you just introduced? I count at least four contradictions.
That's the same shit Stadia promoters were saying. And no, local gaming doesn't have delayed keyboard strokes unless your $2k laptop has serious issues.
Nobody buys $2k gaming systems, and if you do then I'm sorry for you. My Vega 56 + Ryzen 2700X system was $800 and it would destroy Geforce Now in everything. I could build a PC with a Ryzen + RX 580 for $500 that would destroy Geforce Now. This is why I think you're a Nvidia employee because you act like $2k PC's are the norm when most people on Steam's Hardware survey are using a GTX 1060 or lower. Expensive PC's with expensive graphic cards are not the norm. Also never run games at Ultra settings because in most games it offers little in image quality but a massive drop in performance.
Because it makes them far more money in terms of game sales. Just like Steam, Origin, and etc they'll take a cut of game sales. Ultimate form of DRM with a walled garden so that you can't move to competing services without losing your existing library.
No it fucking isn't because it obviously can't do higher frame rates with higher resolutions. Until 4k is released I'm going to assume it's just DLSS 4k because cloud gaming isn't cheap to sustain. I'm calling it right now that Geforce Now's 4k is going to be with DLSS. Same crap as Stadia.
Again, no it fucking isn't because no internet connection is reliable.
Which is why I can't wait for Intel to be making GPU's because we clearly need more competition in the GPU market. Again, Nvidia's Geforce Now is fixing a problem that Nvidia caused with higher priced GPU's. Which is why Steam hardly shows any RTX cards. Even the GTX 1660's are hardly there.
Take snapshots of the game running on Gefroce Now so we can compare. Game action will create less detail than standing still in the game. Don't know if you can run benchmarks on Geforce Now?
Sigh.. considering AMD didn't have gaming systems 3 years ago when I bought my system.. yep surprise surprise it's an nvidia GPU. but yes, a 1080 gtx desktop will easily out perform a 2070 mobile gpu inside of a laptop.You say this but then...
So you're an AMD stockholder and you own a GTX 2070 laptop and you know 4k Geforce Now's performance, which doesn't exist yet, will outperform your $2k gaming laptop. See the contradictions you just introduced? I count at least four contradictions.
Nobody buys $2k gaming systems, and if you do then I'm sorry for you. My Vega 56 + Ryzen 2700X system was $800 and it would destroy Geforce Now in everything. I could build a PC with a Ryzen + RX 580 for $500 that would destroy Geforce Now. This is why I think you're a Nvidia employee because you act like $2k PC's are the norm when most people on Steam's Hardware survey are using a GTX 1060 or lower. Expensive PC's with expensive graphic cards are not the norm. Also never run games at Ultra settings because in most games it offers little in image quality but a massive drop in performance.
Local gaming absolutely does have delays when you're in intense fights and graphical settings, it's called low framerate. Unless you're running on lowest settings or have a 2080 Ti, I suspect people try to run a game at the highest settings they are capable of; when a system encounters too much, it boggs down for 1-2 secs and catches up. That may happen 1-2 times a week for me while using GFN/Shadow (TBH, I rarely use GFN now in the past 30-60 days, just shadow... GFN didn't have the game on it I wanted and have been in the mood for the past couple months)That's the same shit Stadia promoters were saying. And no, local gaming doesn't have delayed keyboard strokes unless your $2k laptop has serious issues.
I am running all of my games at 1080p over 60 FPS. Obviously it's not doing 4k now.. but neither is your $800 2700x system.No it fucking isn't because it obviously can't do higher frame rates with higher resolutions. Until 4k is released I'm going to assume it's just DLSS 4k because cloud gaming isn't cheap to sustain. I'm calling it right now that Geforce Now's 4k is going to be with DLSS. Same crap as Stadia.
Again, no it fucking isn't because no internet connection is reliable.
Which is why I can't wait for Intel to be making GPU's because we clearly need more competition in the GPU market. Again, Nvidia's Geforce Now is fixing a problem that Nvidia caused with higher priced GPU's. Which is why Steam hardly shows any RTX cards. Even the GTX 1660's are hardly there.
