Quantcast
xCloud reportedly bests Stadia in early latency tests at E3, 4 ms vs 21ms of added latency

Forums - Gaming Discussion - xCloud reportedly bests Stadia in early latency tests at E3, 4 ms vs 21ms of added latency

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edit: 

So, the article is a bit misleading. It's comparing total latency vs total latency rather than additional latency vs additional latency, with 2 different games, one of which is a considerably more laggy game than the other. Here is the actual comparison:

xCloud- 4ms of additional latency compared to playing Halo 5 locally on Xbox One
Stadia- 21ms of additional latency compared to playing AC Odyssey locally on Xbox One (

Last edited by shikamaru317 - on 11 June 2019

Around the Network

67 is prettt bad esspecially if it fluctuates but holy hell 166 is terrible.



 

Everything in the above reply is my opinion, from my own perspective and not representative of reality outside of my own head!

-Android user, please be gentle with critique on my spelling.

John2290 said:
67 is prettt bad esspecially if it fluctuates but holy hell 166 is terrible.

That's 67 total ms for xCloud, not 67 additional ms. So it's only like 4ms more than playing Halo 5 locally on an Xbox One. And the nearest server in the test was 400 miles away. That's pretty impressive, and good news for me since Microsoft's nearest Azure center is about 300 miles from me. 

Last edited by shikamaru317 - on 11 June 2019

MS will win the cloud gaming wars.



So, the article is a bit misleading. It's comparing total latency vs total latency rather than additional latency vs additional latency, with 2 different games, one of which is a considerably more laggy game than the other. Here is the actual comparison:

xCloud- 4ms of additional latency compared to playing Halo 5 locally on Xbox One
Stadia- 21ms of additional latency compared to playing AC Odyssey locally on Xbox One



Around the Network
shikamaru317 said:
John2290 said:
67 is prettt bad esspecially if it fluctuates but holy hell 166 is terrible.

That's 67 total ms for xCloud, not 67 additional ms. So it's only like 4ms more than playing Halo 5 locally on an Xbox One. And the nearest server in the test was 400 miles away. That's pretty impressive, and good news for me since Microsoft's nearest Azure center is about 300 miles from me. 

Sure it wasn't a PC behind the curtain running the 'cloud' :) I would take these results with a grain of salt. It's not that hard to get a dedicated line for demonstrations like this.

The distance isn't the problem, a round trip through fiber over 400 miles only adds 6.14 ms. Yet if your stuck with your pedestrian connection, a lot of hops and traffic jams will quickly add to that number. So perhaps Google's 166 is a better indication of real world results.



shikamaru317 said:

So, the article is a bit misleading. It's comparing total latency vs total latency rather than additional latency vs additional latency, with 2 different games, one of which is a considerably more laggy game than the other. Here is the actual comparison:

xCloud- 4ms of additional latency compared to playing Halo 5 locally on Xbox One
Stadia- 21ms of additional latency compared to playing AC Odyssey locally on Xbox One

XCloud beats the speed of light!



Microsoft is in the driver's seat, but Google pushing them is good. I think Gamer Pass + xCloud has a great chance of becoming the Netflix equivalent of game streaming.



shikamaru317 said:

So, the article is a bit misleading. It's comparing total latency vs total latency rather than additional latency vs additional latency, with 2 different games, one of which is a considerably more laggy game than the other. Here is the actual comparison:

xCloud- 4ms of additional latency compared to playing Halo 5 locally on Xbox One
Stadia- 21ms of additional latency compared to playing AC Odyssey locally on Xbox One

Stadia will feel like playing Metro so, not terrible but enough to know there is something wrong and sluggish, maybe a bit worse than that example but not by much. Both are pretty good compared to what I was expecting but it's the stability that is the question now. Is there a method to keep that latency from spiking either up or down and will all developers need to patch this method in. If MS can keep that at 5 - 10 ms extra than console and keep it stable on their end, it might just be worth checking out but I think ISP's are going to be a massive bump in this road along with their peak on and offs, weather related spiking and so on and so forth. It's all built on flimsy infrastructure, it's a greaf idea but it feels to me like using an indoor aerial to try and tune a TV before satellite or UHF as standard. Just flimsy and unreliable and like UHF or satellite many of these problems like weather can never be fixed. 



 

Everything in the above reply is my opinion, from my own perspective and not representative of reality outside of my own head!

-Android user, please be gentle with critique on my spelling.

Yikes thats actually impressive



 "I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007

Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions