Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Nvidia's New 'Console'

TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member

With the official public release of information on their new Tegra 4 processor, Nvidia has also released information on their 'Shield' device.

http://shield.nvidia.com/

Not sure how big a deal this is, but it's an Android with WiFi device, with a multi-touch display, 720p resolution and access to the Google Play store. There is also an Nvidia store, but it's not locked into their store only (smart). Pics of the device show a mini-HDMI port, usb port and a headphone jack.

No word on price.

** edit **
Almost forgot. You can stream your PC games and play them over WiFi. This includes Steam games apparently. That might be a big deal.

** edit edit **

And a pic:
image

5" 720p screen
Tegra 4 Graphics
WiFi + Bluetooth
HDMI, USB & Audio connectors

I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

«134

Comments

  • KhrymsonKhrymson Eorzea, MOPosts: 3,090Member

     

    A 5" screen ~ no thanks!   I'll continue playing games on my highly over-powered PC with a 46" screen...lol

  • jdnewelljdnewell Spring Hill, TNPosts: 2,150Member Uncommon

    Looks interesting for sure.

    I am skeptical about the streaming my PC games over wifi will work. The object being portability, If i am in a hotel 300 miles from home and want to stream Skyrim to this device will that work? Or will I need to be on my home network?

    Worth keeping an eye on for sure. Just to see how it works out if nothing else.

  • CastillleCastillle KhobarPosts: 2,703Member Uncommon
    I dont like the gamepad tbh o.o and yeah teh screen is a bit too small o.o 

    ''/\/\'' Posted using Iphone bunni
    ( o.o)
    (")(")
    **This bunny was cloned from bunnies belonging to Gobla and is part of the Quizzical Fanclub and the The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club**

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by jdnewell
    Looks interesting for sure.I am skeptical about the streaming my PC games over wifi will work. The object being portability, If i am in a hotel 300 miles from home and want to stream Skyrim to this device will that work? Or will I need to be on my home network?Worth keeping an eye on for sure. Just to see how it works out if nothing else.

    It sounds like the idea is to stream things inside a house, on a home network. I'm sure you could do it over the internet, but I'd wonder at how well it would work. Bandwidth considerations aside, the lag might be bad.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • maskedweaselmaskedweasel houston, TXPosts: 7,277Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by lizardbones

     


    Originally posted by jdnewell
    Looks interesting for sure.

     

    I am skeptical about the streaming my PC games over wifi will work. The object being portability, If i am in a hotel 300 miles from home and want to stream Skyrim to this device will that work? Or will I need to be on my home network?

    Worth keeping an eye on for sure. Just to see how it works out if nothing else.



    It sounds like the idea is to stream things inside a house, on a home network. I'm sure you could do it over the internet, but I'd wonder at how well it would work. Bandwidth considerations aside, the lag might be bad.

     

    It almost sounds like a local OnLive type of device...  OnLive itself seemed like a good idea, and I believe they had their own console too -- however, the lag was an issue from time to time and it probably wouldn't be a good idea for multiplayer at all.

    "Loan me a Dragon I wanna see space"


    image

  • AzureProwerAzurePrower AustraliaPosts: 1,508Member Uncommon

    Looks like some one is trying to contend with Wii U.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by maskedweasel
    Originally posted by lizardbones   Originally posted by jdnewell Looks interesting for sure.   I am skeptical about the streaming my PC games over wifi will work. The object being portability, If i am in a hotel 300 miles from home and want to stream Skyrim to this device will that work? Or will I need to be on my home network? Worth keeping an eye on for sure. Just to see how it works out if nothing else.
    It sounds like the idea is to stream things inside a house, on a home network. I'm sure you could do it over the internet, but I'd wonder at how well it would work. Bandwidth considerations aside, the lag might be bad.  
    It almost sounds like a local OnLive type of device...  OnLive itself seemed like a good idea, and I believe they had their own console too -- however, the lag was an issue from time to time and it probably wouldn't be a good idea for multiplayer at all.


    All the stuff for steaming inside a home network already exists. It's not in a convenient package though, which is what they're providing here. I don't really think they are targeting this type of thing over the internet...but then again...their CES presentation talked a lot about cloud services. It was apparently fantastically boring, and left people shaking their heads, but maybe they are trying to get ahead of the curve.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by AzurePrower
    Looks like some one is trying to contend with Wii U.

