1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

OnLive Builds Console-Quality Gaming Into LG Google TVs, No Console Required

Discussion in 'News' started by Cristian_25H, Nov 15, 2012.

  1. Binge

    Binge Overclocking Surrealism

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    6,981 (3.28/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,751
    Location:
    PA, USA
    I've been actually running and running on these servers in my day-to-day job. Guess what? I currently work for a large government body. Do you know how hard we stress the BIG servers with our bandwidth? Packet-size will become enormous vs current multi-player game use, and the challenge of how to handle players with increased latency further exasperates the complications of online play.

    I don't understand how you can honestly say that your 720p video is actually 720p. Please provide your magical low bandwidth 720p video that ACTUALLY REPRESENTS all 720p rendered pixels in the game. I would loves to see as I can not believes!

    This enormous impact to our already lacking infrastructure will cause more issues with the ISPs and down-times forcing the infrastructure to expand to compensate or this company to fold under the pressure of losing subscribers to XBox.
  2. Deadlyraver

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2011
    Messages:
    265 (0.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    23
    Man, I hope consoles fade away, they have held us PC gamers back for too long.
  3. EpicShweetness

    EpicShweetness

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2011
    Messages:
    307 (0.32/day)
    Thanks Received:
    30
    Location:
    Ft Gordon
    I know bandwidth is always an issue with VM's but that is the limitation more of the TCP/IP protocol (IPV4) then anything. I'm not gonna get into it to much but the way is handles packets, and the way that packets pile with streaming high definition content (Oh boy there are alot! Our VM's at work just doing a 2D desktop will generate 2 million packets a min.) you need bandwidth to over come it, I wonder if the extra bits of IPV6 can help . . .. hmmmm.
  4. Xzibit

    Xzibit

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,089 (1.35/day)
    Thanks Received:
    241
    Hope this helps


    Comparative Study of Ipv4 vs. Ipv6 Network performance in Windows 7
    Aaron Thomas is a MS candidate in computer science at California State University Chico, CA
  5. remixedcat

    remixedcat

    Joined:
    May 13, 2010
    Messages:
    2,588 (1.70/day)
    Thanks Received:
    529
    use QoS or other shaping features of your router and that will solve that.
  6. yogurt_21

    yogurt_21

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    4,309 (1.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    544
    Location:
    AZ
    way to try to use big boy words and then fail to actually back it up.

    how is it going to increase the latency in-game? the server is virtual, the desktop is virtual, all exist on a local network. the only bandwidth you have to worry about is to the end user from the virtual desktop. You comepletly ignored the xendesktop bandwidth utilization link, those numbers aren't made up.
    The high def wmv files typically range in the 5-50GB range so sure playback on that uses quite a bit, but otherwise its nowhere near enough to tax a 1.5Mbps connection. You're sending pixels, not files. Yes moving picture trumps static, but the bandwidth per user is still low.

    On a server with tons of vm's? sure the hosting site needs the proper backbone, other than that the users are fine. Also 720p = 720p not sure where your hangup on that is. An instructional video with the resolution of 1280x720 at 30 fps on a web based educational LMS that is surrounded by graphics, tranparencies, and transitions. All qc'd over virtual desktops because the virtual is local to the content and it uses less bandwidth than qc'ing it directly from the website where the files have to be streamed/downloaded onto a local desktop.

    we ship media appliances that host the content locally to the schools that use our product to avoid the bandwidth issue.

    seriously think about it, what uses more bandwidth, downloading the content directly or accessing it over a vm? If the answer was the former, why would we use vm's? it's not like desktops/laptops, etc can't be imaged.
  7. nt300

    nt300

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2010
    Messages:
    868 (0.53/day)
    Thanks Received:
    159
    Location:
    Toronto, ON. Canada
    I see this taking off in about 5 years time once all issues are resolved.
  8. kid41212003

    kid41212003

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    3,583 (1.63/day)
    Thanks Received:
    532
    Location:
    California
    Google optic internet service + OnLive = big win.
  9. RejZoR

    RejZoR

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2004
    Messages:
    4,425 (1.24/day)
    Thanks Received:
    873
    Location:
    Europe/Slovenia
    Some have a very weak understanding of video streaming here. Streaming for video (which OnLive essentially is just that) requires to stream full data at the realtime point in the game. There is no "send just unchanged parts". Thats the job of the video encoder, but you still need to get the full image to the end client. If it's 720p or 1080p, you need nearly lossless quality in order to get nice sharp image, otherwise you'd get a blurry mess. Imagine like comparing regular XviD DVDrip with a 1080p from a BluRay. Or a very low bitrate 1080p video. It won't look good despite the resolution.

    BluRay can have up to 54Mbit datarate. Not exactly something every household can take just for games. Maybe in major cities with FTTH but in general, large populations are still on copper wires...

    And not to mention nasty input reply lag. You need to use a very low delay video encoder in order to compensate commands response time. When you press "Left" button, your command has to go to the OnLive server, their it is received and moves you left in the game. Video capture of that action is then encoded and streamed back to you. If latency between you and the server is up to 100ms, that means you get automatic 200ms delay in both directions without even encoding any video. Add video encoding latency and things start to look pretty bad. And even if latencies are dumbed down, they may still be annoying to those who are used to instant response on local machines.
    digibucc says thanks.
  10. vawrvawerawe

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2012
    Messages:
    579 (0.95/day)
    Thanks Received:
    31
    Depends on who's doing the compressing. I've downloaded 1080p movies in under 300mb and look just about as good as 25GB blueray. However, rates that good are extremely rare because it takes serious skill. But more common is 1080p at 700mb that looks as good as 25gb bluray. However, most uploaders do 700mb and it looks half as good quality as a 25gb bluray disc, but still that's pretty good considering the size decrease.

    So in essence, it really just depends on who (or what software) is doing the compressing.
  11. Xzibit

    Xzibit

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2012
    Messages:
    1,089 (1.35/day)
    Thanks Received:
    241
    Not a good comparison because they do lots of things to cut data/quality of it by lowering original FPS of the movie and decrease original frame size and also sound from 7.1 or 5.1 to a stereo MP3/AAC along with quality.

    Just the image quality the video bitrate quality goes from ten thousand to a few hundred.

    Similar issue when your watching SD signal tv on a 1080p/720p screen once you stretch it to fill the screen the missing information or lack there of visualy is very noticable.
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2012
    vawrvawerawe says thanks.
  12. vawrvawerawe

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2012
    Messages:
    579 (0.95/day)
    Thanks Received:
    31
    Yea I guess you're right

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page