Tom's Guide: "I tested Nvidia GeForce Now’s RTX 5080 upgrade — it made my $750 PS5 Pro feel old"

roosnam1980 said:
so more latency than on ps5?
Click to expand...
Hard to tell because I don't have Cyberpunk on PS5. I wanted to try God of War Ragnarok since I have it on both my Pro and PC, but Sony removed it from GeForce Now.

The GeForce Now version shows I'm running the game at ~90-100fps with frame generation maxed out with path tracing at 3440x1440. On PC, I'm running the same settings but at ~115fps. The native version feels a lot snappier.

If I cap the native version at 60fps, it then feels comparable to GeForce Now at 90fps. If it's better than the console version, it isn't by much when it comes to latency and game feel.

You can play single-player games using GeForce Now. Any competitive fast-paced game that requires twitch reflexes will cook you.
 
Last edited:
Topher said:
From the article....

"I got to demo this in two ways. First, with Cyberpunk 2077 running on a PS5 Pro (with an LG OLED TV) and that same LG TV running GeForce Now. The first thing you notice is that fidelity difference — Night City is so rich with tiny details to every texture on GeForce Now, and DLSS 4 continues to be an industry leader in AI upscaling. Throw in multi-frame gen, and you're getting a rock-solid 120 FPS, whereas the PS5 Pro is rigidly stuck to 30."

Huh? How is Pro stuck at 30fps when Cyberpunk 2077 has a 60fps mode on base PS5?
Click to expand...

Maybe he rigidly refuses to look into menus in console games. Ever think about that, Chrissy?

giphy.gif
 
Gaiff said:
Hard to tell because I don't have Cyberpunk on PS5. I wanted to try God of War Ragnarok since I have it on both my Pro and PC, but Sony removed it from GeForce Now.

The GeForce Now version shows I'm running the game at ~90-100fps with frame generation maxed out with path tracing at 3440x1440. On PC, I'm running the same settings but at ~115fps. The native version feels a lot snappier.

If I cap the native version at 60fps, it then feels comparable to GeForce Now at 90fps. If it's better than the console version, it isn't by much when it comes to latency and game feel.

You can play single-player games using GeForce Now. Any competitive fast-paced game that requires twitch reflexes will cook you.
Click to expand...
Sony never released their titles to GFN. You can play them on AMD-powered Boosteroid though.
 
ShaiKhulud1989 said:
Sony never released their titles to GFN. You can play them on AMD-powered Boosteroid though.
Click to expand...
Oh, I thought they were there but were removed. Whatever the case, GeForce Now to me isn't a viable alternative to a console or high-end PC. The console is much cheaper. The PC is much better.
 
Fahdis said:
Try it.

For all the naysayers... its literally like local. I'm not fucking with you. Maybe even better. You don't need a 4000$ PC my friends. This is the real deal.
Click to expand...
It really isn't like local. I tried them and the difference is extremely obvious. Local feels much better.
 
Gaiff said:
So, I just tried it with Cyberpunk using the Ultimate tier and NO, it is not close to native and you can 100% feel the latency. I have a 2 Gbit internet and the latency test measured at 4ms. I maxed out the bandwidth to 75Mbps/22GB per hour.

Honestly, it isn't bad, but I can definitely feel the latency. The IQ is also quite a bit softer than running natively, but it isn't terrible by any mean. It's like you're one DLSS level below.

Overall, it's decent for a streaming service, but this will NOT replace a high-end rig by any stretch of the imagination. Is it better than a console? Probably, but I'd rather own a PS5 and pay $550-750 once and be done with it than paying $20/month for a "better" gaming experience that will end up costing a lot more over the long term.
Click to expand...

I tried it, but it is still showing 4080 for me.
 
Topher said:
Ready to sell your PC yet?
Click to expand...
Never. I don't give a fuck that I have a bulky PC sitting in my house that costs thousands of dollars. I love that fucking thing and the fact I can do more than just game on it is amazing. I refuse to subscribe to anything when it comes to gaming.
 
MacReady13 said:
Never. I don't give a fuck that I have a bulky PC sitting in my house that costs thousands of dollars. I love that fucking thing and the fact I can do more than just game on it is amazing. I refuse to subscribe to anything when it comes to gaming.
Click to expand...