    I don't think anyone is struggling to contend with the Wii U, aside from the people who bought one.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • ShakyMoShakyMo BradfordPosts: 7,207Member
    I've no interest in running games on my tv.

    1 Mrs mo would complain that she can't watch tv.
    2 I wouldn't be able to escape to my man lair / box room / home "office".

    Anyway its an ugly thing, basicly an Android phone hammer and duct taped to game controller. How it works is it bluetooths to your pc, sending controller input and receiving images and sound, with the option to hdmi output from the phone to tv.

    You can do this anyway with a separate Bluetooth controller and phone, with the bonus being you can actually take your phone with you and use it as a phone.
  • QuizzicalQuizzical Posts: 14,784Member Uncommon

    This serves several purposes.

    1)  It's got enough CPU and GPU power to render relatively low end graphics locally.  Assuming that the rumors of OpenGL 4 compliance are true, if a game has an OpenGL version (loosely, if it has a Linux or Mac version that isn't just official support for Wine or Cider or whatever), it's likely that it will run on Nvidia Shield, albeit at low graphical settings.  And, of course, if the game already has an Android version, that will run very well.  The software support for running Java+OpenGL games on Android is already there.  It might already be there for C++ as well, but even if not, that's presumably coming shortly.

    The reason it's so much thicker than, say, an iPhone or Samsung Galaxy anything is that it has to dissipate a lot more heat.  That's what allows it to have a lot more performance.  A 38 watt-hour battery for 5 hours of battery life means you're looking at 8 W of system power consumption.  That's on the high side for a tablet, but still viable for the tablet form factor.  They're not going to put this chip in phones, though.

    2)  It can stream games across a LAN from a desktop with a GeForce video card.  This is very much a niche use, but there are some people who want to stick a gaming desktop in a wall somewhere and then stream games to other devices in their house.

    This use is very different from OnLive, as OnLive is trying to stream games over the Internet.  If you've got an 802.11n WiFi LAN, you can get much more bandwidth at much lower latency.  It's entirely possible to make latency not a problem at all, and to get enough bandwidth that the compression won't be any worse than saving a game screenshot as a JPEG.  There will still be the problem that wireless is intrinsically unreliable (quick, unplug the microwave!), but that's not nearly as bad as what OnLive had to cope with.

    3)  It will be another marketing bullet point for selling desktop and laptop GeForce cards.  I guarantee you that we'll soon see Nvidia fanboys saying that you should get, say, a GeForce GTX 660 rather than a Radeon HD 7870 because if you also buy an Nvidia Shield, you'll be able to stream games from the GTX 660 to the Shield, and you can't do that with a Radeon HD 7870 because the Nvidia Shield drivers will artificially block it.  And that that's a reason why you should buy the GTX 660 even if you don't have an Nvidia Shield and don't have any interest in buying one.

    Well, that using PhysX and CUDA as reasons to buy a GeForce card were stupid arguments never stopped Nvidia fanboys from using them.

  • maskedweaselmaskedweasel houston, TXPosts: 7,277Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quizzical

    This serves several purposes.

    1)  It's got enough CPU and GPU power to render relatively low end graphics locally.  Assuming that the rumors of OpenGL 4 compliance are true, if a game has an OpenGL version (loosely, if it has a Linux or Mac version that isn't just official support for Wine or Cider or whatever), it's likely that it will run on Nvidia Shield, albeit at low graphical settings.  And, of course, if the game already has an Android version, that will run very well.  The software support for running Java+OpenGL games on Android is already there.  It might already be there for C++ as well, but even if not, that's presumably coming shortly.

    The reason it's so much thicker than, say, an iPhone or Samsung Galaxy anything is that it has to dissipate a lot more heat.  That's what allows it to have a lot more performance.  A 38 watt-hour battery for 5 hours of battery life means you're looking at 8 W of system power consumption.  That's on the high side for a tablet, but still viable for the tablet form factor.  They're not going to put this chip in phones, though.

    2)  It can stream games across a LAN from a desktop with a GeForce video card.  This is very much a niche use, but there are some people who want to stick a gaming desktop in a wall somewhere and then stream games to other devices in their house.

