Nvidia poised to change gaming with cloud graphics chips

[Gahars]

So there's been a huge push for cloud gaming recently, especially with services like OnLive, but it hasn't been all that easy. One of the biggest problems right now is that the serious costs behind don't make it appear to be pretty impractical at the moment.

Nvidia, according to an announcement they just made today, may have found a way over that hurdle.

Nvidia announced today that it has created unique features in its Kepler-based graphics chips that could make cloud-based gaming much more practical. The company has also formed partnerships with companies such as Gaikai to make cloud games much cheaper and more appealing to gamers and maybe even eliminate the need to create a new generation of consoles.

That latter possibility may be a remote one for now, but the fact that it is possible suggests the potential disruption that could occur if Nvidia executes its vision for cloud gaming: Multi-brained graphics chips in data centers will be able to handle computing tasks for home players.

...In an interview with GamesBeat, Nvidia senior vice president Dan Vivoli said Kepler-based graphics chips will be able to handle four times as many server-based games at the same time while using half the power and running at half the cost.

“The beauty of this approach is that GPUs will continue to improve all of the time,” said Vivoli. “Your hardware stays the same, but the data center hardware can be upgraded to handle better games.”

Game streaming companies such as OnLive, Gaikai, and Otoy have introduced cloud infrastructures in the past few years that enable users to play high-end games on low-end hardware. The serious computing is handled in the data center, and video is streamed to the user’s computer, where only a display is needed to view the game. Servers in the data centers can use high-end graphics cards to handle high-end games, but it usually takes one expensive graphics card to process one game being played by one user.

But with improved multitasking on Nvidia’s Kepler-based graphics chips, each data center server can handle multiple users at a lower cost. That makes cloud gaming more economical, Vivoli said.

VentureBeat

The article goes in greater detail on the whole thing; if you're interested, it's definitely worth a read.

So, what do you think? Is cloud gaming the way of the future, or is it doomed to come crashing down like the video game equivalent Chicken Little?

 

[Tom Bombadildo]

If ISPs lower their costs/data caps (for some) then I'm all for it. You could potentially do this with any software really.

Hell, if the internet speed was sufficient enough you would have no need for high-spec hardware at all.

 

[Coto]

While this may be a new idea, I actually prefer having the hardware running things physically

 

[Gahars]

While this may be a new idea, I actually prefer having the hardware running things physically

I understand what you mean. Still, considering the potential behind cloud gaming, it could one day become the more practical, sensible option. Gaming can look forward to some interesting times ahead...

 

[DarkStriker]

And when the internet fails on us.... How the fuck are we supposed to do some sweaty "hardcore" gaming

 

[Quietlyawesome94]

And when the internet fails on us.... How the fuck are we supposed to do some sweaty "hardcore" gaming

Rhetorical question? Answer is no. It's why I am not looking forward to Cloud gaming. It's sad, really, technology is going up in bandwidth usage while ISPs are lowering data caps.

Double edged sword I guess.

 

[Nathan Drake]

Ah, the paradox of progress at work. We move forward in certain respects, while other services simply move backwards. When they need to work in tandem, you really can't win. Either way, cloud gaming isn't the future. There's too many drawbacks, especially in the computer industry. Why spend $1200 on a fantastic gaming rig when you can spend $450 and just stream all of your games? There's also that need to physically own a game for many people. I hold much more interest in a game I physically own than a game I paid $40 to $60 to essentially lease until the service potentially shuts down in the future and leaves me game-less.

 

[jarejare3]

Honestly I don't like Cloud gaming by much. I rather run it physically.


EDIT: Unless it's a Online game, now that's a go for me.

 

[shakirmoledina]

cloud gaming is a new high def version of online mmos. something like runescape will tell u that its quite good but the user's end of graphics may still be problematic.

maybe rather than the world shifting to cloud and stressing the isp (who will then be more strict with their charges) why dont they make games require less resources?

 

[Bladexdsl]

fuck Cloud gaming i'll play MY games on MY machine at MY house thank you!

 

[Hyro-Sama]

I have to say I hate cloud computing. I prefer to hold my own information on my own servers. Cloud computing requires too much trust to entities you have little to no information about. ISPs are bad enough.

 

[KingVamp]

I didn't think cloud computing and digital distribution will replace physical copies anytime soon(hopefully never) only add beside/to it, giving you options.
I mean, I'm sure people who like physical copies, like me, wouldn't mind those being stream from their houses.

 

[ShinyLatios]

Which would mean no internet connection = no games?

no thanks Nvidia, I'll pass.

 

[Saddamsdevil]

Cloud gaming..

"I see you haven't paid your subscription fees, lets stop your access to these games you paid for. "

No thanks. I LIKE upgrading my pc from time to time.

 

[triassic911]

My physical machine for gaming will always be better than cloud gaming.

 

[Costello]

fuck cloud gaming. Really, no.
I'm going to go on a limb and say that Onlive is far from being a universal success.
It doesn't work in many regions. In china, forget cloud based gaming.

With current games I can just buy the game, play on my PC or 360 at home no matter where I live.
But if we start talking about cloud based games... that won't work in MANY places in the world just like with Onlive currently.
I really hate the idea and I hope it will never become mainstream.

 

[ferofax]

While this may be a new idea, I actually prefer having the hardware running things physically

I understand what you mean. Still, considering the potential behind cloud gaming, it could one day become the more practical, sensible option. Gaming can look forward to some interesting times ahead...

It would only be practical and sensible once ISPs offer better bandwidths for lower costs. As it stands, as with all commodities/services, connectivity costs are getting higher instead of lower. Or maybe it's just me and my third-world country.

 

[Snailface]

Option 1: Your video game lives in the cloud, wherever the hell that is.
Option 2: Your video game lives on your hard drive, in your home.

-->Option 2

 

[Bladexdsl]

Which would mean no internet connection = no games?

that's pretty much what happens with settlers 7 if their server shits itself (and it does VERY often) you can't even play the fucking game even on SP! now imagine that happening with ALL your games

 

[KingVamp]

Option 1: Your video game lives in the cloud, wherever the hell that is.
Option 2: Your video game lives on your hard drive, in your home.

-->Option 2

Option 3 Your video game lives on your hard drive, in your home, and travels with you through the clouds to any
temporary home.

If they can sent the stream from their place, you should be able to sent the stream from your home.
Cloud gaming doesn't have to be all bad.