• We've upgraded our forums. Please post any issues/requests in this thread.

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

Binge

Overclocking Surrealism
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
6,979 (2.07/day)
Likes
1,734
Location
PA, USA
System Name Molly
Processor i5 3570K
Motherboard Z77 ASRock
Cooling CooliT Eco
Memory 2x4GB Mushkin Redline Ridgebacks
Video Card(s) Gigabyte GTX 680
Case Coolermaster CM690 II Advanced
Power Supply Corsair HX-1000
#26
sigh in virtualization you don't stream the content.

steaming = downloading incrments and only storing the few seconds of video around what's played.

that is not how virtualization works and until all of you start researching how it does I'm not going to waste my time.

I will say that we employ 1600 people and their home net speeds average 1.5mbps. (tthis varies widely as they pay for their own connection) there is no lag. videos vary from introduction videos at 720p to "ask for help" videos at 640x480 that are designed to be run next to content.


edit:

http://blogs.citrix.com/2010/05/20/how-much-bandwidth-do-i-need-for-my-virtual-desktop/

that's 2 years old, current ones can use more or less depending on server configuration.

hmm link seems to be not working, try this one
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...1IGgBg&usg=AFQjCNFy0uTsufj0sZkKi-snZFRa-T9lFg
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.
 
Joined
Nov 17, 2011
Messages
289 (0.13/day)
Likes
23
System Name Game Raver
Processor Core i7 920 OC'd @ 4GHz
Motherboard ASUS P6T
Cooling Zalman CNPS12X
Memory Mushkin Blackline 24GB Kit@1200
Video Card(s) 2x Club 3D R9 270Xs, Royal Queen Edition
Storage 2tb Barracuda 14, 1tb Barracuda 11
Display(s) 3x VS238H-P
Case NZXT Phantom 410 /w/ Silverstone FN121P-BL fans
Audio Device(s) AudioEngine D1 DAC via Fiber, connected to an ASUS Essence STX
Power Supply Corsair AX760
Benchmark Scores UNLIMITED POWA!!!!!!
#27
Man, I hope consoles fade away, they have held us PC gamers back for too long.
 
Joined
Dec 1, 2011
Messages
343 (0.16/day)
Likes
34
Location
Ft Stewart
System Name Queen Bee
Processor 3570k @ 4.0GHz
Motherboard Gigabyte UD3 Z77
Cooling Water Loop by EK
Memory 8GB Corsair 1600 DDR3
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 970 Gaming WaterCooled
Storage 1x Western Digital 500GB Black 1x Intel 20GB 311 SSD
Display(s) BenQ XL2420G
Case CoolTek W2
Power Supply Corsair 650Watt
Software Windows 7 Pro
#28
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.
 
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
2,417 (1.18/day)
Likes
1,332
#29
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.
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
V. Conclusion As expected, throughput for IPv6 was slightly lower than that of IPv4, due to the increased header size. When considering small packet sizes this difference could be significant, but when considering average packet sizes and rates the difference was relatively insignificant. When considering most circumstances that might maximize the throughput of a link, packet payloads will generally tend to be larger minimizing the effect of the header size increase over the total amount of transferred data. Regardless, special consideration should be taken when calculating maximum potential network capacities, especially with regards to smaller packet, sizes when using Ipv6. All other test results showed no significant statistical difference between IPv4 and IPv6 on the Windows 7 platform. Delay and Jitter remained within statistically indistinguishable values over all tested payload sizes. Neither IPv4 nor IPv6 were favored at any payload range. These results conclude that there is little difference between IPv4 and IPv6 performance when considering Windows 7 in a common switched environment. IPv6 appears to be quite capable of performing at the same levels as IPv4 and these tests show that in a simplified environment IPv6 is unlikely to cause any performance issues or significant differences in network traffic.
 