Take snapshots of the game running on Gefroce Now so we can compare. Game action will create less detail than standing still in the game. Don't know if you can run benchmarks on Geforce Now?
Here you can see the banding I'm talking about and remember, that when I look at one spot for more than 1sec some of the banding goes away, so you don't get to see the full bad banding in these PNG screenshots:
No, it's garbage because it has latency that will never ever go away and you keep comparing it to a $2k PC. Anything above 100ms input latency is uncomfortable to play, and I doubt Nvidia achieved bellow 100ms input latency.You keep touting it's garbage because it doesn't do 4k,
Depends on the game and the settings but last I checked the 2080 Ti can't do 60fps in Borderlands 3 with 4k max settings. Obviously you lower settings for 4k or 1440p. I personally believe that AA at 4k is a waste of GPU resources. The perpose of AA was to remove jaggies caused by lower resolutions like 640X480 or 800X600, but at 4k you shouldn't see much of any jaggies, especially if you're using a smaller monitor at 4k.but the cheapest actual 4k gaming GPU is like a 2080 Ti is it not?
I'm more of a 1440p guy at higher frame rates, to reduce input lag. You can do 1440p in most games on a GTX 1060 or even 970. You won't be getting 120fps but that's still better than Geforce Now.Sure, my 2070m could do 4k... on like lowest settings at best. Your 2700x w/ vega56 sure cant on decent settings.
Depends on the game because some games it makes no different in performance. Besides what do you care about Ultra settings when Geforce Now is compressing the image?You must never operate any games in ultra, there are some vast differences on ultra in some games.. all games? no, but I'd say a lot there is very noticeable difference.
Making a lot of assumptions there. If the game does lag then a local user has the option. Cloud gaming can't increase the speed of light, or the speed of electricity.Local gaming absolutely does have delays when you're in intense fights and graphical settings, it's called low framerate. Unless you're running on lowest settings or have a 2080 Ti, I suspect people try to run a game at the highest settings they are capable of; when a system encounters too much, it boggs down for 1-2 secs and catches up. That may happen 1-2 times a week for me while using GFN/Shadow (TBH, I rarely use GFN now in the past 30-60 days, just shadow... GFN didn't have the game on it I wanted and have been in the mood for the past couple months)
Its doing 1440p at somewhat around 120fps, depending on the game.I am running all of my games at 1080p over 60 FPS. Obviously it's not doing 4k now.. but neither is your $800 2700x system.
I'm using optimum and my speed is pretty good, but why would I use cloud gaming at home? I would think the appeal is using it on a phone while on the go? That's when internet sucks so much even YouTube videos aren't reliable. I also rarely want to pull out my phone to play games because touchscreens are bullshit. Seriously, I want my slide out qwerty phones back again.I feel sad for wherever you live, is it really that unstable/unreliable for you? I even have spectrum and in the past 3 years I've never dipped below 100mb connection speed and haven't had longer than a 1-2 hr outage...and that was due to a car knocking out a pole in the neighbor hood. My whole neighborhood was built between 1983-1988, so it's not like I'm operating on top of the line infrastructure either.
Yea, I can't wait for a GPU that most people and myself can't afford. We all know Intels first GPU's are going to suck, but if they can reach RX 5700 levels of performance with Ray-Tracing for less than $300 then I'd say we have a winner.I am cautiously optimistic on seeing intels discreet gpu performance, more competition is good. I absolutely can't wait to see big navi later this year.
I don't have a copy of ARK on me. WoW this game is made in 2015 and on Steam they want $50. Anyone can take screenshots of the game at 1080p max settings running local? Wanna try to get a side by side comparison if possible.Here you can see the banding I'm talking about and remember, that when I look at one spot for more than 1sec some of the banding goes away, so you don't get to see the full bad banding in these PNG screenshots:
View attachment 221788
View attachment 221789
No, it's garbage because it has latency that will never ever go away and you keep comparing it to a $2k PC. Anything above 100ms input latency is uncomfortable to play, and I doubt Nvidia achieved bellow 100ms input latency.