I'll mark you down as "probably not"
 
GFNow is expensive but damn, I have never had an issue streaming *while the shield is hardwired*, visually and latency is top notch. At times it gives me that , do I really need this console (I still have the Pro). I'm not fully convinced but extremely impressed and can't wait to check out Blackwell update.
 
But then again I've had my PS5 for almost 4 years now, 20€/month would add up to 960€. Of course, short term it's the better solution, if you're a casual gamer that plays about 3 games/year, but it's too expensive in the long run for someone like me who a) likes to play games when they're dirt cheap and b) likes to collect the games, physically.
And on top of that, I've still got my PS3 connected to my TV, and it still runs like a charm, even 15 years after I bought it, still ready to play whenever I want, I just put a game in it and that's it. I'd even say the PS3 era was far superior than current gun consoles in terms of how much mandatory setups were necessary to play a game.
If Geforce Now would have the same price as Gamepass including all the games, that would be a different story though, but as it is right now it's basically like renting a incredible expensive PC.
 
Last edited:
Gaiff said:
Hard to tell because I don't have Cyberpunk on PS5. I wanted to try God of War Ragnarok since I have it on both my Pro and PC, but Sony removed it from GeForce Now.

The GeForce Now version shows I'm running the game at ~90-100fps with frame generation maxed out with path tracing at 3440x1440. On PC, I'm running the same settings but at ~115fps. The native version feels a lot snappier.

If I cap the native version at 60fps, it then feels comparable to GeForce Now at 90fps. If it's better than the console version, it isn't by much when it comes to latency and game feel.

You can play single-player games using GeForce Now. Any competitive fast-paced game that requires twitch reflexes will cook you.
Click to expand...

So are you saying you can't play competitive fast-paced games on PS5? Since you're claiming the latency of GFN is close if not better than PS5.
 
Sure. You own nothing and are constantly at the mercy of the quality of your connection/data infrastructure - things which are always going to be out of your control. $19.99 a month.

LOL
 
Will this board be able to make me play confortably on my sofa on my 65 inch TV while holding a controller? Will this board bring me the simplicity of a single account for all games? Will this make my games to not crash constantly? If that's the case, I'm in.
 
LimanimaPT said:
Will this board be able to make me play confortably on my sofa on my 65 inch TV while holding a controller? Will this board bring me the simplicity of a single account for all games? Will this make my games to not crash constantly? If that's the case, I'm in.
Click to expand...

What board? It's streaming

Yes, you can play games on your sofa, TV, controller, etc. You can have one account if you want. Why would your games crash constantly otherwise?
 
Last edited:
I use GFN ultimate on and off on a Mac, and its basically near enough to native when you are playing it to not make a difference. But....a couple of things I find obnoxious enough to actually prefer my Pro in general.

1. It times out. You can't walk away from the game without risking a disconnect. Which can be super annoying for a game like Satisfactory where you want to just let the game run through some production for an hour or whatever.
2. Its fairly slow to spin up whatever you are playing. (I think the upcoming changes will fix this for your preferred titles)
3. They haven't released an ATV app yet. (which there has been nothing stopping them from doing for 12 months or so)
4. I've only ever had good results wired.
5. It sits just outside my comfortable price zone.
 
roosnam1980 said:
so multi-framegen on top of network based delay has less latency than on ps5.......................

yeah right
Click to expand...

I mean, depends on the game.
Doom Eternal had super dog shit vsync on PS4/Xbox One for example, which made the game feel extremely unresponsive. the Google Stadia version launched with the same Vsync in place, but after the devs patched it and removed it, the Stadia version at 60fps had in fact lower latency than the console versions with the terrible vsync still in place. and that shitty vsync was never patched out on console, and in fact made it into the "next gen" update even. (Doom 2016 didn't have that issue btw)

so the only way to play Doom Eternal with decent input lag on console is by playing the current gen update at 120fps, which gets you in the range of the 60fps latency the game has on PC.


so it absolutely happens that a cloud streamed version has lower latency than a console version. but that is always the fault of the developers of the console version... or because the PC version has Nvidia Reflex support... with reflex enabled you basically always cut latency in half compared to console at the same framerate, and is the reason games using frame gen can in fact often beat console latency
 
Last edited:
analog_future said:
So are you saying you can't play competitive fast-paced games on PS5? Since you're claiming the latency of GFN is close if not better than PS5.
Click to expand...
Talking mainly about competitive shooters where you need an insanely high fps over 200 like CS.