Joined
May 13, 2010
Messages
4,422 (1.60/day)
Likes
1,600
System Name RemixedBeast
Processor Intel i5 3570K @ 3.4Ghz
Motherboard ASRock Z77 Pro3
Cooling Coolermaster Hyper 212 Evo
Memory 16GB Corsair XMS3
Video Card(s) EVGA Nvidia GTX 650 Ti SSC 1GB
Storage 1.5TB Seagate/128GB Samsung 840
Display(s) Samsung SyncMaster P2350 23in @ 1920x1080 + LG Flatron 19in Widescreen 1440x900
Case Antec Three Hundred Two
Audio Device(s) Beyerdynamic DT770 Pro 80 // Fiio E7 Amp/DAC
Power Supply 620w Antec High Current Gamer HCG-620M
Mouse Logitech G700s/G502
Keyboard Logitech K740
Software Windows Server 2012 x64 Standard
Benchmark Scores Network: APs: Cisco Meraki MR32, Ubiquiti Unifi AP-AC-LR and Lite, Ligowave NFT-3AC
#30
controller latency will be mushy compared to a hard wired desktop... the bet is that they will not be so mushy as to be unplayable. It all depends on your connection - the bandwith needed is not much, but if someone starts uploading some massive file in the other room to skybox, you better believe that your game experience will change very quickly LOL.

Also, I have used onlive, and all I have to say is that the graphics quality is really crap. Played some assassins creed on it and it was no good :(.
use QoS or other shaping features of your router and that will solve that.
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2006
Messages
5,100 (1.18/day)
Likes
1,255
Location
AZ
System Name Thought I'd be done with this by now
Processor i7 4790K 4.4GHZ turbo currently at 4.6GHZ at 1.16v
Motherboard MSI Z97-G55 SLI
Cooling Scythe Mugen 2 rev B (SCMG-2100), stock on gpu's.
Memory 8GB G.SKILL Ripjaws Z Series DDR3 2400MHZ 10-12-12-31
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 760 Superclocked replaced HIS R9 290 that was artifacting
Storage 1TB MX300 M.2 OS + Games, 4x ST31000524NS in Raid 10 Storage and Backup, external 2tb backup,
Display(s) BenQ GW2255 surprisingly good screen for the price.
Case Raidmax Scorpio 668
Audio Device(s) onboard HD
Power Supply EVGA 750 GQ
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores no one cares anymore lols
#31
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.
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.
 
Joined
Jan 20, 2010
Messages
868 (0.30/day)
Likes
160
Location
Toronto, ON. Canada
System Name Gamers PC
Processor AMD Phenom II X4 965 BE @ 3.80 GHz
Motherboard MSI 790FX-GD70 AM3
Cooling Corsair H50 Cooler
Memory Corsair XMS3 4GB (2x2GB) DDR3-1333
Video Card(s) XFX Radeon HD 5770 1GB GDDR5
Storage 2 x WD Caviar Green 1TB SATA300 w/64MB Buffer (RAID 0)
Display(s) Samsung 2494SW 1080p 24" WS LCD HD
Case CM HAF 932 Full Tower Case
Audio Device(s) Creative SB X-FI TITANIUM -PCIE x 1
Power Supply Corsair TX Series CMPSU-650TX (650W)
Software Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
#32
I see this taking off in about 5 years time once all issues are resolved.
 
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
12,351 (2.56/day)
Likes
5,809
Location
Europe\Slovenia
System Name Dark Silence 2
Processor Intel Core i7 5820K @ 4.5 GHz (1.15V)
Motherboard MSI X99A Gaming 7
Cooling Cooler Master Nepton 120XL
Memory 32 GB DDR4 Kingston HyperX Fury 2400 MHz @ 2666 MHz 15-15-15-32 1T (1.25V)
Video Card(s) AORUS GeForce GTX 1080Ti 11GB (1950/11000 OC Mode)
Storage Samsung 850 Pro 2TB SSD (3D V-NAND)
Display(s) ASUS VG248QE 144Hz 1ms (DisplayPort)
Case Corsair Carbide 330R Titanium
Audio Device(s) Creative Sound BlasterX AE-5 + Altec Lansing MX5021 (HiFi capacitors and OPAMP upgrade)
Power Supply BeQuiet! Dark Power Pro 11 750W
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Spectrum
Keyboard Cherry Stream XT Black
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit (Fall Creators Update)
#34
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.
 
Joined
Nov 11, 2012
Messages
619 (0.33/day)
Likes
34
#35
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.
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.
 
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
2,417 (1.18/day)
Likes
1,332
#36
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.
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:
Joined
Nov 11, 2012
Messages
619 (0.33/day)
Likes
34
#37
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.
Yea I guess you're right