Depends on the game and the settings but last I checked the 2080 Ti can't do 60fps in Borderlands 3 with 4k max settings. Obviously you lower settings for 4k or 1440p. I personally believe that AA at 4k is a waste of GPU resources. The perpose of AA was to remove jaggies caused by lower resolutions like 640X480 or 800X600, but at 4k you shouldn't see much of any jaggies, especially if you're using a smaller monitor at 4k.
I'm more of a 1440p guy at higher frame rates, to reduce input lag. You can do 1440p in most games on a GTX 1060 or even 970. You won't be getting 120fps but that's still better than Geforce Now.
Making a lot of assumptions there. If the game does lag then a local user has the option. Cloud gaming can't increase the speed of light, or the speed of electricity.
Yea, I can't wait for a GPU that most people and myself can't afford. We all know Intels first GPU's are going to suck, but if they can reach RX 5700 levels of performance with Ray-Tracing for less than $300 then I'd say we have a winner.
I don't have a copy of ARK on me. WoW this game is made in 2015 and on Steam they want $50. Anyone can take screenshots of the game at 1080p max settings running local? Wanna try to get a side by side comparison if possible.
I can do some tomorrow afternoon.I don't have a copy of ARK on me. WoW this game is made in 2015 and on Steam they want $50. Anyone can take screenshots of the game at 1080p max settings running local? Wanna try to get a side by side comparison if possible.
I'll admit, my competitive wins were probably a yearish ago when it was new, probably with limited use during beta, but yeah it excels on SP and MMO types for sure.So I downloaded GFN and gave it a shot, I was getting 23ms ping to a west coast server. I tried Apex Legends and could see some compression artifacts but they weren't too bad. However, the added latency made it difficult to be competitive so this service is definitely not for competitive players (which I doubt it's marketed towards anyway). However, I did record a 9 min video of Bioshock Infinite which worked remarkably well and this is where the service will do well, SP games, MMO and other slow paced titles. I'll put up the video of the gameplay once it's done encoding.
perhaps it's been so long since I've been able to enjoy a locally played game I have a hard time remembering / distinguishing a 10-15% drop in quality due to compression (made up percentage). Granted I do have great internet it seems. I look forward to more comparison shots to compare.I can do some tomorrow afternoon.
All I know is that there is absolutely no banding in the sky at all when I play local.
To me it's no comparison, but then, I don't have fiber internet...
This matters why? Most people don't spend that much on a PC, and you don't need anything better than a GTX 1060 to get 1080p performance.Comparing it to a $2k laptop from 3 years ago, guess I should clarify, 2k PC would probably give me a 2080 ti and with a sweet CPU now days.
Pics or didn't happen.However, while my data points are only from one person... I've come in first place on multiple games of fortnite, which absolutely requires low input latency. I've also won on mordhau... also needs very low latency.
You sure you don't work for Nvidia? You sound like their PR department.With cloud streaming I've been capable of being #1 in FPS games.. a useful member on MMO type games where I'm required to provide critical healing, all of which require low latency.
None of us are the typical case, honestly. Steam shows that the average person rocks a GTX 1060 or less with a quad core CPU or less. Most of us here run PC's faster than that. The reality is most people won't touch cloud gaming unless there's a really good deal or a huge convenience. Not having to buy a PC or console is a huge convience, but when someone starts up a game and runs into performance issues then they'll look elsewhere. As good as Geforce Now is I doubt they have input latency less than 100ms, which is a turn off for most people. Especially because the average Joe Six Pack is mostly using 802.11n WiFi that is supplied from the ISP. Which means they'll experience worse input lag than most of us will. While Gamers Nexus or Digital Foundry might achieve 120ms on average in games, then add another 50ms for crappy slow home wifi.I admit, I'm probably not the typical case.
