It was the LTTP Hitman thread. Part of the 'dont shit on threads you dont like' announcement.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Nvidia just announced a handheld - releasing Q2 2013
- Thread starter Nilaul
- Start date
It was the LTTP Hitman thread. Part of the 'dont shit on threads you dont like' announcement.
Not really excited about the Android portion but as someone considering going back to PC the streaming functionality would make this an instant purchase depending on the price. Speak of which I really hope we hear something on the cost soon but my guess would be at least $400.
Thread whining
Thread whining
MvmntInGrn
Member
Really interested. PC streaming and comfortable looking design. Give me emulation through N64/PS1 and some decent ports and I'll be in line for one.
I'd guess between a 7" and a 10" tablet, so around 400 grams? Also depends on how much battery they packed into it. I don't think that's much of an issue any way, since you hold it with 2 hands.
My guess is that they would make a profit with 200$. 400$ seems very high.
It seems that the battery is one of the good things about the system at 38 Wh, similar to the ipad4.
Regarding emulation: With A15 cores, this should be the most capable portable emulation machine you can buy. I'd say everything up to PS1 generation is fair game.
I wonder if it will be easy to root or at least sideload applications though.
I wonder if it will be easy to root or at least sideload applications though.
I don't think $200 is possible with a profit and retailer margins factored into it. I stick to my $300 prediction.
I guess it could go up to 450g then, still not an issue really.
Liquid_Bike
Member
The system looks strange and I can't see it being cheap either. I wouldn't be surprised it they ask $500 for it.
SnakeSlashRO
Banned
Whos going to spend 400 dollars to play android games? Unless it gets real backing then psh... it has amazing potential but I this will be short lived. Nvidia should stick to making graphics cards for my PC.
seattle6418
Member
Going by this thread you would think it's currently impossible to hook up a PC to a TV. People should use HDMI more, i can't even think of using my notebook without being connected to the TV.
Shield is not creating this feature. The only thing new that it does (it appears) is working like a PC remote control.
Shield is not creating this feature. The only thing new that it does (it appears) is working like a PC remote control.
Beerman462
Member
Guys..guys...guys...hey...guys did you notice....guys did you notice this thing totally looks like an old Xbox controller with a screen attached...
Why? I mean, it could happen, but that would just be stupid. I can't see this thing being even $200 in parts, so they should be able to sell it for $300. Unless they try to pull an Apple, but I think NV is smarter than that.
Huh? The exciting new thing it does is allow you to play your PC games on a handheld device. Personally, I find that very exciting.
tfur
Member
So project Thor is the Steambox(with a 650 or 660), to compliment project Shield.
It could be really nice to have a consumer friendly Steambox to integrate with this device, or any device that has a client.
It looks like their HPC and Cuda technologies are finding their way into the mobile and consumer space more and more. Nobody really competes with Nvidia in the HPC space, and their Cuda ecosystem is huge.
Its probably going to be too expensive though.
It could be really nice to have a consumer friendly Steambox to integrate with this device, or any device that has a client.
It looks like their HPC and Cuda technologies are finding their way into the mobile and consumer space more and more. Nobody really competes with Nvidia in the HPC space, and their Cuda ecosystem is huge.
Its probably going to be too expensive though.
Here is my prediction (patcher watch out!)
The handheld will be a failure, because...
- people who care this much about graphics don't care about them in small handhelds (they rather get the "full" experience on PC or high-end home consoles)
- for people who don't care that much about graphics (the gameplay whores), there won't be anything interesting on it that would justify a purchase
- people who are more casual gamers won't definitely buy it either, because they get their IOS gaming fixes on their tablets or smartphones.
- it doesn't have games and probably won't get any (siginificant ones) in the future, and it's highly doubtful that nvidia is gonna come up with a "must have" original ip
So yeah, this thing is pretty much vita'd!
The handheld will be a failure, because...
- people who care this much about graphics don't care about them in small handhelds (they rather get the "full" experience on PC or high-end home consoles)
- for people who don't care that much about graphics (the gameplay whores), there won't be anything interesting on it that would justify a purchase
- people who are more casual gamers won't definitely buy it either, because they get their IOS gaming fixes on their tablets or smartphones.
- it doesn't have games and probably won't get any (siginificant ones) in the future, and it's highly doubtful that nvidia is gonna come up with a "must have" original ip
So yeah, this thing is pretty much vita'd!
I do not remember another "console" where the final manufacturer / brand was the same that designs and manufactures the major component. This should be a considerable saving.
Who is going to spend 400+ dollars on a mobile phone, tablet etc etc .. (hmm plenty of people)
They don't buy them for the games, they are just an addition.
efyu_lemonardo
May I have a cookie?
did you miss my response from the bottom of last page?
edit:
only if by 'that hardware' do you include the PC used to stream the game to the controller
(beaten)
No.
