Nvidia is bringing High Performance Gaming to your Ultraportable for a Subscription fee

[Dabombinable]

8 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

Are you high? People don't buy GPUs and keep them for 1.5 years!!!!

 

I've had my 770 since mid 2014 (almost 3 years).

 

I don't get the "average life cycle of a graphics card" thing. Just look at how powerful the 8800GTX, 9800GTX+ and GTS 250 are (especially the 1GB GTS 250) compared to all current low end GPU-which only have the GTS 740 pulling ahead because its a GTX 650 rebadge. And the GPU is well over 10 years old (8 years for the the GTS 250 since its a die shrink).

[AlTech]

11 minutes ago, Dabombinable said:

GTS 740

* GT 740 actually

 

Also, why are you quoting me? quote the guy that came up with the "18 months" numbers out of thin air.

[Syfes]

The way I read this, this is not aimed at the gamer who spends 4 hours on his PC every night. Because let's face it, that person has probably already bought a desktop or a powerful enough laptop. This is squarely aimed at the occasional user who likes to play maybe an hour or 2 per week but doesn't want to fork over the 600-700$ you'd need to spend on a more powerful machine.

 

Thing is, I have very little faith in that market segment they're targetting. It's a very small portion of the gaming community, who will be easier to please with cheaper alternatives.

 

Because let's face it, most people who are looking at a game to play for an hour or so are not going to fork over 25$ on Nvidia credits when they could just choose to play a game that's less demanding on their systems, play a mobile game, watch YouTube, etc... for free.

 

Personally I don't think there anything wrong with the price, the idea of remote computing itself is the problem here.

[RotoCoreOne]

If Nvidia plans to push for this service then they'll probably start increasing future GPU prices

[xAcid9]

Can't wait to see this thing flop so bad, don't think it will hurt Nvidia if that happened though.

3 hours ago, RotoCoreOne said:

If Nvidia plans to push for this service then they'll probably start increasing future GPU prices

Yeah because Nvidia is the only company that sell gaming GPU.  The future is bleak... i hope someone else step up and make another company to challenge Nvidia and offer good performance/buck graphic card.

 

/s

[Bananasplit_00]

well im not getting any chance to try this properly any time soon, does anyone know how long the trial is so i can fell how shit it will be on 15 down 1 up?

[Prysin]

the most ridiculous part about this, is that a few years ago when they first started talking about GeForce NOW i was super excited and at the brink of buying a high end Nvidia product. Now that it finally do arrive on the desktop, i feel its a bigger scam then even kickstarter projects

[dragoon20005]

5 minutes ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

well im not getting any chance to try this properly any time soon, does anyone know how long the trial is so i can fell how shit it will be on 15 down 1 up?

the servers will prob be in US

 

so using speed test and linking to US places like LA and CA

 

and check your ping and speeds.

 

15 down and 1 up is only your local speed.

 

on my 1Gbps internet, my connection to US is less than 100Mbps at best

[AlTech]

3 minutes ago, Prysin said:

the most ridiculous part about this, is that a few years ago when they first started talking about GeForce NOW i was super excited and at the brink of buying a high end Nvidia product. Now that it finally do arrive on the desktop, i feel its a bigger scam then even kickstarter projects

They have to pay for multi billion dollar Data Centers..........

 

what the hell do you think the money goes to?
 

Paying off the GPU, paying off the CPU and other system specs. Paying for the electricity bill. Paying for maintenance and cooling.

[Bananasplit_00]

1 minute ago, dragoon20005 said:

the servers will prob be in US

 

so using speed test and linking to US places like LA and CA

 

and check your ping and speeds.

 

15 down and 1 up is only your local speed.

 

on my 1Gbps internet, my connection to US is less than 100Mbps at best

yah but the 15 down 1 up will ultimatly be the bottleneck here, im pretty sure i have a good speed across the atlantic but ping will be in the 100ms+ range for sure

[dragoon20005]

Just now, Bananasplit_00 said:

yah but the 15 down 1 up will ultimatly be the bottleneck here, im pretty sure i have a good speed across the atlantic but ping will be in the 100ms+ range for sure

my pings is much worse because i need to link to Aus routers or Japan or Korea routers before going to US

[Bananasplit_00]

1 minute ago, dragoon20005 said:

my pings is much worse because i need to link to Aus routers or Japan or Korea routers before going to US

well for me its going to be from Sweden to Germany and then France to then procede across the atlantic and then routing all the way across the US  

[AlTech]

16 minutes ago, Bananasplit_00 said:

yah but the 15 down 1 up will ultimatly be the bottleneck here, im pretty sure i have a good speed across the atlantic but ping will be in the 100ms+ range for sure

They actually said it needed 25Mbps .......

 

RIP you

[Bananasplit_00]

1 minute ago, AluminiumTech said:

They actually said it needed 25Mbps .......

 

RIP you

its not like i need it, i just want to test the trail and see how horrible it will be to cram a GTX 1080 through my internet lol

[Godlygamer23]

7 hours ago, Wolther said:

So if it's just like a video then Nvidia is also giving you CPU power aswell? Since the GPU only does graphical calculations while the CPU needs to do the other tasks. Since it's just like a video I don't see how Nvidia could do that without also giving you CPU performance.

The GPU has to be fed, so yes they are using CPUs. But I think the point is to make the GPU the limit in the system, so no matter what, you are pushing the GPU to around 100%. I really don't think the average consumer wants to worry about bottlenecks, nor do I think they want to try to understand them. 

[dragoon20005]

23 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

They actually said it needed 25Mbps .......

 

RIP you

25Mbps with high pings will not work either

 

imagine the respond time between your clicks and the gun firing like 300ms later = dead /  KIA

[Prysin]

39 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

They have to pay for multi billion dollar Data Centers..........

 

what the hell do you think the money goes to?
 

Paying off the GPU, paying off the CPU and other system specs. Paying for the electricity bill. Paying for maintenance and cooling.

if you think, even for a moment, that the prices Nvidia has set isnt providing ample profit margins, you are sorely mistaken.

If a GTX 1060 costs 25$ per hour to rent + the cost of the game (do note, if the game costs "full price", then there is margins built into those prices so that Nvidia makes even more money).

 

Since the cost of a GTX 1060 internally for Nvidia is well, astronomically low, we can assume less then 125$ investment cost per 1060, for a 1080 it would probably be maximum 200$ investment for Nvidia. Making a larger GPU isnt really that expensive, it's only expensive when yields are bad (which they shouldnt be by now).

 

If we assume prices around this range, Nvidia would pay down a GTX 1060 in 7 days. Now, they are renting the CPU + mobo + cooling + electricity, but when you go big like Nvidia does, the rental costs for these systems arent that big (per system). You are also technically renting a VM, thus prices are actually lower, hardware wise, for Nvidia. Since Nvidia is providing the GPUs, i promise you, that datacentre will use those GPUs for something else when they arent used by Nvidias service, this makes the most sense from a economics perspective. Invest as little as possible, gain as much out of what you invest, at the least amount of cost, then reap the profits.

 

All in all, i bet Nvidia has a good 5$ profit margin per session of these machines. That only applies to GeForce NOW. God knows how much they make/made renting out the hardware when its not used by GeForce NOW.

 

 

[dragoon20005]

4 minutes ago, Godlygamer23 said:

The GPU has to be fed, so yes they are using CPUs. But I think the point is to make the GPU the limit in the system, so no matter what, you are pushing the GPU to around 100%. I really don't think the average consumer wants to worry about bottlenecks, nor do I think they want to try to understand them. 

iirc if the only difference here is the GPU

 

i can say the CPU used for the calculations and the CPU rendering will be using Xeons and using tons of VMs

 

think of the same concept which Linus used for the 7 gamer one CPU system rig which had 7 GPUs.

 

nVidia will allocate the certain amount of CPU power, RAM for the GTX1060 and GTX1070 virtual rigs for gamer to use at a subscription rate.

[Prysin]

23 hours ago, AluminiumTech said:

 

 

Opinion:

AMD needs to get on this kind of action and try to offer this kind of system but offer more levels of performance. I do think that people may dislike this idea and I have a strong suspicion that it'll be worth it in the long run to continue to buy GPUs instead of using this service.

Your right about one thing, at these prices, it is more worth it buying hardware then using the service. Remember that 25MBs internet is not that cheap depending where you live, thus the added cost of higher network speeds + buying the game + subscription costs means you could have built yourself an insane gaming rig within a half a year or maybe a year if you''re more of a casual gamer

[AlTech]

1 minute ago, Prysin said:

Your right about one thing, at these prices, it is more worth it buying hardware then using the service. Remember that 25MBs internet is not that cheap depending where you live, thus the added cost of higher network speeds + buying the game + subscription costs means you could have built yourself an insane gaming rig within a half a year or maybe a year if you''re more of a casual gamer

IDK if games come included or not. With the Android TV version, Games were included as part of the package.

[ZestyJalapeno]

Okay Nvidia. Let's have a look at the expected user case study. So obviously I have enough expendable income to afford an internet connection that's able to handle the bandwidth latency required for gaming and streaming. (Where I'm from: not cheap. And if on the go, you'd better be rolling in moolah) But at the same time; I can't afford a 3GB GTX 1060 and the most basic of PCs. I get where they're coming from from a circular economy point of view, but they really have to make this an unlimited pay per month thing for it to be even close to viable.

[dragoon20005]

14 minutes ago, Prysin said:

Your right about one thing, at these prices, it is more worth it buying hardware then using the service. Remember that 25MBs internet is not that cheap depending where you live, thus the added cost of higher network speeds + buying the game + subscription costs means you could have built yourself an insane gaming rig within a half a year or maybe a year if you''re more of a casual gamer

the rate which nVidia is charging is laughable because for the same rate I can get a decent 500Mbps internet speed

 

with the additional cost for getting a GTX1080 performance, I can easily get a half decent PC with 1Gbps speeds and my own steam library of games which i bought during those crazy summer, holidays and humble bundles.

[AlTech]

5 minutes ago, dragoon20005 said:

the rate which nVidia is charging is laughable because for the same rate I can get a decent 500Mbps internet speed

 

with the additional cost for getting a GTX1080 performance, I can easily get a half decent PC with 1Gbps speeds and my own steam library of games which i bought during those crazy summer, holidays and humble bundles.

This is not meant for people who can afford a GTX 1080. Nvidia have to spend billions and billions of dollars in R & D to set this up.

[Prysin]

24 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

IDK if games come included or not. With the Android TV version, Games were included as part of the package.

Correction.  SOME games were included.  Others was 30-60$

[dragoon20005]

1 minute ago, AluminiumTech said:

This is not meant for people who can afford a GTX 1080. Nvidia have to spend billions and billions of dollars in R & D to set this up.

sure nVidia spend a ton of money on setting up this service.

 

But Pay to Stream service isnt new to be honest.

 

Video On Demand has been here for quite a while, nVidia made a bold move to push gaming as a on demand service but they need to rethink of the cost structure because the wow factor isnt there during their live stream and the moment the tentative pricing was mentioned. A lot of us just went WTF