How many hours a day do you game on Geforce Now again? Do you not have access to Amazon or NewEgg?Don't get me wrong, if I had the free time to escape to my office, I'd buy a 1440p capable system today,
Sounds like an awfully specific place.however due to kids and the need to get more close proximity time with the wife, I game on the couch from a surface pro.
You sure you aren't a door to door sales man who sells vacuum cleaners that comes with a free month of Geforce Now? I'd also point you to how I was able to get my Vega 56 down to 63C core with 15 mins of FurMark using the reference cooler with details on how I achieved this here. Just look at my sexy lap job. This is also the same technique I used to reduce the temperature of my laptops, because apparently I have like 15 laptops. 17 laptops if I count the two Toshiba laptops my cousin gave me because they got hot and slow, but I plan to give those to a friend of mine for free. I got the temperature down to 61C under load. But you probably don't have enough time to do all that with gaming on the cloud on the couch and all.I used to use my gaming laptop.. however it can no longer go more than like 30-45 mins before blue screening / over heating... even at max fans. So, now that GFN / shadow are an option.. 99% of the time I can't tell the difference between my physical system and cloud streaming, and I can actually run the games at higher levels. Obviously there is probably some video compression.. but I can run it at higher settings compared to the 2070m.
I'd honestly like to see your laptops temp as well. That sounds crazy.Re your other post.. I'll see if I can get ark running on my laptop long enough to take a screenshot, then compare to GFN.
Remember this is the PCMasterRace where our frame rates stay high and our temps low. If I just simply played games off Steam and Origin then how different am I to a console peasant? No.. I play games with mods. I play console games on PC through emulators. I play console games on PC through an emulator that has mods installed. I play old games like Doom but with the Brutal Doom mod. I can play dead games on a private server like City of Heroes. Cloud gaming is just an inferior console system with input lag. Which somehow seems even more inferior to consoles, which I didn't think that was possible. Why would anyone of us think about cloud gaming as an alternative?
Bruh, that was like 9 months ago during my peak gaming time! I may have a screenshot somewhere, I'm too lazy to look and can't prove it was on GFN ;pThis matters why? Most people don't spend that much on a PC, and you don't need anything better than a GTX 1060 to get 1080p performance.
Pics or didn't happen.
You sure you don't work for Nvidia? You sound like their PR department.
None of us are the typical case, honestly. Steam shows that the average person rocks a GTX 1060 or less with a quad core CPU or less. Most of us here run PC's faster than that. The reality is most people won't touch cloud gaming unless there's a really good deal or a huge convenience. Not having to buy a PC or console is a huge convience, but when someone starts up a game and runs into performance issues then they'll look elsewhere. As good as Geforce Now is I doubt they have input latency less than 100ms, which is a turn off for most people. Especially because the average Joe Six Pack is mostly using 802.11n WiFi that is supplied from the ISP. Which means they'll experience worse input lag than most of us will. While Gamers Nexus or Digital Foundry might achieve 120ms on average in games, then add another 50ms for crappy slow home wifi.
How many hours a day do you game on Geforce Now again? Do you not have access to Amazon or NewEgg?
Well, of course it's a specific place, that's what I do multiple times a week. Kids go to bed at 7-730... wife and I get freetime from then until 10-1030. I'd love to escape to the office to gametime alone, but me playing half attentive on the couch lets us communicate an spend time together...and keeps her happy!Sounds like an awfully specific place.
You sure you aren't a door to door sales man who sells vacuum cleaners that comes with a free month of Geforce Now? I'd also point you to how I was able to get my Vega 56 down to 63C core with 15 mins of FurMark using the reference cooler with details on how I achieved this here. Just look at my sexy lap job. This is also the same technique I used to reduce the temperature of my laptops, because apparently I have like 15 laptops. 17 laptops if I count the two Toshiba laptops my cousin gave me because they got hot and slow, but I plan to give those to a friend of mine for free. I got the temperature down to 61C under load. But you probably don't have enough time to do all that with gaming on the cloud on the couch and all.
