CES 2017: Nvidia's 'GeForce Now' Cloud Service to Bring High-End PC Gaming to Mac

Discussion in 'Mac Blog Discussion' started by MacRumors, Jan 4, 2017.

  1. MacRumors macrumors bot


    Apr 12, 2001

    Tonight at its CES 2017 keynote event, Nvidia announced GeForce Now for Mac and PC, a cloud gaming service that allows low-end Mac and PC users to play high-end PC games. The service is similar to an identically-named service for Nvidia Shield users.


    Nvidia says that there are an estimated 1 billion PC users who have integrated GPUs that can't play games "to their full potential." GeForce Now allows those users to access a Pascal-powered PC in the cloud to play games to their full potential.

    In addition to letting users with low-end computers play high-end games, the service will become one of the few ways Mac users can play the latest AAA PC games. According to The Verge, Nvidia showed off the service by playing Rise of the Tomb Raider on an iMac. Rise of the Tomb Raider is not yet available for macOS.

    GeForce Now doesn't stream games from the cloud to a user's computer, similar to how Netflix streams movies to various devices, reports Engadget. GeForce Now is more like a high-end PC in the cloud that runs a user's games. Users will have to purchase their games from online distributors like Steam and Origin. Once they're purchased, they can use the power of GeForce's GRID servers to run them on their computers.

    The service will cost $25 for every 20 hours of play. Nvidia says the service will start rolling out in March

    Article Link: CES 2017: Nvidia's 'GeForce Now' Cloud Service to Bring High-End PC Gaming to Mac
  2. motorazr macrumors 6502


    Oct 24, 2006
    The Frozen Waste...wait. Duluth, Minnesota.

    Maybe I don't take enough to understand this... but seems costly for what it is... surprised they didn't come up with a weekly or monthly billing system ... ah well.
  3. zorinlynx macrumors 601


    May 31, 2007
    Florida, USA
    What's with this obsession with running our software on remote systems and using our computers as, basically, thin clients or terminals?

    This model of computing became outdated in the 90s. Why are we going back to it?

    I can't imagine games to be very playable on this setup due to latency, jitter, lost packets, and so on.
  4. R3k macrumors 6502a

    Sep 7, 2011
    Sep 7, 2011
    Wow. I feel the marathon session will make a come back with that pricing scheme.
  5. motorazr macrumors 6502


    Oct 24, 2006
    The Frozen Waste...wait. Duluth, Minnesota.

    I think the thin client model is still in use in many places actually. This just seems like a strange implementation.
  6. garirry macrumors 65832


    Apr 27, 2013
    Canada is my city
  7. busuan macrumors newbie

    Feb 24, 2016
    So that's why nvidia priced their products so high. They don't want you to buy them at all, because they need all the chips to build their cloud GPU?!
    --- Post Merged, Jan 4, 2017 ---
    Unix nostalgia....
  8. Stella, Jan 4, 2017
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2017

    Stella macrumors 604


    Apr 21, 2003
    Computer / system architecture repeats itself.

    We've seen fat clients, thin clients, several times in the past 30 / 40 years. Technology improves that makes it viable again.

    Cloud computing is basically thin clients - a web or mobile front end for example - with an app server(s)

  9. saudor macrumors 6502

    Jul 18, 2011
  10. frankdogg macrumors regular


    Mar 24, 2011
    Mid-Wilshire LA
    and they said I couldn't Overwatch on OS X....

    (idk if this allows me to play overwatch on my mac though)
  11. farewelwilliams macrumors 65816

    Jun 18, 2014
    I used to use OnLive. It was super playable. The only downside is that the video quality wasn't as crisp as playing it natively. It's like viewing a 1080p video on Youtube vs viewing that 1080p video before Youtube recompressed it.
  12. konqerror, Jan 4, 2017
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2017

    konqerror macrumors 6502

    Dec 31, 2013
    Explain why its outdated. I see some major changes since the 90s:
    1. Users are dumber (everybody has to use a computer, not just a professional) while software and problems (security!) has increased exponentially in complexity. Centralized support has become much more efficient.

    2. Communication has become much cheaper and bandwidth increased. You used to be stuck on 1200 bps paying $.50 (1985) a minute to get data across the country.

    3. Timesharing makes sense economically. You don't play games 100% of the time, and you use the same programs as other people. You can share hardware. With rising energy costs, this is critical. With mobile computing you have the stagnation of battery technology and the end of Moore's law.

    4. Hardware lifecycles are decreasing. NVidia puts out new products every 6 months whereas the Mac Plus sold for 4.5 years. Sharing hardware lets you have the latest products by spreading the cost among others.

    Real-time communication by text was outdated by the 80s too when everybody got a telephone and threw away their Telex. What's this obsession with texting?
  13. bladerunner2000 macrumors 68000


    Jun 12, 2015
    This! Omg, would love to slap a 1080 into my Hackintosh.
  14. Quu macrumors 68020


    Apr 2, 2007
    When he began talking about how people may have a notebook and they want more powerful graphics I was fully expecting him to announce a slim form factor external GPU dock using Thunderbolt 3.

    But instead we get .. GeForce Now.. A streaming service with noticeable high latency over a real life GPU connected right to your computer.

    And $25 for 20 hours .. that seems rather high to me to be honest, a real GPU would be a lot cheaper over the long run.
  15. macmee Suspended


    Dec 13, 2008
    $25 for 20 hours? You're better off just building a gaming PC....
  16. nortonandreev macrumors regular


    Jan 11, 2016
    "The service will cost $25 for every 20 hours of play." lol
  17. Cougarcat macrumors 604

    Sep 19, 2003
    Yikes. Unlike PSNow, you have to buy the games in addition to the fee...yikes. So 1,000 hours would cost $1250, the cost of a good gaming rig to begin with. Throw in a Steam Link and you have the exact same thing: AAA streaming on your Mac with less latency.

    This seems like it would be only good for extremely casual users who only want to rarely play the occasional AAA game.
  18. konqerror macrumors 6502

    Dec 31, 2013
    Say you build a gaming computer. Costs $2500, lasts 3 years.

    For the same amount of money, that buys you 2,000 hours of play. Over the 3 years, that's 1.8 hours per day, every day, or 12.8 hours per week. So it really depends on how much you actually play.
  19. TylerAllen86, Jan 4, 2017
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2017

    TylerAllen86 macrumors newbie


    Dec 8, 2015
    When a Mac user wants to game... they turn on the PlayStation!
  20. FactVsOpinion macrumors 6502

    Jul 27, 2012
    Not true.

    Now even the most portable notebooks will be able to play on the go. And also, for people who only play very occasionally, that 25 might last 3 months.
  21. Steveo13, Jan 4, 2017
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2017

    Steveo13 macrumors regular


    Oct 25, 2011
    New York
    Sooooo you have to buy the game...THEN pay by the hour to play it...yeaaaaa doesn't sound like a good idea....
  22. BoneDaddy macrumors 6502a


    Jan 8, 2015
    Bringing high end gaming to Macs would put an end to the only argument the PC fan boys have.
  23. Freyqq macrumors 68040

    Dec 13, 2004
    If this was a $10 a month unlimited service, I think people would look into it. As it is now, it sounds like a really bad deal. Their competition is now the eGPU market. You can build an eGPU for like $450, which would pay for itself before this becomes economical.
  24. FactVsOpinion macrumors 6502

    Jul 27, 2012
    That's not competition until all the games are available on Mac at the same time.

Share This Page