Stadia: A new paradigm for gaming?

Just watched the Google Stadia announcement.

Incredible! 4K 60fps games streamed to any screen that can run Chrome. Doom coming later in 2019...

No GPU/RAM/limitations. Instant access.

Anyone else catch it?

https://store.google.com/magazine/stadia

YT: [video=youtube_share;nUih5C5rOrA]https://youtu.be/nUih5C5rOrA[/video]

o7
 
If Stadia works as well as they say it will... those guys are doomed, along with consoles (Except maybe Nintendo).

But internet connectivity is still problematic, even in the initial launch countries.

I personally can't wait for the day I can buy a sub-£200 chromebook and enjoy AAA, AA and indie titles without having to upgrade my hardware every couple of years.

A good screen and a fast 'net connection will be the priorities.

If it all works as it was demonstrated!

Maybe E: D will migrate? (ahhh, one can but fantasize!)

o7
 
Imo they have same issues as any other contender before. They do not control the internet infrastructure needed for flawless performance. Doubt Google will put up datacenters for this in every major city.
 
Last edited:
Reality check:

4k 60 fps means 18 GBit/s. So you will need
- a sufficiently fast HDMI or similar connector on your PC, which pretty much excludes Chromebooks
- a fast (they did say Highspeed) Internet connection for the downstream
- a low-latency connection for the upstream

Assuming further that they're using something similar to HEVC for the video stream, that still means an internet connection with a stable data rate >15 mbps (no buffering!) and a PC with a hardware (speed, latency) HEVC decoder. And you'll still get something in excess of 40 ms lag between your command and the reaction if you're lucky, and 500 ms if you're not (just pinged amazon - 15, 256, 17 and 15 ms from my place, on a TV fiber line). Probably ok for a console game, but suicide in a flight sim.

Possible? Sure, for some people.
A competitor for consoles? You bet.
Killing high end gaming PCs or even VR? Not yet.
 
Reality check:

4k 60 fps means 18 GBit/s. So you will need
- a sufficiently fast HDMI or similar connector on your PC, which pretty much excludes Chromebooks
- a fast (they did say Highspeed) Internet connection for the downstream
- a low-latency connection for the upstream

Assuming further that they're using something similar to HEVC for the video stream, that still means an internet connection with a stable data rate >15 mbps (no buffering!) and a PC with a hardware (speed, latency) HEVC decoder. And you'll still get something in excess of 40 ms lag between your command and the reaction if you're lucky, and 500 ms if you're not (just pinged amazon - 15, 256, 17 and 15 ms from my place, on a TV fiber line). Probably ok for a console game, but suicide in a flight sim.

Possible? Sure, for some people.
A competitor for consoles? You bet.
Killing high end gaming PCs or even VR? Not yet.
Wanted to write exactly that. Thankfully I refreshed the thread before wasting my time. :D

I would just add that the latency is the main and to certain extent unsolvable problem. I sometimes stream my games. Just from my rig to a laptop in the living room. Even with a really nice router there are games that are borderline unplayable.
I know I will sound very masterrace-y but you can FEEL the difference between 1ms and 5ms latency, let alone 20ms, which is I guess about an average "internet latency" that is realistically achievable.

I see this technology as a crutch that can help with SOME computing, but the major portion of the work will have to remain within the local machine.
 
Last edited:
Wanted to write exactly that. Thankfully I refreshed the thread before wasting my time. :D

I would just add that the latency is the main and to certain extent unsolvable problem. I sometimes stream my games. Just from my rig to a laptop in the living room. Even with a really nice router there are games that are borderline unplayable.
I know I will sound very masterrace-y but you can FEEL the difference between 1ms and 5ms latency, let alone 20ms, which is I guess about an average "internet latency" that is realistically achievable.

I see this technology as a crutch that can help with SOME computing, but the major portion of the work will have to remain within the local machine.
I agree, but other tech will improve over time as well: 5G... local net infrastructure... faster broadband... put it all together and it makes a compelling case.

