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

[Prysin]

18 minutes 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.

Billions? Not at all. There has been services like this before. There is already preexisting APIs and software.  Hardware VMs is nothing new either. And i bet most of the infrastructure they are using is based on the Android TV version.  So TBH,  i find it hard to believe that they even invested a couple of hundred millions. 

 

I don't think you understand just how much a billion dollar is. Nor how cheap a GPU is to manufacture. 

 

For example. 

2GB of 5Gbps GDDR5 would cost me 4.78$ per chip. If i buy 1000x chips,  i get a bulk discount,  and they now cost me 2.99$ a chip. This is through a middleman retailer. Mega corporations like AMD and Nvidia buy straight from the manufacturer and they buy memory chips by the millions. So I would not be surprised if each 2GB chip on a RX 480 costs AMD little more than a dollar each. 

 

A single GTX 1060, the silicone itself is probably less than 50$ to make. But what drives the cost is the time taken by binning and validation and shipping back and forth between assembly plants. 

[AlTech]

1 minute ago, Prysin said:

Billions? Not at all.

They have to setup Data Centers running Xeons with cooling solutions

 

[michaelocarroll007]

22 hours ago, lots of unexplainable lag said:

20 hours for $25. So that's $25 for, lets face it, a week at most for 1060 performance ignoring latency and all that jazz. $100 a month. So in two-and-a-half months you've spend the same amount of money as if you'd bought the damn card itself, after which it's only losing you money by the minute.

Id say this isnt for people who spend 100 Hours a week Gaming Because thats some dedication of time that almost no one has.

 

7days 24 hours a day= 168 hours a week.

7 days x 8 hours Sleep= 56 hours a week.

168-56= 112 hours possible to play video games.

 

Mainly this seems to be for secondary lower power computers like say you have a gaming desktop but just a regular laptop.  and or  this is more for the guy who plays 2 hours a  week typically.  which would put it around $125-150 a year and or honestly more of a concept now future later. 

[Carclis]

6 hours 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).

 

That was my point. You've had that card for much longer and I dare say that by then it would have worked out to be a significantly better buy than Geforce Now would have been if you had been subscribed for that period of time? I only see this service being good for one thing and that's playing games when you're living away from home for work purposes.

[Prysin]

1 hour ago, AluminiumTech said:

They have to setup Data Centers running Xeons with cooling solutions

 

They don't build those. They rent space from existing data center. There are many companies that specialize in building massive data centers and renting out rack space. Do you think EA builds their own data center to host BF4 or BF1 servers? No. They go to companies in Dallas,  Austin, California,  Hamburg, Koeln etc...  Where there is gigantic server hosting companies that rent out either the rack space or premade servers. 

[Guest Kloaked]

1 hour ago, Prysin said:

2GB of 5Gbps GDDR5 would cost me 4.78$ per chip. If i buy 1000x chips,  i get a bulk discount,  and they now cost me 2.99$ a chip. This is through a middleman retailer. Mega corporations like AMD and Nvidia buy straight from the manufacturer and they buy memory chips by the millions. So I would not be surprised if each 2GB chip on a RX 480 costs AMD little more than a dollar each. 

 

A single GTX 1060, the silicone itself is probably less than 50$ to make. But what drives the cost is the time taken by binning and validation and shipping back and forth between assembly plants. 

5

It's silicon.

 

And you are making a "it costs this to make so it should cost less for me to buy" argument here. You also need to take into account the amount of research and development put into making the thing in the first place so that mass manufacturing can actually happen. If they sold their product for little more than what they spent on actually making the thing from the factory, they would go under. People made this argument about Google Glass and were so surprised when it costed little more than $50 or something to actually make. It shouldn't surprise anyone who is actually a tech enthusiast.

 

I don't like how much Nvidia's service costs, but it's not a solution for people who are already playing PC games, nor is it a long-term solution to play games. It's a way for people who don't own a gaming PC at all to get their mouths watering for playing on PC. I don't understand the problem.

[Prysin]

1 minute ago, Kloaked said:

It's silicon.

 

And you are making a "it costs this to make so it should cost less for me to buy" argument here. You also need to take into account the amount of research and development put into making the thing in the first place so that mass manufacturing can actually happen. If they sold their product for little more than what they spent on actually making the thing from the factory, they would go under. People made this argument about Google Glass and were so surprised when it costed little more than $50 or something to actually make. It shouldn't surprise anyone who is actually a tech enthusiast.

