The problem isn't (average) download speed. The problem is the network packets don't come at a constant rate. Fast bursts don't help if they are too late for a high frame rate. A wired connection is less bursty (on Apple's current products).
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Hands-On With NVIDIA's GeForce Now Streaming Game Service
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The problem isn't (average) download speed. The problem is the network packets don't come at a constant rate. Fast bursts don't help if they are too late for a high frame rate. A wired connection is less bursty (on Apple's current products).
A lot of people, especially on this forum, do not like Windows PC's at all. This service allows people that cannot, or will not buy a Windows PC to game on a Mac, which you should know is very, very, very far from great! Bootcamp is not the best solution either.
I honestly do not like Windows at all, and the only reason that I have Windows is (as I described in my earlier post) because I enjoy building my own custom computers, which Windows is specifically used to game on (I literally do nothing else on my Windows PC) and then I do some Hackintoshing.
Also, I have 500/50 internet, and it is not really that expensive...so 400/50, or 400/25 is most likely going to be cheaper. Then to add a service that costs $4.99 (and also has a free tier) is not bad at all.
TLDR: A streaming service is better over wired connection rather than wireless.
SHOCKING
SHOCKING
You definitely don't need 400Mb/s The max GFN will send is 50Mbps and you can easily play with good quality on 25Mbps. Latency is far more important than bandwidth here.
Additionally this service and services like it will enable mac owners to actually play games which seems pretty relevant for a site like this.
I tried it, very nice. It's also funny how much this enrages gamers.
[automerge]1582776892[/automerge]
[automerge]1582776937[/automerge]
[automerge]1582776892[/automerge]
Well I played on 30mb/s internet over wifi and took the quality hit, no big deal. If I had faster internet, it'd be for stuff besides this. Also it's annoying to deal with another computer.
[automerge]1582776937[/automerge]
Also average latency tends to be much worse over wifi.
Last edited:
At least in Europe fast internet is dirt cheap - I have 10 Gbps symmetric fiber connection for the equivalent of $50, including 200+ TV channels and phone service.
I think this shows you the future of where all software is headed. Up in the cloud on powerful servers
I can see APPLE no longer selling downloadable software like Final Cut Pro and Logic Pro X and the iWork Suite.
Because future versions will be installed and updated on APPLE server farms only.
Then the software would go to a monthly or yearly subscription Fee.
I am 100 percent certain this is where Adobe Cloud Applications are headed. To the server and off your computer only to be accessed through a browser
This is why Apple can get away with selling ARM Macs instead of beefed up desktop Macs with multicore processors and expensive video cards.
In the world of 5G to 7G internet heavy lifting desktops and laptops NO LONGER NEEDED.
I can see APPLE no longer selling downloadable software like Final Cut Pro and Logic Pro X and the iWork Suite.
Because future versions will be installed and updated on APPLE server farms only.
Then the software would go to a monthly or yearly subscription Fee.
I am 100 percent certain this is where Adobe Cloud Applications are headed. To the server and off your computer only to be accessed through a browser
This is why Apple can get away with selling ARM Macs instead of beefed up desktop Macs with multicore processors and expensive video cards.
In the world of 5G to 7G internet heavy lifting desktops and laptops NO LONGER NEEDED.
I subscribed for 3 months and I'm extremely satisfied except for a few issues and bugs. This is one of the reasons why Apple does not care about developing a game for macOS since you just need to get streaming service for only $5 per month. I don't have any games to enable ray tracing but I can test it if you buy one for me(....)
And 4K streaming at this point is quite impossible.
And 4K streaming at this point is quite impossible.
It's just too expensive for mainstream. But also the media complains about geeky stuff like the 4K not working or whatever. The thing is, anyone who works for a PC gaming media company is going to be personally against streaming games and also out of touch with what most people want.
Damn.
I wish we had that pricing in the U.S.!
Or over here in apparently a different country in Europe since 50$ wouldn’t even get me a 50 Mbps asymmetric connection and with definitely less than 200 TV channels. I couldn’t even get a 10 Gbps connection if I wanted to. At best I can find a 1 Gbps for about 100$ but that’ll be asymmetric again.
That's simply because you fail to see the bigger picture. It's the declared strategy of all big IT corporations to move --all-- computing to "the cloud", games are just one piece of the puzzle here (albeit a very demanding one).
Xbox is turning into a streaming platform for games, Microsoft already stated that they no longer care what hardware you want to use to play Xbox titled. You probably can even expect an Xbox streaming client for Sony's Playstation rather soon.
