21–30 of 69 posts
> The cause of Bufferbloat was that previously, congestion control relied on packet loss, which was a signal that the buffer is full. I couldn't understand "congestion control relied on packet loss"? could somebody explain? Thanks! does it mean "congestion control is triggered by the packet loss event, which is a signal for buffer being full"?
The elephant in the room here is that you can pay to win in any game by buying a monitor with higher reftesh rate and use a larger GPU that uses more electricity to have 2x more time to react. Fortunately for us humans that seems to stop at 120Hz because most games can't even hold that at a steady rate with a 3090. Now whether a 300+W gaming device is interesting in the long run will be answered this year by your ele…
By that logic, every sports player that uses high quality gear is "paying to win". Is Nadal winning solely based on the quality of his racquet? Of course not. Would he play with a basic or low quality one? Absolutely not. What's wrong using the best gear possible? I don't know where'd you get this notion that it stops at 120hz. It's been proven again and again that even with monitors with low refresh rate you still g…
> The cause of Bufferbloat was that previously, congestion control relied on packet loss, which was a signal that the buffer is full. I couldn't understand "congestion control relied on packet loss"? could somebody explain? Thanks! does it mean "congestion control is triggered by the packet loss event, which is a signal for buffer being full"?
Author here. Your understanding is right, and I meant that old congestion control algorithms was only using the information of packet losses.
The elephant in the room here is that you can pay to win in any game by buying a monitor with higher reftesh rate and use a larger GPU that uses more electricity to have 2x more time to react. Fortunately for us humans that seems to stop at 120Hz because most games can't even hold that at a steady rate with a 3090. Now whether a 300+W gaming device is interesting in the long run will be answered this year by your ele…
lol -- Most CS:GO top level players are playing on 240hz, and getting close to 500+ fps. Also, higher refresh will give skilled players an advantage, but it's def not pay to win.
I usually get 10ms ping on CSGO.... they must have something better? (I have 5ms right now with a Comcast cable link)... as much as I hate having to call Comcast for any issues, when it works, it is pretty good.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are a variety of factors that add up to many ms of lag. USB and HDMI are a few that come to mind. USB is incredibly complex when compared to e.g. ps/2. If you are building an embedded board like rasberry pi and you want to add ps/2, you just add a couple pins. If you want to add usb, you buy an extra chip.
Many CPUs have USB support. Pin count also doesn't correlate to latency, what matters is the minimum buffer size and transfer speed. USB can beat PS/2 for latency without issue.
The elephant in the room here is that you can pay to win in any game by buying a monitor with higher reftesh rate and use a larger GPU that uses more electricity to have 2x more time to react. Fortunately for us humans that seems to stop at 120Hz because most games can't even hold that at a steady rate with a 3090. Now whether a 300+W gaming device is interesting in the long run will be answered this year by your ele…
By that logic, every sports player that uses high quality gear is "paying to win". Is Nadal winning solely based on the quality of his racquet? Of course not. Would he play with a basic or low quality one? Absolutely not. What's wrong using the best gear possible? I don't know where'd you get this notion that it stops at 120hz. It's been proven again and again that even with monitors with low refresh rate you still g…
Not that big of a deal when you are all getting together in real life. You can see if you were at a disadvantage due to equipment. Online, you don't get to see.
I usually get 10ms ping on CSGO.... they must have something better? (I have 5ms right now with a Comcast cable link)... as much as I hate having to call Comcast for any issues, when it works, it is pretty good.)
This is about adapting algorithms that deal with congestion of network packets to reduce congestion of a game loop (refreshing as fast as possible, but no faster).
It definitely uses a lot of network-theory language so it reads like a foreign language to me (in a good way).
The elephant in the room here is that you can pay to win in any game by buying a monitor with higher reftesh rate and use a larger GPU that uses more electricity to have 2x more time to react. Fortunately for us humans that seems to stop at 120Hz because most games can't even hold that at a steady rate with a 3090. Now whether a 300+W gaming device is interesting in the long run will be answered this year by your ele…