Remember this is the PCMasterRace where our frame rates stay high and our temps low. If I just simply played games off Steam and Origin then how different am I to a console peasant? No.. I play games with mods. I play console games on PC through emulators. I play console games on PC through an emulator that has mods installed. I play old games like Doom but with the Brutal Doom mod. I can play dead games on a private server like City of Heroes. Cloud gaming is just an inferior console system with input lag. Which somehow seems even more inferior to consoles, which I didn't think that was possible. Why would anyone of us think about cloud gaming as an alternative?
I'd honestly like to see your laptops temp as well. That sounds crazy.
I've already addressed those issues.Are you brain damaged? Seriously. You've been told ad nauseam that it's an alternative for people who couldn't otherwise afford a gaming PC (or travel to places where one isn't available) and instead of addressing that, you go off on a tangent talking about PCMR and mods.
Nvidia's most lucrative income is from servers... like Geforce Now. Most of those servers aren't obviously used for gaming, but I'm sure Nvidia would like to be the #1 choice for cloud gaming hardware if they could.Like seriously, wtf dude, get a grip. NVIDIA isn't in the business of destroying their most lucrative income (consumer GPUs), they're offering a game streaming service to those who want to play PC games on crappy android phones, tablets and laptops.
Because I have a network degree and I know you can't beat the speed of light. That's it, don't pass Go, don't get $200, don't game without latency. It is the main reason why cloud gaming is always going to fail, because we seem to ignore the most fundamental principal of physics. It's the reason why Stadia failed, among many other things. It's the reason why Grid and now renamed Geforce Now has and will fail. And yes I know most of the latency is caused by hops, but those aren't unavoidable. It's literally the most retarded thing ever. WTF even?Why does that get you so worked up? I don't know where you live, but here in California you can get fast internet in just about any city and when you're not at home, there are plenty of fast wireless options.
It works like video streaming services where in this case more choice is bad. You want to watch the Mandalorian then you need a Disney+ subscription. Want to watch Star Trek Picard, then you need CBS All access. The Witcher is on Netflix, and the Grand Tour is on Amazon Prime. Neither Stadia or Geforce Now has exclusives... yet, but PS Now certainly does. We're just opening up Pandora's Box if we allow these services to florish, besides that it has the potential to destroy console and PC gaming. It won't happen but throw in some timed exclusives and raise the price of gaming hardware and it might.This service isn't a trojan horse to replace PCs or even consoles, it's a third tier alternative and more choices is a good thing, not bad.
1. Will it cost $5 long term? probably not. but you're speculating, and as it stands it is either free for 1 hour sessions for $5 for unlimited, until it is stated otherwise and an annoucment has been made, guess what.. it's $5.I've already addressed those issues.
A. We don't know the final cost of Geforce Now, cause it certainly isn't $5 per month.
B. Here's a $630 pre-built gaming PC that'll do a better job.
C. If you're traveling then this certainly won't work as well as advertised. Remember latency is all about distance from server.
D. Get a Switch if you plan to travel. I did and modded the sucker and put Brutal Doom on it, among other things like emulators. Cell phone internet is not that good, and defintely drops when you're in a moving vehicle.
Because I have a network degree and I know you can't beat the speed of light. That's it, don't pass Go, don't get $200, don't game without latency. It is the main reason why cloud gaming is always going to fail, because we seem to ignore the most fundamental principal of physics. It's the reason why Stadia failed, among many other things. It's the reason why Grid and now renamed Geforce Now has and will fail. And yes I know most of the latency is caused by hops, but those aren't unavoidable. It's literally the most retarded thing ever. WTF even?
You can't get a faster internet because ultimately the speed of light is the issue, not bandwidth. A lack of bandwidth can cause more latency but I'm ignoring that issue and giving everyone the benefit of the doubt that their internet is fast as hell. You want to fix this issue then you need to move the server closer to you, or you move closer to the server. As it is most games have anywhere from 60ms to 80ms of latency without cloud gaming. The higher the frame rate the lower the latency. I assume we all know this right? So it's easy to see that cloud gaming must have over 100ms of input lag, unless you play a game like Thumper which can run on a potato of a computer.
