Input latency is there, yes, but it's not too bad especially if you turn on Nvidia Reflex and use the hardware cursor. Totally unnoticeable in many games. For first-person shooters it's definitely noticeable, but IMO still playable as long as you're not doing it competitively. I play shooters on it from time to time... and put it this way, I would much rather do that (on max graphics) and deal with the minor input lag, than to try to get them running on my Mac, all to get super low graphics with low draw distance, etc.
It's never going to beat a 4090 on your desk, but for $20/mo...? It's an incredible value.
I don't know that there really is a "catch" beyond basic network principles/limitations. Game streaming has been developed for more than a decade now... when OnLive first came out, the technology (home internet and hardware encoding) wasn't quite there. Now 35Mbps is commonplace, Nvidia has hardware encoding in all their cards, AND they control the entire stack of their data center like no one else can. Stadia's failure was IMO a Google management problem more than any technical limitation. GeForce Now is a much much better service, both using your existing Steam library and supporting way more games.
The pricing does seem really good, especially compared to Shadow.tech (where you rent a whole gaming VM with a 3070 Ti for $50/mo, but can run anything you want) or AirGPU (similar service). But the games-as-a-service platforms like Amazon Luna, Xbox Cloud Streaming, and PS Plus are all comparably priced ($10-$20/mo). There are other third party services like Boosteroid too. Cloud gaming is a maturing technology that's largely already "there", in my experience (have tried nearly all of them over the last 10+ years).
I think Nvidia is uniquely positioned as the only company in this space who can provide the graphics cards first-party instead of needing to buy them from, well, Nvidia. It's possible that the current pricing is a loss leader, but they've already raised the prices from the Founders pricing they had a few years ago, and it's still not too bad. It's not like Nvidia is hurting for cash anyway. My main fear is not that there's a "catch", but that they'll gradually move out of the gaming segment and focus on AI.
In the meantime, while it lasts, GeForce Now really is wonderfully, uh, game-changing :)
----------
Edit: PS they have a free tier, and you can even use it in a browser tab, no client download needed. That's enough to give you a taste for free, no commitment. If you decide you like it, the Ultimate plan is very much worth it, and the desktop (or mobile) clients offer slightly better UX than the browser tab and higher resolutions.
From https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce-now/system-reqs/:
- 15 Mbps for 720p @ 60FPS
- 25 Mbps for 1080p
- Up to 35 Mbps for 4k/120 FPS
Input latency is there, yes, but it's not too bad especially if you turn on Nvidia Reflex and use the hardware cursor. Totally unnoticeable in many games. For first-person shooters it's definitely noticeable, but IMO still playable as long as you're not doing it competitively. I play shooters on it from time to time... and put it this way, I would much rather do that (on max graphics) and deal with the minor input lag, than to try to get them running on my Mac, all to get super low graphics with low draw distance, etc.
It's never going to beat a 4090 on your desk, but for $20/mo...? It's an incredible value.
I don't know that there really is a "catch" beyond basic network principles/limitations. Game streaming has been developed for more than a decade now... when OnLive first came out, the technology (home internet and hardware encoding) wasn't quite there. Now 35Mbps is commonplace, Nvidia has hardware encoding in all their cards, AND they control the entire stack of their data center like no one else can. Stadia's failure was IMO a Google management problem more than any technical limitation. GeForce Now is a much much better service, both using your existing Steam library and supporting way more games.
The pricing does seem really good, especially compared to Shadow.tech (where you rent a whole gaming VM with a 3070 Ti for $50/mo, but can run anything you want) or AirGPU (similar service). But the games-as-a-service platforms like Amazon Luna, Xbox Cloud Streaming, and PS Plus are all comparably priced ($10-$20/mo). There are other third party services like Boosteroid too. Cloud gaming is a maturing technology that's largely already "there", in my experience (have tried nearly all of them over the last 10+ years).
I think Nvidia is uniquely positioned as the only company in this space who can provide the graphics cards first-party instead of needing to buy them from, well, Nvidia. It's possible that the current pricing is a loss leader, but they've already raised the prices from the Founders pricing they had a few years ago, and it's still not too bad. It's not like Nvidia is hurting for cash anyway. My main fear is not that there's a "catch", but that they'll gradually move out of the gaming segment and focus on AI.
In the meantime, while it lasts, GeForce Now really is wonderfully, uh, game-changing :)
----------
Edit: PS they have a free tier, and you can even use it in a browser tab, no client download needed. That's enough to give you a taste for free, no commitment. If you decide you like it, the Ultimate plan is very much worth it, and the desktop (or mobile) clients offer slightly better UX than the browser tab and higher resolutions.