Someone Gets Their Hands on an OnLive Server, Contains 9800 GT, Core 2 Duo (56k)

This is one of the biggest thread backfires I've seen in a long time.. "hey guyz, look onlive uses this sw33t GPU" "lol wat, that card sucks" "oh, uh, well, i'm sure they updated by now!"

Wow you spent all that time gathering articles that claim they upgrade, I asked you what they use now, not whether they upgrade or not. :|

lol seriously? haha no wonder most of the games arent maxed out hahahaha what fail. How does more than one person even use that thing?

This is quite obviously an older unit considering that this guy purchased it from a third party in the way he did. Not to mention, both the 9800 and C2D are very hard to come by in the last year or so - there is no way, unless OnLive is not expanding it's capacities, that they would be using such old SKUs. Common sense, let's utilize it?

That said, the lack of maturity in this thread is disgusting.

That is quite surprising that they use that GPU, what a failure. Heil68

lol seriously? haha no wonder most of the games arent maxed out hahahaha what fail. How does more than one person even use that thing?

painguy1

They use many servers. Also, that thing looks pretty big... Like about the whole side of my case.

This is one of the biggest thread backfires I've seen in a long time.. "hey guyz, look onlive uses this sw33t GPU" "lol wat, that card sucks" "oh, uh, well, i'm sure they updated by now!"

Wow you spent all that time gathering articles that claim they upgrade, I asked you what they use now, not whether they upgrade or not. :|

110million

no wonder dirt 2 has framerate issues on onlive.

goodtobeback

Dirt 2 actually runs well on my old 8800gt at 1680x1050 and highest directx 9 settings except for reflection being on ultra instead of ultra high since I installed some mods which add expanded effects like highest volume, particles, dust, smoke, water, dirt, mud etc.

Also added enhanced reflections and shadows.

[QUOTE="painguy1"]

lol seriously? haha no wonder most of the games arent maxed out hahahaha what fail. How does more than one person even use that thing?

rpgs_shall_rule

They use many servers. Also, that thing looks pretty big... Like about the whole side of my case.

what does size have to do with anything? its only powerful enough to run one instance of the game.

[QUOTE="110million"]My LAST video card was more powerful than a 9800 GT..Rikusaki

And still doesn't change the fact that if 80 million some people who own a 360 or an PS3 don't care, if we did we'd be gaming on the PC. Which I would choose over OnLive in an instant. If you're so into promoting OnLive Rikusaki, why don't you post it on your blog so none of us have to be bothered with your blatant advertising... give me one good feature about OnLive, just one. Oh wait, there are none. Do you own your own games? No. Do you have lag in single-player games? Yes. If my internet goes down can I still play games? No. Will my current internet speed be sufficient for OnLive? No, because it lags with practically any connection. There are NO positivies to OnLive.

As I said previously, take your love for OnLive to your blog. Then no one has to look at this.

Makes sense: why spend thousands of dollars on top-of-the-line hardware capable of maxxing out games when you're going to lose a bunch of detail to compression anyway?

Wasdie raises a good question though: with that type of hardware, wouldn't they need one server per user? While that's not as big an issue as it sounds as one can easily oversubscribe a service like OnLive (since you'll never have every user attempting to use the service at the same time), I can't imagine it'll scale well as (if?) OnLive builds its userbase.

Makes sense: why spend thousands of dollars on top-of-the-line hardware capable of maxxing out games when you're going to lose a bunch of detail to compression anyway?

Wasdie raises a good question though: with that type of hardware, wouldn't they need one server per user? While that's not as big an issue as it sounds as one can easily oversubscribe a service like OnLive (since you'll never have every user attempting to use the service at the same time), I can't imagine it'll scale well as (if?) OnLive builds its userbase.

PBSnipes

[QUOTE="PBSnipes"]

Makes sense: why spend thousands of dollars on top-of-the-line hardware capable of maxxing out games when you're going to lose a bunch of detail to compression anyway?

Wasdie raises a good question though: with that type of hardware, wouldn't they need one server per user? While that's not as big an issue as it sounds as one can easily oversubscribe a service like OnLive (since you'll never have every user attempting to use the service at the same time), I can't imagine it'll scale well as (if?) OnLive builds its userbase.

Rikusaki

The specs are fine.. That graphics card could run Crysis on high. These arent bad specs at all, and could easily run most games at great settings, the processor isnt the best though.

Very underwhelming. OnLive won't have anything that can match up to Uncharted 2 for a long time, if ever.

[QUOTE="Rikusaki"][QUOTE="PBSnipes"]

Makes sense: why spend thousands of dollars on top-of-the-line hardware capable of maxxing out games when you're going to lose a bunch of detail to compression anyway?

Wasdie raises a good question though: with that type of hardware, wouldn't they need one server per user? While that's not as big an issue as it sounds as one can easily oversubscribe a service like OnLive (since you'll never have every user attempting to use the service at the same time), I can't imagine it'll scale well as (if?) OnLive builds its userbase.

NVIDIATI

Very underwhelming. OnLive won't have anything that can match up to Uncharted 2 for a long time, if ever.

EVOLV3

Very underwhelming. OnLive won't have anything that can match up to Uncharted 2 for a long time, if ever.

EVOLV3

9800 gt smokes rsx and cell lol.

the compression technology is horrible.