I also wouldn't play competitive games capped at 60 though. Consoles will have A latency advantage there. You need a much higher frame rate to offset this and even then, the network latency is impossible to eliminate.
 
Nah, cloud gaming can go fuck off a cliff, and if people are really dumb enough to trade more ownership away for minor convenience...you deserve what you'll get.

They'll do the same Silicon Valley playbook of offering great value up front that's not even profitable for them. Then when enough people are locked in, the prices will go up and the value will go down just like every other streaming service has over time (Game Pass showing signs of this already).

We're already experiencing diminished returns on graphics where high-end GPUs are the worst value they've ever been over mid-tier/budget hardware... but storage is the cheapest it has ever been, so I have more reason than ever to just use my own hardware.
 
CoreyFlawless said:
I'm confuse what GeForce now is. Is it kinda like gamepass? Only the games that is on it can be play on the cloud or what?
Click to expand...
No, it's a cloud streaming service. You must own the games on Steam, GOG, Epic, or other services to play them remotely on NVIDIA's cloud platform.

The advantage is that the highest tier called Ultimate costs $20/month and gives you access to play remotely on an RTX 4080-equipped rig. The disadvantage is the added network latency and that you don't own the hardware and are limited to 8 hours of uninterrupted gaming before having to sign back in. Also, you have 100 hours of game time included per month.

A computer with such performance would probably be close to $2000. That's 100 months of GeForce Now or 8.3 years. Less if you take the 6 months plan. It sounds quite economical, but there are drawbacks to consider.
 
Last edited:
Topher said:
Each game sessions takes up resources in the data center. You are put in a queue when you log in to get to those resources. If you are in the higher paid tier then you'll be at the top of the queue and you probably won't have to wait much, if at all.

Every tier has time limits meaning how long you can play interrupted before you have to log off and log back in and get back in a queue.

Free tier you get one hour/session. Performance tier (mid tier), you get 6 hours. Ultimate tier, you get 8 hours.

No matter what tier you get 100 hours of play time per month. Up to 15 hours can roll over from one month to the next.

Ready to sell your PC yet?
Click to expand...
Are there queues and time limit on paid tiers? I thought only the free one has.
 
geary said:
Are there queues and time limit on paid tiers? I thought only the free one has.
Click to expand...
Time limit, yes. You can play 8 hours continuously before having to log back in. You're also limited to 100 hours per month, but up 15 unused hours roll over to the next month.

As for queues, supposedly, there are, but when I tried it today, I didn't experience any and if I did, they were less than 15 seconds.
 
This is happening at exactly the same time as the PS5 Pro price is going up to a whopping $750. The company reps are being modest in what they say, so I'll say it instead — this has a very real chance to upend the entire idea of a games console.
Click to expand...

Understanding that the console market is very different from the cloud gaming market is not being "modest'. There is no chance of a service like this replacing consoles, just like every other alternative over the years hasn't either. As well, it's weird how it's so hard for some people to talk about something they like without dragging something else down. It doesn't give more weight to their opinion on what they like, it just irritates most people.
 
ps5 pro is mostly based on hardware released in the year 2020 so it really doesn't take all that much to make it "feel" old, does it?
 
Another positive to consider is assuming you are close to 100hr a month user you are probably saving something in the order of 30kWh or so of power. More possibly if whatever you are using as a gateway is very low power. I think for me on my electricity tariff I worked it out as about a 30% discount on GFN vs running a 4080 locally, assuming I had one. So GFN is for a lot of people a very good deal imo, but personally I prefer local compute at the end of the day, although its taken about 12 months of GFN usage to arrive at the conclusion.
 
Last edited:
Gaiff said:
Is it better than a console? Probably, but I'd rather own a PS5 and pay $550-750 once and be done with it than paying $20/month for a "better" gaming experience that will end up costing a lot more over the long term.
Click to expand...
Maybe. But you'll buy new hardware every 7 years or so, more often than that if you use the mid gen upgrades. so it depends if you add it all up. Might also let you skip a console or PC so hardware cost there could be removed.