The fact that Nvidia has stipulations like a wait time and a limited time to stay logged is just icing on the shit cake. Because financially these services can't maintain a profit without limiting how much hardware is used. That's why Stadia was up-scaling to 4k, like I predicted, and why Nvidia will probably use DLSS for 4k as well. They are using server grade hardware like Xeons running @ 2.7Ghz, with a Tesla P40 or something like that. That is vastly more expensive hardware than something like a 9900K with a RTX 2080 Ti, and inferior for gaming. You really think they'll let you or "casual" gamers use this service for as long as they want for $5?
It works like video streaming services where in this case more choice is bad. You want to watch the Mandalorian then you need a Disney+ subscription. Want to watch Star Trek Picard, then you need CBS All access. The Witcher is on Netflix, and the Grand Tour is on Amazon Prime. Neither Stadia or Geforce Now has exclusives... yet, but PS Now certainly does. We're just opening up Pandora's Box if we allow these services to florish, besides that it has the potential to destroy console and PC gaming. It won't happen but throw in some timed exclusives and raise the price of gaming hardware and it might.
https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/how-does-nvidia-make-money-2019-09-10Well, look at that, who would have thought, not a bit of revenue was made from server services such as GFN.Nvidia's most lucrative income is from servers... like Geforce Now. Most of those servers aren't obviously used for gaming, but I'm sure Nvidia would like to be the #1 choice for cloud gaming hardware if they could.
Because I have a network degree and I know you can't beat the speed of light. That's it, don't pass Go, don't get $200, don't game without latency.
As it is most games have anywhere from 60ms to 80ms of latency without cloud gaming. The higher the frame rate the lower the latency. I assume we all know this right? So it's easy to see that cloud gaming must have over 100ms of input lag,
It works like video streaming services where in this case more choice is bad. You want to watch the Mandalorian then you need a Disney+ subscription. Want to watch Star Trek Picard, then you need CBS All access. The Witcher is on Netflix, and the Grand Tour is on Amazon Prime. Neither Stadia or Geforce Now has exclusives... yet, but PS Now certainly does. We're just opening up Pandora's Box if we allow these services to florish, besides that it has the potential to destroy console and PC gaming. It won't happen but throw in some timed exclusives and raise the price of gaming hardware and it might.
30 minute play session of GFN recorded by me:
1. It's not speculation when it's on Nvidia's website. See where it says limited time offer? That means it won't always be $5.1. Will it cost $5 long term? probably not. but you're speculating, and as it stands it is either free for 1 hour sessions for $5 for unlimited, until it is stated otherwise and an annoucment has been made, guess what.. it's $5.
2. Speculation yet again, you havent utilized that system and you seem to have never utilized GFN
3. You realize GFN has multiple servers in multiple locations? It worked quite well in some hotels I've stayed at.
4. A switch...nevermind
I don't think you read the article. It says, "GPU revenues refers to revenue generated from sale of graphic processor units primarily used in consumer PCs, professional PCs, and data centers " and there's "In addition, the company also sells some of its high-end GPUs directly to consumers through retailers such as Best Buy. ". They don't break down exactly how Nvidia makes their money.https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/how-does-nvidia-make-money-2019-09-10Well, look at that, who would have thought, not a bit of revenue was made from server services such as GFN.
