The knives are out for cloud gaming as Nvidia flashes blade-based box packing 40 RTX GPUs Nvidia used this week's GPU Technology Conference in San Jose to reveal the most powerful GPU box that its R&D labs have cooked up. The RTX Blade Server uses blade configuration to squeeze up to 40 Turing GPUs into an 8U enclosure, for as many as 184,320 CUDA cores. Multiple enclosures can be combined into a "pod", with up to …
"allowing customers to play the latest games with all settings turned to 11 without having to spend tons of cash on enthusiast-level hardware"
Has human nature somehow changed in that competitors aren't always looking for an "edge" and willing to spend money to get one? Try to buy talent with bucks? I've yet to see any sport where that can be done where it isn't widely done.
Those little-bit better golf clubs, that tweak on a faster car, sports shoes, the best computer for gaming, even the best scope for long distance rifle shooting. It's a long list indeed, and often rules authorities make rules against it, which is either futile or worse - people leave the "sport".
Marketing guys live in a bubble. Sometimes there are enough others in there to make it work, but it's not as common as they hope.
That's what I was thinking. What's the latency on this. I mean, a Steam Link into the living room is one thing with <1ms lag on the network. Then you just have the encoding/decoding lag. But is you stick a broadband link in there?
Given how much people have moaned about HDMI latency and "Game Mode" on their tellies, I'm honestly not feeling it. Also, we're back to the pay-every-month model.
Agreed, my Steam-link over a direct 1Gb Cat 5-E connection has noticeable latency. Fine with the right games, and can even play Mirror's edge quite effectively, but driving games? nope. Too much latency, and steering becomes a positive feedback system.
I really can't imagine how bad it can get over the net.
Who doesn't want to play (sub) console quality games with hideous input lag and visual artifacts?
I mean those consoles are £250-400, who's got that kind of money kicking about? Much better to pay £30 a month for 10 years for a crappy service that you never own.
/Sarcasm
It'd still struggle to run Crysis, doesn't matter how much GPU you throw at it. The main issue is the single threaded engine. You need a beefier CPU.
OG Crysis was from back in a time just before we realised that 6-8GHz processors just were not going to fly, and was built with that future in mind.
icon:closest thing to the Crysis helmet icon used for the game (do we need a "but can it run Crysis" icon?)
Not surprising that they're rolling it out in Japan and South Korea first, those are the only two places in the world with good enough broadband to make such a thing viable.
I suspect we won't be hearing much more about this service, aside from lots of marketing fluff trying to convince people to buy RTX cards that no one really wants because it'll be at least a year before games that fully use its features are available.
And, in the meantime, the rig we have is fine and working and does the job. Even in a year when the games finally become compatible, there isn't going to be a mad rush to get a hold of them.
Oh sure, the enthusiasts will jump at the chance to splurge yet another grand to show off their new power, but the rest of us ? The last purchase I made on my I7-6700 was in 2015 and it still chews through the games I play without any trouble. Why should I go and throw good money at something that is only going to improve performance by what, 5% at best ?
I'm off the upgrade treadmill now (after having gleefully participated for the past two decades), and unless there's a game out there that I simply cannot avoid playing that really requires this new tech, I'm staying off of it.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