    This use is very different from OnLive, as OnLive is trying to stream games over the Internet.  If you've got an 802.11n WiFi LAN, you can get much more bandwidth at much lower latency.  It's entirely possible to make latency not a problem at all, and to get enough bandwidth that the compression won't be any worse than saving a game screenshot as a JPEG.  There will still be the problem that wireless is intrinsically unreliable (quick, unplug the microwave!), but that's not nearly as bad as what OnLive had to cope with.

    3)  It will be another marketing bullet point for selling desktop and laptop GeForce cards.  I guarantee you that we'll soon see Nvidia fanboys saying that you should get, say, a GeForce GTX 660 rather than a Radeon HD 7870 because if you also buy an Nvidia Shield, you'll be able to stream games from the GTX 660 to the Shield, and you can't do that with a Radeon HD 7870 because the Nvidia Shield drivers will artificially block it.  And that that's a reason why you should buy the GTX 660 even if you don't have an Nvidia Shield and don't have any interest in buying one.

    Well, that using PhysX and CUDA as reasons to buy a GeForce card were stupid arguments never stopped Nvidia fanboys from using them.

    Interesting take on it I suppose.  I believe native C++ has been codable on android since Gingerbread,  but I guess where I'm confused slightly, is that it essentially sounds like it is streaming the playability, so presumably the game coding shouldn't matter at all, should it? It would focus more on the hardware required for playback....  or are you speaking specifically to the downloading and use of games on the device?

    While I understand that it isn't the exact equivelant to OnLive,  I think in my mind, the end result is similar,  albeit if what you say is true the decreased latency is a plus in regards to the issues OnLive has had.  That being said though, I would imagine there wouldn't be much demand for this, and instead this would have a small onset of users -- so is it really worthy of an additional appliance?

    "Loan me a Dragon I wanna see space"


    image

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by Quizzical
    This serves several purposes.
    <snip - lots of stuff, read the post above>
    They're not going to put this chip in phones, though.
    <snip - lots of stuff, read the post above>


    They do want to put these things in phones. One of the features is that it can fix phone pictures. One of the examples was when people take a picture outside, the blue sky often washes out to white. This chip can fix that because it can do the HDR imaging on the fly much faster than the current crop of chips.

    I have no idea what they'll do about heat dissipation, but if people are mostly doing what they normally do with phones, it wouldn't be a huge issue.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Posts: 14,784Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by maskedweasel
    Originally posted by Quizzical

    This serves several purposes.

    1)  It's got enough CPU and GPU power to render relatively low end graphics locally.  Assuming that the rumors of OpenGL 4 compliance are true, if a game has an OpenGL version (loosely, if it has a Linux or Mac version that isn't just official support for Wine or Cider or whatever), it's likely that it will run on Nvidia Shield, albeit at low graphical settings.  And, of course, if the game already has an Android version, that will run very well.  The software support for running Java+OpenGL games on Android is already there.  It might already be there for C++ as well, but even if not, that's presumably coming shortly.

    The reason it's so much thicker than, say, an iPhone or Samsung Galaxy anything is that it has to dissipate a lot more heat.  That's what allows it to have a lot more performance.  A 38 watt-hour battery for 5 hours of battery life means you're looking at 8 W of system power consumption.  That's on the high side for a tablet, but still viable for the tablet form factor.  They're not going to put this chip in phones, though.

    2)  It can stream games across a LAN from a desktop with a GeForce video card.  This is very much a niche use, but there are some people who want to stick a gaming desktop in a wall somewhere and then stream games to other devices in their house.

    This use is very different from OnLive, as OnLive is trying to stream games over the Internet.  If you've got an 802.11n WiFi LAN, you can get much more bandwidth at much lower latency.  It's entirely possible to make latency not a problem at all, and to get enough bandwidth that the compression won't be any worse than saving a game screenshot as a JPEG.  There will still be the problem that wireless is intrinsically unreliable (quick, unplug the microwave!), but that's not nearly as bad as what OnLive had to cope with.