I didn't even think about streaming emulators yet. Awesome.only if by 'that hardware' do you include the PC used to stream the game to the controller
No, I just disagree. All the "attach stuff to your phone" options seem clumsy and finicky.
Also, no one is in a position to do PC streaming as well as Nvidia. AMD doesn't have the mobile hardware, everyone else doesn't have the PC presence.
Sure, but this isn't practical for anything other than gaming.
Since this is geared towards gamers, I just don't see the appeal for most of them.
And what exactly is a failure for this product?
Selling 10K? 100K? 1M?
Is a failure if it doesn't destroy Nintendo's handheld market share?
Come on, this is just a little gadget for a niche market.
They don't depend on the success of this shield thing to keep alive the company, is just a little experiment, a demonstration of their soc.
It's only goint to be a failure if the user is not happy with the product.
Moga Pro was also announced at CES:
Personally I see more use in something like this. As time passes our smartphones become more and more powerful and iOS games become better. Then this would be a nice way to play at home, in theory.
This i can see if it would also support android phones. I just ordered a Xiaomi Mi2 for 250, which would be ideal for something like this. Not that i really would be getting this or the "Shield".
efyu_lemonardo
May I have a cookie?
I'm talking about Nvidia still doing it, just allowing phones manufacturers to license the tech. That's what could make it so attractive to Nvidia in my opinion.
It could allow them to leverage their dominance in the PC market to increase demand for smartphones built on Nvidia's platforms.
As long as the game supports controller input and you have a modern Nvidia GPU, yes. That's why some people are excited.
Hmm, that would make sense.
Was this posted yet?
Is that just a controller though or dedicated hardware.
Why stream it when you can just hook up a HDMI lead and a wireless controller.
For me, the huge part would be stuff like lying in the hammock in summer playing a PC game.
I guess I should look into illegally powerful WiFi antennas.
Streaming to the handheld itself is the biggest feature for me.
Okay, that changes everything.
I hope this thing will be successful, that is extremely interesting on paper.
immortal-joe
Member
Dear God that design.
Does the screen at list fold down? Or even fold back for better viewing angles?
Does the screen at list fold down? Or even fold back for better viewing angles?
AstroNut325
Member
I'm definitely interested. Hardware specs seem impressive and the streaming capabilities sound too good to be true.
That's what I thought, just wanted to make sure what you meant.
Eh, I don't know about hammock, but my bed beckons.
Although, at this point, I'm somewhat more inclined towards the Oculus. I'm not sure I'm willing to upgrade my GTX570 just yet.
Nightstick11
Banned
I... don't know what to say. That looks ugly as hell. At first I thought that was a TV screen strapped into the controller so I was ready to dismiss it, but on second glance it looks like a phone holder.
Could be interesting. I don't own many smartphone games though. Controller looks uncomfortable.
Could be interesting. I don't own many smartphone games though. Controller looks uncomfortable.
Because I'm an adult in a house with an office where my most powerful computer is.
Well the 7xx series will certainly arrive before Shield ships.
SirButterstick
Banned
This looks interesting. However, the thing at this point that's keeping me from purchasing it, besides the unknown price point, is the need for a 600-series graphics card. I have two 580s SLI'd, and I don't feel the need to upgrade yet.
Why would you need a 600-series card? All your doing is streaming the vid from a pc to the device.
Why would you need a 600-series card? All your doing is streaming the vid from a pc to the device.
Could be some latency deal or streaming ability that they've natively built into Kepler. 580s are sitting on really really old Fermi architecture that might be missing some key ingredient. NVIDIA certainly would not want to purposefully lock themselves out of a vast majority of NVIDIA card owners on purpose, nor would they want to proposition these same people with an additional $300-500 purchase to get current on their tech.
Let's talk about latency. I just did a ping from my android tablet to my PC. The router is around 10 meters away, behind a really thick wall.
So we have a normal latency of <= 1ms, with some outliers up to 7 ms. Let's go with a 2 ms average latency L.
For encoding frames, let's go with the x264 estimation (for 1080p!) of 8ms. Let's say the same amount of latency for decoding (though it should be possible to get that lower). So 16 ms codec latency C.
To transmit the data, I'd estimate around 5 ms transmission time T.
With these assumptions/estimations, we get an additional input latency of 2*L + C + T, or 25 ms. That's <2 frames at 60 FPS or <1 frame at 30 FPS.
Code:
Pinging 192.168.1.2 with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time=4ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time=5ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time=3ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time=4ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time=1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128
Reply from 192.168.1.2: bytes=32 time<1ms TTL=128For encoding frames, let's go with the x264 estimation (for 1080p!) of 8ms. Let's say the same amount of latency for decoding (though it should be possible to get that lower). So 16 ms codec latency C.
To transmit the data, I'd estimate around 5 ms transmission time T.
With these assumptions/estimations, we get an additional input latency of 2*L + C + T, or 25 ms. That's <2 frames at 60 FPS or <1 frame at 30 FPS.
Hardware support for low-latency encoding is what NV is claiming.