• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

(Video) Hands-On With GeForce Now: Does Cloud Gaming Finally Work?

cageymaru

cageymaru

Fully [H]
2FA
Joined
Apr 10, 2003
Messages
23,513
Hands-On With GeForce Now: Does Cloud Gaming Finally Work?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cq_LLPZfwrs

They show how GeForce Now runs on their system. First of all it used over 25MB/s to stream the games. It looked impressive to me until they got to the GameWorks titles. It seems that Nvidia's GPUs that they have in their Cloud servers can't handle GameWorks. Batman ran at 46 fps instead of 60 fps with frame drops and The Witcher 3 could only muster 30 fps.

Like the narrator of the video explained you have to pay full price for the Geforce Now version of the game. Why would you pay full price for 30 fps and a monthly subscription fee on top of the full game price? But like I said it does look like Cloud Gaming is maturing some. I'm not convinced of the "low latency" 150ms figure that the CEO of Nvidia tossed around at the TitanX launch party.

So are you'll ready to give Cloud gaming a go?
 
I guess the idea is that you could save on hardware by subscribing - basically just have an HTPC and pay the $96/year to have someone else upgrade and run your hardware?

Man, that's a ton of latency though.
 
Well in the video they said that they were able to play at 55ms - 80ms. At the TitanX launch I remember the CEO stating 150ms. 55ms - 80ms is probably a best case scenario where you have a Fiber connection and the servers are close. Thus 150ms for the rest of us.
 
cagey you will get used to it in my country we get 150ms minimum on wow.lol, starcraft because our only way to play is through european servers even EA cancelled TitanFall.
 
Last edited:
Well at 25mb-50mb/s you can't use this with any kind of cap. You will probably be racking up multi-terabytes of bandwidth used.

For me 150ms is not usable, the difference between 100ms & 50ms is also pretty huge also. Even putting the lag aside, those low FPS for a paid service is not acceptable IMO.
 
So basically it's a 10x better experience than the typical consoles?
 
jwcalla said:
So basically it's a 10x better experience than the typical consoles?
Click to expand...

Hmm. Say you are playing Street Fighter V and you have 150ms to the GeForce Now server. Then the person you're playing against has 150ms to the server. Then I suppose that both contestants would be connected to Capcom's server? Even if they aren't connected to Capcom servers for matchmaking and the actual match, how much lag would that be?

I think I'd take the console 100% of the time. :)
 
cageymaru said:
Hands-On With GeForce Now: Does Cloud Gaming Finally Work?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cq_LLPZfwrs

They show how GeForce Now runs on their system. First of all it used over 25MB/s to stream the games. It looked impressive to me until they got to the GameWorks titles. It seems that Nvidia's GPUs that they have in their Cloud servers can't handle GameWorks. Batman ran at 46 fps instead of 60 fps with frame drops and The Witcher 3 could only muster 30 fps.

Like the narrator of the video explained you have to pay full price for the Geforce Now version of the game. Why would you pay full price for 30 fps and a monthly subscription fee on top of the full game price? But like I said it does look like Cloud Gaming is maturing some. I'm not convinced of the "low latency" 150ms figure that the CEO of Nvidia tossed around at the TitanX launch party.

So are you'll ready to give Cloud gaming a go?
Click to expand...


The FPS drops are probably because the current GRID systems are based on Kepler and not Maxwell GPUs. I'm surprised NVIDIA did that instead of packing Maxwell in there for maximum power efficiency. This is just the beginning for GRID, in the next 3-5 years after they scale it up to Pascal/Volta with better network latency we'll see some real progress, especially if NVIDIA strikes a deal with someone like Samsung and incorporates the service into a Smart TV--that would be a good way of competing against consoles.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top