    3)  It will be another marketing bullet point for selling desktop and laptop GeForce cards.  I guarantee you that we'll soon see Nvidia fanboys saying that you should get, say, a GeForce GTX 660 rather than a Radeon HD 7870 because if you also buy an Nvidia Shield, you'll be able to stream games from the GTX 660 to the Shield, and you can't do that with a Radeon HD 7870 because the Nvidia Shield drivers will artificially block it.  And that that's a reason why you should buy the GTX 660 even if you don't have an Nvidia Shield and don't have any interest in buying one.

    Well, that using PhysX and CUDA as reasons to buy a GeForce card were stupid arguments never stopped Nvidia fanboys from using them.

    Interesting take on it I suppose.  I believe native C++ has been codable on android since Gingerbread,  but I guess where I'm confused slightly, is that it essentially sounds like it is streaming the playability, so presumably the game coding shouldn't matter at all, should it? It would focus more on the hardware required for playback....  or are you speaking specifically to the downloading and use of games on the device?

    While I understand that it isn't the exact equivelant to OnLive,  I think in my mind, the end result is similar,  albeit if what you say is true the decreased latency is a plus in regards to the issues OnLive has had.  That being said though, I would imagine there wouldn't be much demand for this, and instead this would have a small onset of users -- so is it really worthy of an additional appliance?

    Whether you render a game locally or stream it from some other device should be a game-by-game decision.  If you want to play Angry Birds, then streaming that is completely stupid.  You'll have way more performance than you need to render it locally.  If you want to play Guild Wars 2, then you don't have anywhere near the performance you need to render it locally, on top of not having the proper API and OS support, so you stream it.

    If you want to render a game locally, then you need to have the proper OS and API support.  DirectX is out, as you're running Android.  But if a game uses OpenGL instead, then it might be easy or even trivial to have an Android version that runs locally on Tegra 4.  Imagine being able to play WoW or LotRO on a device like this, while it rendering locally so that you don't have to stream it and can play it just fine over an awful lot of WiFi connections.  It's likely to be possible, as Tegra 4 probably has enough performance.

    If you want to stream the game, then you still need the OS and API support, but you only need it on the computer that is rendering the game, not on Nvidia Shield.  In that case, it doesn't matter what Nvidia Shield supports, so long as it supports whatever software they use to stream the game.

    If you stream a game over a LAN, you're not just looking at slightly more bandwidth available than OnLive.  You might be looking at two orders of magnitude more.  The latency would go from "better pick a turn-based game" to being a rounding error.  That's the difference between "kinda, sorta works, but not very well, and is really only a last resort" and "works well enough that you might want to use it if you like the form factor".

    Is it good enough to actually buy and use one?  Are gaming laptops good enough to buy and use one?  Are consoles good enough to buy and use one?  It's a matter of opinion, and the answer will vary from person to person.  I don't see Nvidia selling 10 million of these, but neither will their market be limited to only clueless people who don't know any better.

  • QuizzicalQuizzical Posts: 14,784Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by lizardbones

     


    Originally posted by Quizzical
    This serves several purposes.

    They're not going to put this chip in phones, though.
     

     



    They do want to put these things in phones. One of the features is that it can fix phone pictures. One of the examples was when people take a picture outside, the blue sky often washes out to white. This chip can fix that because it can do the HDR imaging on the fly much faster than the current crop of chips.

    I have no idea what they'll do about heat dissipation, but if people are mostly doing what they normally do with phones, it wouldn't be a huge issue.

     

    The full Tegra 4 chip in a phone is a bad idea.  At minimum, they'd have to greatly reduce the clock speeds to make the power consumption palatable.

    Now, a cut down Tegra 4 chip based on the same architecture could go in phones.  Tegra Grey is supposed to be something to that effect.  They might need to use Cortex A7 or A9 cores instead of A15, or two cores instead of four, or 24 shaders instead of 72, or some such.  Look at what Apple did, with Swift cores in the iPad 4, and then Cortex A9 cores in the iPhone 5.

  • SouldrainerSouldrainer Elmer, NJPosts: 1,857Member
    I don't normally go for handhelds, but the Steam compatability has me excited. Combine it with the announcement that the Steambox will be Linux-based, and all I need are release dates and price tags, lol.

    Error: 37. Signature not found. Please connect to my server for signature access.