——

Me, PS console hw cost, since 2020:
PS5, 650€ (+extra controller, bundle done to avoid scalpers)
PS5 Pro, 1150€ (+ discdrive)
= 1800€, 5 years
Note: In about 3 years I'll likely buy a PS6 so this will keep on increasing, I'm guessing $2500€ over 10 years. I don't play online so I don't include any PS+ cost here. Others should do that.

——

GFN Ultimate cost:
25€/month
300€/year
= 1500€, 5 years

Note: Subscription price changes makes longterm cost difficult to calculate. But minimum 3000€ over 10 years should be expected.

——

Me, PC hw cost, since 2020:
2022, 5000€ (New desktop PC incl screen)
2023: 3500€ (New couch PC)
2025: 4000€ (graphics card and CPU upgrade)
= 12500€, 5 years
Note: I can pretend that it's a longterm investment and that I'm set for 10 years. But as an enthusiast it's just not true.

——

I have no bigger problem with cloud gaming becoming big. Could save me money. But it only really work if everything is there, every game and every platform, including Nintendo, and if there are no queues. I played Cyberpunk at launch and had to wait in line to play. Not okay! And there are still so many games not available on GFN. And it's definitely not useful to skip PlayStation, there are a few Sony games there but no Spider-Man, Horizon, Returnal, The Last of Us. Sony want you to subscribe to PS+ instead.
 
Fess said:
Maybe. But you'll buy new hardware every 7 years or so, more often than that if you use the mid gen upgrades. so it depends if you add it all up. Might also let you skip a console or PC so hardware cost there could be removed.

——

Me, PS console hw cost, since 2020:
PS5, 650€ (+extra controller, bundle done to avoid scalpers)
PS5 Pro, 1150€ (+ discdrive)
= 1800€, 5 years
Note: In about 3 years I'll likely buy a PS6 so this will keep on increasing, I'm guessing $2500€ over 10 years. I don't play online so I don't include any PS+ cost here. Others should do that.

——

GFN Ultimate cost:
25€/month
300€/year
= 1500€, 5 years

Note: Subscription price changes makes longterm cost difficult to calculate. But minimum 3000€ over 10 years should be expected.

——

Me, PC hw cost, since 2020:
2022, 5000€ (New desktop PC incl screen)
2023: 3500€ (New couch PC)
2025: 4000€ (graphics card and CPU upgrade)
= 12500€, 5 years
Note: I can pretend that it's a longterm investment and that I'm set for 10 years. But as an enthusiast it's just not true.

——

I have no bigger problem with cloud gaming becoming big. Could save me money. But it only really work if everything is there, every game and every platform, including Nintendo, and if there are no queues. I played Cyberpunk at launch and had to wait in line to play. Not okay! And there are still so many games not available on GFN. And it's definitely not useful to skip PlayStation, there are a few Sony games there but no Spider-Man, Horizon, Returnal, The Last of Us. Sony want you to subscribe to PS+ instead.
Click to expand...
It's €25 per month only if you play less than 100 hours. For additional playtime, you need to pay extra.
 
ThisIsMyDog said:
It's €25 per month only if you play less than 100 hours. For additional playtime, you need to pay extra.
Click to expand...
No problem for me but I understand that it can be a problem for others.

In general the infrastructure on servers for current cloud gaming solutions aren't good enough on a global scale.

Ironically Stadia is the service that has had the least issues for me - no queues, high resolution, image quality was good, roughly 1 frame latency, pick up and play UI without nonsense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Nvidia GeForce RTX 5080 Super (24GB) & RTX 5070 Super (18GB) may be in the works
Rumor  2 3
112
4K
LavitzSlambert replied
Geforce Now getting 5080-class GPUs
11
225
peish replied
Sorry, but the RTX 5090 is outdated: The NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 is in town
2
84
2K
Ramiro_Rodriguez replied
VideoCardz - NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 reviews go live January 24, RTX 5080 on January 30
2 3
136
8K
OverHeat replied
GeForce RTX 5080 with 24GB memory reportedly in the works
Rumor Hardware 
12
2K
lmimmfn replied
Top Bottom