[QUOTE="NVIDIATI"]

[QUOTE="Rikusaki"] They lease the servers, not buy them. Rikusaki

[QUOTE="EVOLV3"]

Very underwhelming. OnLive won't have anything that can match up to Uncharted 2 for a long time, if ever.

Rikusaki

I understand, yet it still can't offer something on the same level as Uncharted 2, which is over a year old now.

EVOLV3

What do you mean by offer?

[QUOTE="Rikusaki"][QUOTE="EVOLV3"]

Very underwhelming. OnLive won't have anything that can match up to Uncharted 2 for a long time, if ever.

EVOLV3

[QUOTE="Rikusaki"][QUOTE="EVOLV3"]

Very underwhelming. OnLive won't have anything that can match up to Uncharted 2 for a long time, if ever.

EVOLV3

Their compression is horrible. Especially in really quick motion, which you do a lot in FPS games. Guess the genre of a lot of the games on OnLive?

total noob here:

what are OnLive servers? and why are they important to gamers?

thanks.

[QUOTE="EVOLV3"]

I understand, yet it still can't offer something on the same level as Uncharted 2, which is over a year old now.

Hakkai007

What do you mean by offer?

He's kinda right, uncharted 2 looks more crisp than any onlive title will because the compression is horrible worse than youtubes LOL.

the compression technology is horrible.

goodtobeback

total noob here:

what are OnLive servers? and why are they important to gamers?

thanks.

CwlHeddwyn

[QUOTE="Rikusaki"][QUOTE="NVIDIATI"] They also have to contribute their own hardware.

NVIDIATI

[QUOTE="EVOLV3"]

[QUOTE="Rikusaki"] This is far more powerful than the PS3 by the way...Rikusaki

[QUOTE="goodtobeback"]

the compression technology is horrible.

Rikusaki

image quality being worse than youtube's isnt impressive if u ask me.

[QUOTE="Rikusaki"]

[QUOTE="EVOLV3"]

I understand, yet it still can't offer something on the same level as Uncharted 2, which is over a year old now.

Merex760

[QUOTE="NVIDIATI"]

[QUOTE="Rikusaki"] Which cost only $10-20 a chip. ;)Rikusaki

He's kinda right, uncharted 2 looks more crisp than any onlive title will because the compression is horrible worse than youtubes LOL.

goodtobeback

Yah I understand that but I wonder what he means.

Compression may be horrible but Uncharted 2 its not anything special either.

.

[QUOTE="Rikusaki"]

[QUOTE="goodtobeback"]

the compression technology is horrible.

goodtobeback

image quality being worse than youtube's isnt impressive if u ask me.

[QUOTE="Rikusaki"][QUOTE="NVIDIATI"] It all adds up. Though in the long run they save instead of spending the extra $100 or so, per server unit.

NVIDIATI

System War's bias against OnLive is pathetically close-minded. I don't really even use the service much, I have used it somewhat, but I'm waiting for games I don't have as well as more appealing games to make its way on the service before I really jump in; but it's still a great service. rolo107

[QUOTE="goodtobeback"]

the compression technology is horrible.

Rikusaki

Explain to me how being developed on Xeons affects its performance when it's running on Core 2 Duos.

Sure, but it's something that is always getting better. If bandwidth is the only problem with the service, they have done something great here. Rikusaki

It will always lag behind an actually gaming PC.

[QUOTE="Rikusaki"]

[QUOTE="goodtobeback"]

the compression technology is horrible.

rpgs_shall_rule

Explain to me how being developed on Xeons affects its performance when it's running on Core 2 Duos.

System War's bias against OnLive is pathetically close-minded. I don't really even use the service much, I have used it somewhat, but I'm waiting for games I don't have as well as more appealing games to make its way on the service before I really jump in; but it's still a great service. rolo107

How many games is a single server supposed to run? I'm assuming they don't have a server per player, correct me if I'm wrong.

Those specs are largely outperformed by a modest computer from a couple of years ago, so even if the servers were 1:1, this means Onlive is still leagues behind modern PC gaming.

[QUOTE="Rikusaki"]Sure, but it's something that is always getting better. If bandwidth is the only problem with the service, they have done something great here. Hakkai007

It will always lag behind an actually gaming PC.

Kinect has nothing to do with this...

Kinect has nothing to do with this...

agpickle

The lag you get with Kinect is about the same and I don't see anyone complaining.Rikusaki

I don't mean lag like that even though the latency issues are horrid with a lot of people Including me and I live probably less than 2 hours from the nearest Onlive server.

By lag behind I mean in actually quality.

Even if Onlive ran a game at max settings it still has to deal with compression and gaming PCs are starting to play games at higher resolutions.

My next PC build will go for 1920x1200.

The video quality of Onlive is as bad as youtube which is bad enough that is it hard to tell the difference from high and low settings of Bad Company 2 on a youtube video.

I know, but you are trying to justify Onlives faults by pointing at another, unrelated thing that has the same issues.

[QUOTE="rpgs_shall_rule"]

[QUOTE="Rikusaki"] It was developed on Dual Quad Core Xeons ($5,000). It can compress HD video within a frame time. They went on to develop their own hardware that doesn the same thing for only $10 a chip. Pretty damn impressive if you ask me. ;)

Rikusaki

Explain to me how being developed on Xeons affects its performance when it's running on Core 2 Duos.

So you say. I'll wait until someone actually benchmarks that 10$ chip. It's hardware may be specially configured for HD compression, but for 10$, I somehow doubt it'd be of any notable quality. Maybe that's why the video sucks?