LinkedIn emplea cookies para mejorar la funcionalidad y el rendimiento de nuestro sitio web, así como para ofrecer publicidad relevante. Si continúas navegando por ese sitio web, aceptas el uso de cookies. Consulta nuestras Condiciones de uso y nuestra Política de privacidad para más información.
LinkedIn emplea cookies para mejorar la funcionalidad y el rendimiento de nuestro sitio web, así como para ofrecer publicidad relevante. Si continúas navegando por ese sitio web, aceptas el uso de cookies. Consulta nuestra Política de privacidad y nuestras Condiciones de uso para más información.
Cloud gaming, i.e., real-time game playing via thin clients, relieves players from the need to constantly upgrade their computers and deal with compatibility issues when playing games. As a result, cloud gaming is generating a great deal of interest among entrepreneurs and the public. However, given the large design space, it is not yet known which platforms deliver the best quality of service and which design elements constitute a good cloud gaming system.
This study is motivated by the question: How good is the real-timeliness of current cloud gaming systems? To address the question, we analyze the response latency of two cloud gaming platforms, namely, OnLive and StreamMyGame. Our results show that the streaming latency of OnLive is reasonable for real-time cloud gaming, while that of StreamMyGame is almost twice the former when the StreamMyGame server is provisioned using an Intel Core i7-920 PC. We believe that our measurement approach can be generally applied to PC-based cloud gaming platforms, and that it will further the understanding of such systems and lead to improvements.
Kuan-Ta Chen1, Yu-Chun Chang12, Po-Han Tseng1, Chun-Ying Huang3, and Chin-Laung Lei21Academia Sinica 2National Taiwan University 3National Taiwan Ocean UniversityMeasuring The Latency of Cloud Gaming SystemsConclusion We proposed a general methodology to measure the latencycomponents of cloud gaming systems OnLive provides shorter latency for real-time gaming thanSteamMyGame Future work Improve the proposed methodology Apply the methodology to more platforms and derive generalguidelines for designing quality cloud gaming systemsCloud GamingMotivation Game software becomes more complex The overhead of setting up a game is significant Games have software and hardware compatibility with computers Real-time game playing via thin clients Advantages of cloud gaming No set up overheads or compatibility issues People can play games anywhere, anytime Cloud gaming services OnLive, StreamMyGame, GAIKAI, G-cluster Global, OTOY, T5-Labs Which platform provides the best quality of service?Measurement Methodology Response delay : In each experiment, send ESC key in the game and seewhen the corresponding MENU frame will be displayed Response delay (RD) =Network delay (ND) + Processing delay (PD) + Playout delay (OD)Scatter Plot of tblock_succeed and tblock_failedMeasurement ResultsHow to determine the occurrence of t3 Blocking is successful : add tblock to the set tblock_succeeded Blocking is failed : add tmenu to the set tblock_failed We then estimate t3 as the point that yield the minimum sum of thetwo density functions formed by tblock_succeeded and tblock_failed Blocking : Block the incoming data on the clientBlocking is successfulBlocking is failedExperiment Setup• Game:Lego Batman: The VideoGame (Batman)Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War (DOW)F.E.A.R. 2: Project Origin (FEAR)• Platform:OnLive (OnLive)StreamMyGame (SMG)Network delay (ND) = network RTTProcessing delay (PD) = t3 – t0 – NDPlayout delay (OD) = t4 – t3tblock tblock+1 TimetmenuMenu screen appearstblock tblock+1 TimetmenuInternetLANLANSwitchClient (Intel Core i7-920)Server (Intel Core i7-920)OnLive Servert0 t1 t2 t4(controllable)t3(probable) (observable)Processing delay Playout delayProbing rangeTimeAcademia SinicaServerClientGame ServersPCLaptopMobileStreamingStreamingStreamingInternett0 (Key event sent) t1 (Key event received)t2 (Frame sent)t3 (Frame received)Menu frameMenu screen shownt4 (Frame displayed)