**Sigh**... Ok let me explain what you fail to understand. I talk about input lag latency which encompasses all latency, including network latency. When you hit the button on your input device it sends the data to Nvidia's servers at 12-18ms, which is really good like you live next to the server. Nvidia's sever is playing the game at 60fps which will create about 60-80ms of latency depending on the game, because games aren't input lag free. Nvidia's video encoder has to encode the video stream which creates another 2-5ms of latency. The data makes it back to you and your hardware has to decode it which is another 2-5ms of latency. Assuming your numbers are correct then you'll experience over 100ms of input latency. That's enough to notice it. At 150ms it begins to feel sluggish and annoying. At 200ms the game is unplayable.Network degree...speed of light. k. I have 12-18ms latency to the GFN server, and in game have a latency anywhere from 10-40 depending on the game. So I average anywhere between 22-58. Ideal latency in online FPS type games is 50ms or less.. so 22-58 is in the pretty ideal range for FPS. (I suspect I have a GFN server in very close proximity), but honestly 90ms or less is pretty decent.
No thanks, I'm keeping that train wreck out of this station. I've read the limited reviews and reddit posts and people are experiencing the same problems as Stadia. Same thing like Staida where people said I should try the service instead of bash it. Nope, I have a thing called foresight.lot of speculation from someone that seems to never have utilize the service. Let's just be a typical [H] human being here, spend 5 minutes and go look at the googles or reddit, don't take my word for it, there are hundreds/ thousands of reviews out already. Some are meh, others are competing and winning in competitive FPS games.
You would think but the temptation of money is too strong for companies. Stadia isn't done as they're making exclusives to try and push their platform, despite the horrible launch they had. I'm not even sure Geforce Now is having a launch since we've been through Nvidia's Streaming service multiple times already. Grid was introduced in 2008, so that makes Nvidia's cloud gaming service like 12 years old now. How many people use it, like 300,000 maybe? To give you an idea the Nokia N-Gage sold 3 million units, and that was considered a failure. For comparision the PS Now service which was released in 2014 has like 700,000 active users and that service actually has exclusive games.Not everyone will have that perfect experience of course, but many will.. or no one would be willing to pay for it, and it would obviously go out of business right... I'm pretty sure that's how business works, bad product, no money, no business.
People said the same thing about Stadia as well and look at where they are today. Microsoft stopped reporting Xbox One sales because they're super smart. I bet Nvidia can count all the way to potato.I'd like to think NVIDIA is a pretty competent and has smart people in their ranks, or they wouldn't be in business.
You do know that you're not making Geforce Now sound any better right? Also, I'm pretty sure I mentioned your points in another post of mine.Of course not everyone is going to have the same experience because.. guess what not everyone has the same ISP or good networking equipment in their house, a lot of people use the garbage router/modem combo from their ISP, I suspect they may suffer under streaming conditions. I'm sure you know all this with your networking degree though.
Just as I expected, the image is suffering from color banding from video compression. You'll get a clearer picture from a Xbox One than this. My point is that people need to stop comparing it to a $1k let alone a $2k PC when this happens to the image. Makes you wonder how they'll pull off 4k?Ok here are screenshots comparing image quality on my laptop (tried to get close to the same exact spot and time of day)
Both are running the same settings (all Epic). Ignore the lack of clouds also, for some reason the GeforceNow session had to clouds this time lol.
GeforceNow:
View attachment 222066
Native:
View attachment 222067
As you can see the banding is pretty obvious...
Just as I expected, the image is suffering from color banding from video compression. You'll get a clearer picture from a Xbox One than this. My point is that people need to stop comparing it to a $1k let alone a $2k PC when this happens to the image. Makes you wonder how they'll pull off 4k?
now I'm just responding because I'm bored before bed, because you seem to be of the type, given straight up empirical evidence from multiple sources refuting your "theories" because as you stated you haven't even attempted to use GFN, so absolutely everything you say is... guess what? speculation and a fallacy.1. It's not speculation when it's on Nvidia's website. See where it says limited time offer? That means it won't always be $5.
2. I honestly can't make heads or tails of your sentence. My PC or the one I linked? Exactly what speculation?
3. Yes, just like Stadia, thank you. Who would have known that Nvidia has multiple servers to support the Geforce Now service? Of course they have multiple servers, but that doesn't change the fact there's always input latency.
4. Hey don't knock it. It works without an internet connection and since I hacked mine I can do more things than even Cloud Gaming offers. Plus it has physical input buttons.