  • BelegStrongbowBelegStrongbow Pasadena, MDPosts: 281Member

    Looks like they are competing with Razer  

     

    http://www.razerzone.com/projectfiona

     

    http://www.razerzone.com/switchblade

     

    EDIT:  This is the product you guys should really be talking about,  That nvidia thing looks like trash compared to the new Razer devices.  I went to CES 2012 and demoed them.  They are pretty wild.

  • tkoreapertkoreaper Castroville, TXPosts: 401Member Common
    Don't get this trash and don't be fooled. You can do this with most tablet devices already. Get yourself a Nexus 10 and a PS2 controller and you're all set... That is, if you need something like this. The Nexus 10 packs more power and a higher resolution for an extremely resonable price.
  • TheFirst109TheFirst109 Lincoln Park, NJPosts: 179Member
    Originally posted by lizardbones

     


    Originally posted by AzurePrower
    Looks like some one is trying to contend with Wii U.


    I don't think anyone is struggling to contend with the Wii U, aside from the people who bought one.

     

    I think someone needs some friends then lol...Nintendoland is the most fun I've had in a video game in a long time, but I have people over constantly so I guess if you don't have that the console loses some of its appeal.

  • WicoaWicoa LondonPosts: 1,602Member Uncommon
    prefer the razer stuff the screen is too small 5" :?/
  • negativf4kknegativf4kk WorthingPosts: 377Member Uncommon
    Cloud gaming - everything is possible!!!!

    <a href="http://www.danasoft.com"><img src="http://www.danasoft.com/sig/499105419258.jpg"; border="0"></a><div style="font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:11px;"><p>Sign by Danasoft - <a href="http://www.danasoft.com">For Backgrounds and Layouts</a></p></div>

  • AethaerynAethaeryn Kitchener, ONPosts: 1,974Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by lizardbones

     


    Originally posted by AzurePrower
    Looks like some one is trying to contend with Wii U.


    I don't think anyone is struggling to contend with the Wii U, aside from the people who bought one.

     

    Hey my wife loves ours. .and if I want her love. . she needed to play the new Mario despite the cost.!  I have to let her kick my arse at Nintendo Land stuff as well.  But then I can spend what I want on my PC. . . a small price to play. . plus I Netflix better on the Wii.

     

    ehehm. .  

     

    It seems like an android tablet. . . with most of the same connections.  You can also hook a wireless controller up to your android tablet.  The streaming games from the PC is the only part that sets it apart but if I am close enough to stream through wireless. . assuming that is how it works. . then I would just play on my PC. . plus most games I play require a keyboard.

     

     

    Wa min God! Se æx on min heafod is!

  • ezpz77ezpz77 Beale, CAPosts: 227Member
    Originally posted by Khrymson

     

    A 5" screen ~ no thanks!   I'll continue playing games on my highly over-powered PC with a 46" screen...lol

     

    To be fair, I don't think they're aiming this towards someone sitting at home with their gaming computer.

    I can't exactly pick up my oversized tower and 46" TV to go with me on a business trip and good gaming laptops are insanely expensive. I'd consider something like this if it were priced right.

  • rojoArcueidrojoArcueid hell, NJPosts: 6,778Member Uncommon
    Ouya just got a new contender. It looks nice but i cant see myself streaming the latest steam multiplayer AAA games on this small screen. And to me it would be useless to buy it just for low end games that i dont play anymore, but still looks pretty nice.

    image
  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member


    Originally posted by TheFirst109
    Originally posted by lizardbones   Originally posted by AzurePrower Looks like some one is trying to contend with Wii U.
    I don't think anyone is struggling to contend with the Wii U, aside from the people who bought one.  
    I think someone needs some friends then lol...Nintendoland is the most fun I've had in a video game in a long time, but I have people over constantly so I guess if you don't have that the console loses some of its appeal.


    Well, to be honest I have no idea what the user experience is like. It just looks weird. We have a Wii, and I think Nintendo knows their audience better than the other console makers, but the Wii U still just looks weird to me. :-)

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • AticusWellesAticusWelles Beverly hills, CAPosts: 152Member
    I wouldn't want to use this to play an mmo but a single player game, while soaking up the sun sitting next to my pond would be fantastic. Already got a sling box for watching live TV next to the pond, only thing missing is top notch PC gaming.
«134
Sign In or Register to comment.