In December 2019, Microsoft launched a product called "Windows Virtual Desktop". It's exactly what it says on the (virtual) "box": A virtual Windows desktop, running in Azure. With the desktop versions of Office. And whatever other software you want to install on it. All you need is an HTML5 capable browser to use a Windows machine this way. And again, Microsoft doesn't care what hardware or operating system you use to access this virtual desktop.
"We’re building out Azure as the world’s computer.”
-- Satya Nadella, CEO of Microsoft Corporation, in his ”Vision Keynote” at the Microsoft Build 2019 Conference
This is where this all is headed. Right now, they're all building the back-end infrastructure so that it is ready when the telcos have finished upgrading their (mobile) networks to make the necessary bandwidth available. What will feel completely natural to use in five years from now, is being built today.
But all of us should ask ourselves the very important question whether we want this future.
Here is the must-read book on the topic, and it explains in non-technical language why that question is to important:
"The Age Of Surveillance Capitalism"
SHOSHANA ZUBOFF
shoshanazuboff.com
I have been using GeForce Now with a MBP15 and my corporate zbook 15 both wired (when convenient) and wireless and my feedback is pretty great.
I like the model, there games come from my steam library and on those two machines (both unable to do so, one too slow, the other too restricted) I can play games. On regular properly configured desktop PCs I play the same games.
I like the model, there games come from my steam library and on those two machines (both unable to do so, one too slow, the other too restricted) I can play games. On regular properly configured desktop PCs I play the same games.
onlive worked great and proved the concept. Problem is when thes services die you lose your game purchases too
Unfortunately, GeForce Now is not up to scratch. If you are capable of perceiving input lag, it’s off the scale with GeForce Now even with the different options they have that are meant to mitigate it. I have a decent internet connection (200mbps down, 19mbps up) and even wired in with ethernet on a Mac and PC, the lag is very noticeable. And, if you implement the different settings meant to reduce lag, you soon realise the lag still exists and the image looks like mud. Streaming just isn’t there yet, even for those of us with reasonable internet connections.
Ethernet cables? Yeah, nope.
Superfast internet? Not in my part of the world anytime soon.
Only being able to game with a connection to a server? No thanks.
I like games that only need a power source and don't require an internet link (or the 'permission' of a server owner to allow me to play).
I dislike this move to have everything running like a Thin Client - businesses do it with critical software; hospitals do it with patient data; everyone's doing it.
It's barely OK when it 'works' and then when the network goes down it becomes a nightmare because everyone has assumed the computers they're looking at are actually running the software, when it's nothing of the sort.
[automerge]1582799661[/automerge]
Hell no! It's a dystopian nightmare...
Superfast internet? Not in my part of the world anytime soon.
Only being able to game with a connection to a server? No thanks.
I like games that only need a power source and don't require an internet link (or the 'permission' of a server owner to allow me to play).
I dislike this move to have everything running like a Thin Client - businesses do it with critical software; hospitals do it with patient data; everyone's doing it.
It's barely OK when it 'works' and then when the network goes down it becomes a nightmare because everyone has assumed the computers they're looking at are actually running the software, when it's nothing of the sort.
[automerge]1582799661[/automerge]
Hell no! It's a dystopian nightmare...
For me, gaming isn’t just about playing the game, there’s a collecting aspect too. While i am sure streaming will be where we end up, it will be a sad day for me. I prefer physical copies of games. The fact some want the same price for a physical disc as they do for a digital download baffles me.
the funny thing is, that the biggest compute capacity is alredy in your pockets. the billions of smartphones with their GPU can deliver several magnitudes higher computing power that any datacenter on earth. oh, and another fun fact:
- you paid for this device with your own money.
- you power it with the electricity you pay for
- they are dirt cheap compared to any x64/GPU servers as they are produced on a lot larger scale
mobile CPUs and GPUs are getting insanely powerful, so why'd anyone bother to try to squeeze this into a smaller footprint, plus rely on a stupidly expensive highspeed network to deliver the pre-rendered stream with a significant latency to you, while stuggling with cooling, power consumption and networking costs. not to mention the upfront costs.
sure, 'cloud gaming' is very similar to netflix as it is essentially just a 'personalised' video stream, but while netflix can 'easily' distribute its content almost to everyone's doorstep. their pod delivers 100Gbps videostream from 4 rack units, that is over 10000 full HD streams simultaneously. for 'cloud gaming' you'd need a whole lot more at this scale.
good review though I'm not a modern gamer
last game i played/owned was total annihilation for pc years ago
was pretty fun back then
last game i played/owned was total annihilation for pc years ago
was pretty fun back then