 

I don't like how much Nvidia's service costs, but it's not a solution for people who are already playing PC games, nor is it a long-term solution to play games. It's a way for people who don't own a gaming PC at all to get their mouths watering for playing on PC. I don't understand the problem.

actually, no. My point is that for Nvidia, sponsoring hardware isnt so expensive. So if people think this service is "rightfully priced because extreme investment costs" then they are wrong. The pricing has a large margin, anyone understands that Nvidia isnt going to bother with any service that nets them pocket money. We have seen time and time again that Nvidia is not looking for the goodwill of gamers, they are looking for their money.

[79wjd]

2 hours 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

That generalization isn't accurate for everyone. Paying to stream would likely work out cheaper for me in the long run since I spend most of my time playing easy to run games (dota/CSGO) and like 50-100 hours/year playing something demanding. So this could easily have saved me the cost of building my entire desktop and where I live, 50mbps is only $5 more than the cheapest plan. 

[Prysin]

2 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

That generalization isn't accurate for everyone. Paying to stream would likely work out cheaper for me in the long run since I spend most of my time playing easy to run games (dota/CSGO) and like 50-100 hours/year playing something demanding. So this could easily have saved me the cost of building my entire desktop and where I live, 50mbps is only $5 more than the cheapest plan. 

sure, but how many hours do you spend with Dota/CSGO?

 

most gamers have a certain game they play A LOT... so if you play those games for several hundred hours a year, then no, this sub isnt worth it. Also do note that so far it is not crystal clear whether the time you rent said hardware is fixed from purchase, or if it is dynamic based on login. If it is a "session" of 20 hours, then you got 20 hours to nerd the fuck out of the game. If it is dynamic and based on login time, its a bit more flexible but you're still going to be paying 25$ or more pretty much once every week.

[Guest Kloaked]

2 minutes ago, Prysin said:

actually, no. My point is that for Nvidia, sponsoring hardware isnt so expensive.

1

It isn't absurdly expensive for anyone if you only factor in manufacturing costs. You're trying to single out a company when every one of them does it.

2 minutes ago, Prysin said:

So if people think this service is "rightfully priced because extreme investment costs" then they are wrong.

 

Rightfully priced is subjective. It's a free market, and they can determine how much their service is worth. If they don't get enough business like they think they should, they'll end up lowering the price a bit or do a limited time discount for new users.

3 minutes ago, Prysin said:

The pricing has a large margin, anyone understands that Nvidia isnt going to bother with any service that nets them pocket money. We have seen time and time again that Nvidia is not looking for the goodwill of gamers, they are looking for their money.

2

No company is looking to make their customers 100% happy and give them the longer end of the stick since that's not good business. Every company only cares about the dollar signs that you're worth, even dare I say, AMD. They do this stuff to make the most money off of their market.

Just now, Prysin said:

sure, but how many hours do you spend with Dota/CSGO?

 

most gamers have a certain game they play A LOT... so if you play those games for several hundred hours a year, then no, this sub isnt worth it. Also do note that so far it is not crystal clear whether the time you rent said hardware is fixed from purchase, or if it is dynamic based on login. If it is a "session" of 20 hours, then you got 20 hours to nerd the fuck out of the game. If it is dynamic and based on login time, its a bit more flexible but you're still going to be paying 25$ or more pretty much once every week.

 

The whole point in this service is to get people who don't own a gaming PC to play PC games. Through this service, they'll know Nvidia makes graphics cards. So if/when they go shopping for PC parts they'll be way more inclined to buy an Nvidia based video card.

[79wjd]

6 minutes ago, Prysin said:

sure, but how many hours do you spend with Dota/CSGO?

 

most gamers have a certain game they play A LOT... so if you play those games for several hundred hours a year, then no, this sub isnt worth it. Also do note that so far it is not crystal clear whether the time you rent said hardware is fixed from purchase, or if it is dynamic based on login. If it is a "session" of 20 hours, then you got 20 hours to nerd the fuck out of the game. If it is dynamic and based on login time, its a bit more flexible but you're still going to be paying 25$ or more pretty much once every week.

