Slashdot Mirror
OnLive Latency Tested
The Digital Foundry blog has done an analysis of recently launched cloud gaming service OnLive, measuring latency across several different games. Quoting:
"In a best-case scenario, we counted 10 frames delay between button and response on-screen, giving a 150ms latency once the display's contribution to the measurement was removed. Unreal Tournament III worked pretty well in sustaining that response during gameplay. However, other tests were not so consistent, with DiRT 2 weighing in at 167ms-200ms while Assassin's Creed II operated at a wide range of between 150ms-216ms. ... OnLive says that the system works within 1000 miles of its datacenters on any broadband connection and recommends 5mbps or better. We gave OnLive the best possible ISP service we could find: Verizon FiOS, offering a direct fiber optic connection to the home. Latency was also reduced still further simply due to the masses of bandwidth FiOS offers compared to bog standard ADSL: in our case, 25mbps."
Latency was also reduced still further simply due to the masses of bandwidth FiOS offers compared to bog standard ADSL: in our case, 25mbps.
Damn it, kids, Latency and bandwidth are not the same thing and anybody who makes that mistake should be forced to use a "1Gb/s" connection via fedex.
Yes, in the case of something like OnLive, which is basically streaming mouse/keyboard events one way and video the other, things will look substantially worse if frame N hasn't finished downloading by the time frame N+1 is ready for transfer(and then either has to be dropped, or delays frame N+1 even more than your connection's latency would); but having a fat pipe does not "reduce your latency". It is correct to say that 25mb/s FIOS is probably about the most generous test that is also remotely realistic for more than a tiny number of their potential customers; but the bandwidth thereof does not "reduce latency"...
150-200 ms latency in a modern FPS is nearly unforgivable. I played TF2 a lot for a while and if I ever had more than 40-70 ms latency the hit detection would start to suffer and you'd get shot through walls or just not hit.
I expect a system like OnLive might work better with strategy games and other types of games that are not nearly as fast paced as most modern shooters are.
Admit nothing. Deny Everything. Make Counter-accusations.
Less than 5ms is nonsense (a simple framerate calculation , but Digital Foundry did quite a few input lag tests.
Anywhere from 60ms to over 100ms is common. Apparently gamers start to notice input lag at 166ms. Also, input lag and network lag shouldn't be confused with each other. The ping values you see in your game aren't 1-on-1 comparable to the input lag rates reported here.
To be honest, the 150ms input lag surprises me in a positive way. It's much lower than I had expected. For a game like UT3, 150ms is probably way too much and apparently that's one of the faster games, so OnLive's input latency is probably still too high for most games.
Wen you see "I am connected to a server, and I have 200 ping with this server", that is not input latency. You can have 10ms input latency with a server that give you 200 ping. Things are computed clientside. So this will be much less playable than your average 200ms server.
-Woof woof woof!
It's not about consoles only. Your PC has the same problem. An average input lag of 5ms is impossible because when you take a game that renders at 60fps, every frame is roughly 16ms on the screen. If you push a button, then your action won't be visible until the next frame. So I'd say that at 60fps you'd have an average input lag of 8ms and that's not taking into account factors like game code processing the input and updating the gamestate or the lag caused by your LCD display.
(Older) PC games can be run at higher framerates because the hardware can handle it, so that might potentially decrease that 8ms average, but 5ms is only achieved with a 100fps framerate (when you assume 5ms as average, if you assume it's the slowest it'll ever be then you need 200fps).
Again, your LCD display has an inherent delay of 40 - 80 ms as well. The idea that 40ms input lag turns a game unplayable is a grave error. I mean, the article already points out that 60ms is basically as low as input lag on a non-LCD screen goes.
Let's assume you have a hop where distance/c = 10ms and packet's length/bandwidth = 10ms. This means, the head of a packet arrives in 10ms, the tail in 20. No routers or bridges save for the most unaware repeaters will handle the packet until it arrives completely. Only then they will examine it and start sending it forward.
Thus, the final latency will be:
a) distance/c, plus
b) time spent in queues, plus
c) time needed for the bodies of packets to arrive.
To reduce a), you need to be closer to your destination. To reduce b), you need an ISP who oversells less. To reduce c), you need bandwidth on all hops.
The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
I think the real point is like everything else in this world it comes down to $$$. Company A develops app that uses a LOT of bandwidth and requires that Company B do massive upgrades. Company B has already decided NOT to roll out new lines, even though they are reaching saturation by other companies like Youtube and Hulu, and instead imposes caps so they can keep their profits high. Now what are the odds that company A is gonna stay afloat? Most likely 0%.
You do NOT bet the farm on a company that requires a symbiotic relationship with other companies if the other companies aren't gonna play along. Last I heard even Verizon is slowing down the rollout of FIOS, and most of the regional teleco/cableco companies are simply gonna jack their prices or rollout caps, such as the 36Gb a month I'm currently dealing with on cable. Now since OnLive will blow through that cap in probably less than a day, and at $1.50 a Gb for going over could easily cost more than all my other bills combined if my kids got into a frag session, what are the odds anyone in my area will keep their service? Again most likely 0%. That is why OnLive is doomed to failure, not because of any conspiracy, but simply because they didn't accept the reality of the infrastructure in their plans.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.