By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
SvennoJ said:
Hiku said:

The input latency from PC monitors can vary drastically as well.

One monitor released in 2018 was tested to have an input latency of 33.4 ms for native resolutions. While an HP monitor released the same year had an input latency of only 2.6 ms. https://www.rtings.com/monitor/tests/inputs/input-lag

Though I wasn't suggesting that this was the major contributor for the lag, but that there are multiple factors adding up.

What I'm saying about the bandwith is that Google may be sending data of different bandwith volume through different routes.
In this case the data for the PC game may have been forced to travel a longer distance, making more hops before it reaches its destination.

And the paragraph you cited from Eurogamer makes it sound like higher resolutions may only available for PC at the moment.
"We're focusing on the big screen primarily because right now at least, it is the only way to access Stadia's top-end video output - ultra HD at 60 frames per second with HDR support."

But whether that's the case or not, there's also the possibility of being able to chose.

True, further tests would be useful. The game would also render faster if you go for the 1080p or 720p option, thus less latency at the source. If the game can render at 120 fps at 720p, while only sending half the frames, you still have cut the render time in half. In the case of a 30 fps game at 4K, that's 25 ms saved. Also compression and decompression will be faster at lower resolutions and bandwidth, as well as the transmission time per frame. It all adds up.

Yeah, I'm sure we'll see more comprehensive tests in the coming days. After seeing these preliminary tests I'm mainly curious if they'll find a common correlation between higher end options, and more latency issues. Which also makes me wonder how spread out Stadia's data centers are.
And if one data center has hardware that only focuses on 4K streaming, while another data center has hardware that only handles 1080p streams.

Though either way, it seems quite possible that you may be matched up to a data center further away because the ones near you happen to all be busy at the moment.

So essentially, during the Washington Post PC test, the closest available data center may have been further away than the one that was streaming to them during the mobile test.
Or perhaps they used different ISP's during the two tests, which may have resulted in the data taking unnecessary extra routes, depending on how the ISP handles its data.
The interesting thing there, if it's the ISP's fault, is that it may not even necessarily be a 'problem' with the ISP per say. As in, it's not something they can, or will, fix. But rather depending on how certain ISP's handle their data (some make extra stops between a parent company and the daughter company for example), you may have a bad experience with Google Stadia with ISP's that otherwise function well for you.

So this could potentially be an issue with Stadia that you can't predict until you test it out with any given ISP first.

Last edited by Hiku - on 19 November 2019