Dota/CSGO can run on a potato. So I can run both off of my laptop without an issue. So I only really need more powerful hardware for those 50-100 hours/year. It's certainly not a good solution for everyone, but for me it would be.

[Prysin]

2 minutes ago, Kloaked said:

Through this service, they'll know Nvidia makes graphics cards. So if/when they go shopping for PC parts they'll be way more inclined to buy an Nvidia based video card.

which they would have bought anyway, because outside of internet forums not a damn fuck has heard of AMD or even ATI.

AMD and ATI has been ereased from the average consumers memory already back in 2004. Even back then, Nvidia was the stronger brand, and ever since there has been no way of AMD/ATI to ever challenge that brand. Irregardless of how much they try, Nvidia is the brand common non-tech savvy people buy, because they simply don't know of any other brand.

[Guest Kloaked]

13 minutes ago, Prysin said:

which they would have bought anyway, because outside of internet forums not a damn fuck has heard of AMD or even ATI.

AMD and ATI has been ereased from the average consumers memory already back in 2004. Even back then, Nvidia was the stronger brand, and ever since there has been no way of AMD/ATI to ever challenge that brand. Irregardless of how much they try, Nvidia is the brand common non-tech savvy people buy, because they simply don't know of any other brand.

 

 

I mostly disagree, but I do follow you. Even the non-tech savvy people that I know don't even know what Nvidia actually is, they just see that name on video cards and some laptops on Best Buy shelves. If AMD were to come in and sell video cards in something like Best Buy, nobody would think twice about it since they truly don't know anything about either company. They'll most likely ask someone for help, and if it's a store employee the whole "Nvidia is the best" crap will get perpetuated just like when you ask about a phone there, they will either show you Samsung or Apple and nothing else.

 

What AMD needs to do if their video cards actually perform well this time around is get people educated more on PC gaming hardware so they can break into the market. They only have their hands in so many places while Nvidia is branching out into AI and all of that where they will be secure for the future almost definitely. AMD, not so much. They either need to be the best at CPUs, GPUs and software for their market or do something else.

[Prysin]

6 minutes ago, Kloaked said:

I mostly disagree, but I do follow you. Even the non-tech savvy people that I know don't even know what Nvidia actually is, they just see that name on video cards and some laptops on Best Buy shelves. If AMD were to come in and sell video cards in something like Best Buy, nobody would think twice about it since they truly don't know anything about either company. They'll most likely ask someone for help, and if it's a store employee the whole "Nvidia is the best" crap will get perpetuated just like when you ask about a phone there, they will either show you Samsung or Apple and nothing else.

 

What AMD needs to do if their video cards actually perform well this time around is get people educated more on PC gaming hardware so they can break into the market. They only have their hands in so many places while Nvidia is branching out into AI and all of that where they will be secure for the future almost definitely. AMD, not so much. They either need to be the best ast CPU, GPUs and software for their market or do something else.

AMD has secured themselves in consoles, aviation (They scored a deal with Boeing to deliver inflight media systems and flight control systems back in early 2016), geoengineering (basically since Nvidia has atrocious double precision AMD is the default solution), VR movie capturing, VR rendering, movie editing (they scored a huge deal with several Hollywood studios back in 2015, selling shitloads of FirePros) and medical imaging (same issue as with Geoengineering. You need DP here as any error can be catastrophic)... They are just really shit at bragging about it. Which is what they should be doing.

[Guest Kloaked]

3 minutes ago, Prysin said:

They are just really shit at bragging about it. Which is what they should be doing.

 

Yes. If truly they are that far into the market with all of that stuff, they do need to be talking about it, but even then they have to do it better than Nvidia. They should also be pushing for better performance than Nvidia and Intel, and not be the "budget option" like Lisa Su was saying that AMD needed to stop back when she became CEO. Maybe with Ryzen and Vega they will be turning into the company that she was talking about, finally.

[Citadelen]

Try as I might I can't imagine a scenario where this would be worthwhile, I feels like some kind of gimmick to be honest.

[79wjd]

1 hour ago, Citadelen said:

Try as I might I can't imagine a scenario where this would be worthwhile, I feels like some kind of gimmick to be honest.

 

3 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

Dota/CSGO can run on a potato. So I can run both off of my laptop without an issue. So I only really need more powerful hardware for those 50-100 hours/year. It's certainly not a good solution for everyone, but for me it would be.