6 ms·
One of the benefits of GeForce now is im pretty sure they are subsidizing it. I get unlimited gaming on a 4080 for USD$20. I have a 4080 at home and I can't ge
by killingtime74 2y ago
One of the benefits of GeForce now is im pretty sure they are subsidizing it. I get unlimited gaming on a 4080 for USD$20.
I have a 4080 at home and I can't get the same latency/frame rate with Parsec even though I have a gigabit connection.
Cool project, actual experience unsure.
- MacsHeadroom 2y agoI get better latency and frame rate than GeForce Now on a 2660 using moonlight. Using h.265 or AV1 is necessary. I'm not familiar with Presec, but I'll bet it's defaulting to h.264.
- softfalcon 2y agoThe default for Parsec is h.265, it's only on older machines that can't hardware encode/decode that fall back to h.264. The reason they're likely seeing latency issues is that Parsec doesn't have the localized servers that GeForce Now has. Servers closer to your location will always have lower latency. This is a simple case of nVidia simply having more money, more servers, and better infrastructure than Parsec. Which isn't surprising given the scale and cashflow difference of the two companies.
- mynameisvlad 2y agoParsec doesn’t use their servers though. It’s peer to peer once discovery is done. So the “server” is likely elsewhere in your house. That’s basically as close as you can get.
- softfalcon 2y agoOh, wild, I didn't know that. I definitely see some high latency on Parsec within my home. It might be bouncing around through the net somehow instead of transferring directly within my local network? I wonder if something about local peer-to-peer discovery isn't working properly? Maybe that's also happening to the other person comparing GeForce Now to Parsec?
- WildGreenLeave 2y agoI've been using Parsec on my local network for several months now and I see absolutely no latency whatsoever. GFN and any streaming provider gives me a very small but noticeable lag in shooters, but Parsec on my home network is genuinely perfect. I game from my Macbook and I play whatever I want from my homeserver (3090 and 4060) in another room. Both my Macbook and computer are wired of course. Important to note is that I needed a dummy HDMI on my computer for a 'true' screen, any kind of virtual screened caused it to lag hard, probably because the game or stream ran without any kind of hardware acceleration. I have to say, I love the way Parsec works and allows you to use your whole library (since it doesn't stream the game, but it streams your whole desktop). But if there is ever a service that allows you to get the same thing including remote servers (since I travel), I would probably switch.
- softfalcon 2y agoAppreciate the details you’ve provided! I’m going to do some more Parsec experiments this weekend thanks to your info. Something is clearly wrong with my setup, I’m going to figure it out.
- WildGreenLeave 2y agoI'm not a professional myself either, but the things I would check are: - Make sure you run hardware acceleration, you can see if this is applied after opening a connection and checking the details. Without acceleration it will be terrible. This can either be as simple as enabling it or possibly you need the monitor below. - Make sure a monitor is plugged in (there might be a way around this, but I just bought a $4 HDMI dummy instead of trying to figure out how to do this the software way) Edit: formatting
- WithinReason 2y agoIn my experience if both sides are wireless the connection quality is terrible, no matter how good the signal is.
- 2y ago
- LoganDark 2y agoPeer-to-peer across networks is impossible unless you can punch a hole, i.e. UPnP. It's possible this isn't enabled and that could cause Parsec to have to fallback to a central server.
- 2Gkashmiri 2y agoWhy don't you use zerotier / tailscale
- LoganDark 2y agoBecause those aren't peer-to-peer in reality. They're peer-to-peer in terms of a virtual network that's often (not necessarily, but certainly in this case) implemented using a central server anyway.
- mynameisvlad 2y agoHow is Tailscale not P2P? Just because there's a central server for discovery and key exchange does not somehow make it not peer-to-peer. If the actual communications between two clients is P2P then, by definition, the VPN is P2P. Because that's the actual part people are talking about when they talk about VPNs.
- aborsy 2y agoThose are peer to peer. The coordination server manages the public keys, and exchanges the ip addresses initially. After that peers connect directly. Relays are involved only briefly initially.
- mynameisvlad 2y agoI mean, sure, but that doesn't mean that Parsec uses central servers by default, which was the entire point of the GP comment; that their servers are worse than Nvidia's.
- LoganDark 2y agoParsec uses whatever server you tell it to. Parsec will discover servers on LAN and/or with a port open and display them as distinct entries in the connection list, usually positioned in front of the central server options. So there's no default as you're always the one choosing.
- nullify88 2y agoI'm not sure you would use h265 for "better latency" as the encoding overhead is greater than that compared to h264. Sure, h265 requires less bandwidth but it also is a slower encoder. AV1 is supposedly a fast encoder but hardware to encode it is limited to the recent generation. Capture method can have a big effect on latency and technologies like the Desktop Duplication API or NV FBC are also necessary for achieving lower latencies by minimising data transfer between cpu and the gpu when capturing and encoding.
- manmal 2y agoI’m getting a stable 5ms latency over ethernet with Sunshine + Moonlight (forced HW en & decoding). WIFI adds a few ms and you need a good router & mostly idle access point for perfectly smooth 4K. For FPS like L4D2 I do get better results (aim) running locally, but I ascribe that to the mouse acceleration weirdness which I never managed to configure _just right_.