I don't think you read the article. It says, "GPU revenues refers to revenue generated from sale of graphic processor units primarily used in consumer PCs, professional PCs, and data centers " and there's "In addition, the company also sells some of its high-end GPUs directly to consumers through retailers such as Best Buy. ". They don't break down exactly how Nvidia makes their money.
No thanks, I'm keeping that train wreck out of this station. I've read the limited reviews and reddit posts and people are experiencing the same problems as Stadia. Same thing like Staida where people said I should try the service instead of bash it. Nope, I have a thing called foresight.
You would think but the temptation of money is too strong for companies. Stadia isn't done as they're making exclusives to try and push their platform, despite the horrible launch they had. I'm not even sure Geforce Now is having a launch since we've been through Nvidia's Streaming service multiple times already. Grid was introduced in 2008, so that makes Nvidia's cloud gaming service like 12 years old now. How many people use it, like 300,000 maybe? To give you an idea the Nokia N-Gage sold 3 million units, and that was considered a failure. For comparision the PS Now service which was released in 2014 has like 700,000 active users and that service actually has exclusive games.
People said the same thing about Stadia as well and look at where they are today. Microsoft stopped reporting Xbox One sales because they're super smart. I bet Nvidia can count all the way to potato.
You do know that you're not making Geforce Now sound any better right? Also, I'm pretty sure I mentioned your points in another post of mine.
Just as I expected, the image is suffering from color banding from video compression. You'll get a clearer picture from a Xbox One than this. My point is that people need to stop comparing it to a $1k let alone a $2k PC when this happens to the image. Makes you wonder how they'll pull off 4k?
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.I don't think you read the article.
Your entire argument is a fallacy. None of it is based on your experience and it's just theory.**Sigh**... Ok let me explain what you fail to understand. I talk about input lag latency which encompasses all latency, including network latency. When you hit the button on your input device it sends the data to Nvidia's servers at 12-18ms, which is really good like you live next to the server. Nvidia's sever is playing the game at 60fps which will create about 60-80ms of latency depending on the game, because games aren't input lag free. Nvidia's video encoder has to encode the video stream which creates another 2-5ms of latency. The data makes it back to you and your hardware has to decode it which is another 2-5ms of latency. Assuming your numbers are correct then you'll experience over 100ms of input latency. That's enough to notice it. At 150ms it begins to feel sluggish and annoying. At 200ms the game is unplayable.
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.
I'm sorry, did you not read my previous post where I gave my "more in depth" review of GeforeNow? It's not just 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.
**Sigh**... Ok let me explain what you fail to understand. I talk about input lag latency which encompasses all latency, including network latency. When you hit the button on your input device it sends the data to Nvidia's servers at 12-18ms, which is really good like you live next to the server. Nvidia's sever is playing the game at 60fps which will create about 60-80ms of latency depending on the game, because games aren't input lag free. Nvidia's video encoder has to encode the video stream which creates another 2-5ms of latency. The data makes it back to you and your hardware has to decode it which is another 2-5ms of latency. Assuming your numbers are correct then you'll experience over 100ms of input latency. That's enough to notice it. At 150ms it begins to feel sluggish and annoying. At 200ms the game is unplayable.
No thanks, I'm keeping that train wreck out of this station. I've read the limited reviews and reddit posts and people are experiencing the same problems as Stadia. Same thing like Staida where people said I should try the service instead of bash it. Nope, I have a thing called foresight.
Just as I expected, the image is suffering from color banding from video compression. You'll get a clearer picture from a Xbox One than this. My point is that people need to stop comparing it to a $1k let alone a $2k PC when this happens to the image. Makes you wonder how they'll pull off 4k?
The target market is going to be people that are too cheap to spend their money on anything decent, be it a console, laptop, internet, router, etc. How do you think the experience will be for them? Anybody that has a 1GB fiber connection at home I would assume would have some kind of "gaming device" be it console or PC.