4 ms·
That's absolutely true but I still very much doubt it's so bad that you would exceed 480mbps even on a decent resolution stream. We're not talking multiple orde
by ClassyJacket 3y ago
That's absolutely true but I still very much doubt it's so bad that you would exceed 480mbps even on a decent resolution stream. We're not talking multiple orders of magnitude difference. Like... if all else fails just send every frame as a separate image with a fast encoder and you've still got 1.6 megabytes for each.
Steam in-home streaming needs to be realtime too, but is very playable, and most people aren't realistically getting 480mbps out of their wifi.
4k I don't know... 1080p no problem.
Don't most phones have dedicated hardware video encoders on their SoC now anyway?
- rcme 3y agoYou could transmit raw rgba pixels at 1920x1080 and 60 fps in less than 500 mbps.
- ClassyJacket 3y agoI don't think so... my maths (for RGB, no need for alpha channel) comes out to 2,847mbps. Did you accidentally switch megabits and megabytes?
- duskwuff 3y agoAnd don't forget that 480 Mbps is the line rate. Practical throughput to a device will be substantially less, especially if other devices are on the bus.