- MacsHeadroom 2y agoThis is my experience, 4-6ms. Even over the internet on a different continent I can game from my home PC with negligible latency with Moonlight.
- Animats 2y ago> One of the benefits of GeForce now is im pretty sure they are subsidizing it. NVidia is getting the cost advantages of being the manufacturer. Renting out rack mounted gamer PCs costs more than users are willing to pay for it. Users pay by the month, but server costs are per hour of use. As a business, this only works if users don't use it much, like a gym. Or users face severe limits on how much time they can use. Most of the early "cloud gaming" companies are gone, because the business model didn't work for them. For a sense of what it really costs, see Shadow PC. They charge $30 - $40 per month, after the first month intro price.
- chii 2y agoif you sell globally, then you can get max utilization from different sides of the globe as people sleep, so that you can over-subscribe per unit of the GPU. I would expect that people dont play 24/7, but if you charge like they do, then you get to make a profit.
- wasmitnetzen 2y agoThat doesn't work due to the latency. If you want 30ms roundtrip, you need to be within ~3000km/1800 miles of the subscriber.
- shepherdjerred 2y agoWhat if the gaming PCs were in orbit? You could have the orbit of the satellites track the sleeping times of populations, so that you don't have PCs above areas where nobody would use them. Starlink promises latency around 20-40ms, so I do wonder if this is possible. You would have far more distance between the client/server, but I would expect that routing would be greatly simplified.
- utensil4778 2y agoPowering and cooling tens, hundreds of gaming PCs in orbit is beyond infeasible right now. RTGs can't produce that much power even if we had the plutonium. Solar panels are too big and heavy and don't work on the dark side of the planet. Batteries to complement the solar would also be prohibitively heavy.
- i5heu 2y agoAlso one does have to consider energy! In Germany energy prices are currently at 0.328€/kWh from big providers, and considering a RTX 4080 has 320W alone an say 230W extra for the rest of the system + PSU inefficiencies - my M1 MacBook has way under 30W so the difference between these 2 is 520W.. what means that alone for energy consumption you need to game about 129 hours/month or 4.3/hours per day to break even ... _but_ this is before having to buy a 1300€ GPU, that one would have to replace every year to have the same as GFN. But IMHO the biggest appeal to GFN in Germany is temperature. In Germany there are no air conditioners in normal households and even in apartments with more then 2k a month rent there are none. So it is quite luxurious to game while not having 0.5kW blasting into your room.
- brnt 2y ago.328 and they are complaining! Bah!
- KronisLV 2y ago> considering an RTX 4080 has 320W alone > having to buy a 1300€ GPU, that one would have to replace every year Feels like gamers are quite the demanding audience, instead of getting something like Intel Arc A380 (or something that supports AV1), upscaling from 720p/1080p using framegen and running games on medium settings. That might make the equation work out better, though perhaps not if the industry pushes for more and more complex graphics all the darn time, while the engines themselves are capable of scaling back all the way to mobile devices. I probably have lower standards in that regard, I wouldn't expect to max out graphics when trying to play games on a MacBook or a netbook or something, due to the smaller screen anyways, it feels like modern game graphics are so noisy you can hardly make things out well. Nowadays I mostly play indie games that aren't super graphically complex, yet still are lovely experiences. That said, my current GPU is actually an Arc A580 (replaced my old RX 580) and it's been pretty good since I got ReBAR working, and 1080p at 60 fps is the sweet spot for me (except slightly higher framerates like 72 fps feel better in VR).
- LoganDark 2y ago> upscaling from 720p/1080p using framegen This isn't something you can just do. I mean, it almost is (look at apps like Lossless Scaling, Magpie) but it's always most optimally implemented by the game itself. Just because the buzzword exists doesn't mean the problem is solved.
- fulafel 2y agoWhat assumptions make it less than profitable at $20? If the hw costs are $1000 and if you'd need a hw setup per every 5 subscribers, you'd get $2400 in 2 years for $1000 in hw investment. Power, bandwidth and other costs are something but doesn't sound obviously unprofitable to me.
- flipbrad 2y agoFirst, you take USD4-5 off that in tax. Then more for support, finance and and marketing. Then electricity, bandwidth and insurance. Then games licences. Then hw...
- nothercastle 2y agoThe hardware could be used for other things I think 1 4080 card tiers also 2 1080 cards equivalent. I wound bet they rent out capacity for other stuff during the day too. I would also be surprised if they were only 5-1 on users still it’s probably not their most profitable venture.
- INTPenis 2y agoMay I ask what benefit do you get from Geforce now when you already have a 4080 at home?
- TiredOfLife 2y agoNoise/heat/electricity cost/not infesting pc with kernel level anticheat
- nothercastle 2y agoDoes the higher price tier work better than the low tier? I Usally get wierd stutter and resolution/packet loss during peak times or network congestion at the nvidia end. It’s typically related to new game or game season releases so I think it’s in nvidias end.