Also, love your avatar :D

And, no, I don't have an Ana, and I have no plans for one, either!

o7
 
I agree, but other tech will improve over time as well: 5G... local net infrastructure... faster broadband... put it all together and it makes a compelling case.

Also, love your avatar :D

And, no, I don't have an Ana, and I have no plans for one, either!

o7
As a matter of fact, Conda is my #1 hated ship. My sig has a self-depreciatory subtone. ;)


And yes, naturally one day, everything will be cloud based and centrally computed as the tech will progress.
But some things will NOT change, no matter the level of tech we have.
One of those things is the speed of light in the cables. :D

That's why I pointed out latency as the most important issue. The others will improve. Latency? Not so much.
 
Incredible! 4K 60fps games streamed to any screen that can run Chrome.......

No GPU / RAM / limitations.
Oh there's a limitation, and for me it's a big one - BANDWIDTH.

Make that two - LATENCY. Though I suppose a game like ED will be a tad more forgiving of input lag than playing Widowmaker in Overwatch.
 
No, thanks. Latency will be an issue, there's no way around it at the moment. BTW, they are not first I believe. There were streaming gaming services already. And they failed.
 
Latency is the big killer along with available internet speed with current internet connections.

However there is a massive game changer approaching rapidly called 5G.

Latency for 5g is rated at 1ms. This is to the local node.

Standard connectiivity for most network connections now is around 60 ms for the connecting device.

Now obviously this doesnt mean with 5g gaming connections you will get a 1 ms response. You have to take into account other factors such as the server processing power and the overall distance data going to and from the servers. The further they are from the originating input signal the longer the latency. What 5g will do is reduce the overall latency and make things far more tolerable than is the case now.

For every 60 miles of distance from the data centre servers you can add roughly 1ms of latency to the overall time to send and receive a response.
 

DDastardly00

D
The lag during the demonstration was noticeable, seems like it will be problematic to have a stream only device that requires a fast internet connection to work properly

That being said, I like to game in one place, my living room, so this product doesn't appeal to me. Even my PC is connected to my living room TV. I also play the Switch almost exclusively while it's docked, I'm just not much of a mobile gamer I guess.
 
Reality check:

4k 60 fps means 18 GBit/s. So you will need
- a sufficiently fast HDMI or similar connector on your PC, which pretty much excludes Chromebooks
- a fast (they did say Highspeed) Internet connection for the downstream
- a low-latency connection for the upstream

Assuming further that they're using something similar to HEVC for the video stream, that still means an internet connection with a stable data rate >15 mbps (no buffering!) and a PC with a hardware (speed, latency) HEVC decoder. And you'll still get something in excess of 40 ms lag between your command and the reaction if you're lucky, and 500 ms if you're not (just pinged amazon - 15, 256, 17 and 15 ms from my place, on a TV fiber line). Probably ok for a console game, but suicide in a flight sim.

Possible? Sure, for some people.
A competitor for consoles? You bet.
Killing high end gaming PCs or even VR? Not yet.
So it's useless for me and my wife who are limited to 4G wireless internet that is capped at 20GB per day.
 
60fps lol.

Does anyone care about 60fps anymore? 144hz is where it's at and has been for a while now. With 240hz screens coming more into the mainstream, 144hz is fast becoming the standard.

And input lag. No thanks.
 
60fps lol.

Does anyone care about 60fps anymore? 144hz is where it's at and has been for a while now. With 240hz screens coming more into the mainstream, 144hz is fast becoming the standard.

And input lag. No thanks.
Actually, i think the majority plays with 60Hz still. Also, for example Steam statistics says that 62% of players play with FHD resolution and for example even QHD (2560x1440) resolution has only 4% share and UHD as small as 1.5%.
Those stats wont tell the refresh rate, but its quite easy to predict that most of those FHD monitors are 60hz.
 
Top Bottom