
Twilight of the GPU? - mcav
http://perilsofparallel.blogspot.com/2009/04/twilight-of-gpu.html
======
jdoliner
I think everyone's vaporware senses are tingling a bit. But let's think for a
second, why can't this work. Really the only issue I can see is keeping the
video interface smooth enough to allow for gameplay. The problem is that they
need to do compression on the fly, they don't know what happens in the future
of the video, and they've got to have already sent the past. So they can only
compress a small number of frames together. Which seems a bit difficult but
not necessarily impossible to me. Who here knows about video compression and
can tell us more?

~~~
wmf
Lookahead (B-frames) is optional in most codecs already. OnLive can be viewed
as a form of one-way videoconferencing, which is a solved problem. It's merely
expensive.

------
saucetenuto
The author claims that OnLive has to deliver latencies of no more than 150
milliseconds. I'd put it at 50, 20 frames per second, and I cannot for the
life of me figure out how you'd hit that, even with something like Akamai's IP
Accelerator thingie. Maybe OnLive's vaunted psychophysical research can relax
that figure a bit, but I can't imagine what you could do to make a player
content with even 12 frames per second, let alone /7/.

~~~
wmf
Latency and FPS are orthogonal.

------
buugs
There must be an awful lot of compression taking place and then their is still
the market left for the low connections higher standards for operating systems
and programs such as photoshop. This would have to outperform faster and
better than a normal console for people to subscribe.

