> have it encoded in <10ms.

For context, OP achieved 0.13 ms with his codec.

"0.13 ms on a RX 9070 XT on RADV."

"interesting data point is that transferring a 4K RGBA8 image over the PCI-e bus is far slower than compressing it on the GPU like this, followed by copying over the compressed payload."

"200mbit/s at 60 fps"

It's certainly a very different set of tradeoffs, using a lot more bandwidth.

	▲	theshackleford 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		> It's certainly a very different set of tradeoffs, using a lot more bandwidth. Wasnt that the point? > These use cases demand very, very low latency. Every millisecond counts here > When game streaming, the expectation is that we have a lot of bandwidth available. Streaming locally on a LAN in particular, bandwidth is basically free. Gigabit ethernet is ancient technology and hundreds of megabits over WiFi is no problem either. This shifts priorities a little bit for me at least.

▲

torginus 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I don't have the timings right now but you can go significantly below 10ms.

There's a tradeoff between quality and encoding time - for example, if you want your motion vector reference to go back 4 frames, instead of 2, then the encoder will take longer to run, and you get better quality at no extra bitrate, but more runtime.

If your key to-screen latency has an irreducible 50-60ms part of rendering, processing, data transfer, decoding and display, then the extra 10ms is just 15% more latency, but you have to find the correct tradeoff for yourself.

▲

your_challenger 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

But isn't the OP talking about local network while Jean-Baptiste Kempf is talking about the internet?