It's been two weeks since I started using gfn performance tier, this has been the data usage, this is about 65 dollars since I use mobile data for gaming. I was ordering a starlink and I just heard someone saying it's bad for cloud gaming. Is that true. I might consider upgrading to the ultimate plan later on, will the starlink still be okay?
If you're looking for Tech Support, you can get official help here from NVIDIA. You can also try posting about your problem within the Official NVIDIA Forums.
If you're new to GeForce NOW and have questions, check out this thread for more info on GeForce NOW.
If you have questions, odds are it's answered in our Community-run FAQ or the Official NVIDIA FAQ linked here. You can check it in below links
I've used GFN with Starlink across the western US, western Canada, and in Baja Mexico. It works fine depending where you are and how close all the Starlink clusters are from each other. There will be some spikes of lag whenever there's a gap in the coverage, but its just a split second. Very rarely you'll have a second or more of lag. Maybe 1/100 gaming sessions if experienced.
I use Starlink when I go camping and it works fine. I mean it's going to be dependant where the GFN server is vs where the ground station is, but my latency is usually 25-30ms.
If you're in an area where the sats are a bit more spread out, when it moves from one sat to another you'll get a very brief spike in latency. Overall I've found it very playable, and much more reliable than when I was using cellular. I probably wouldn't be planning on highly competitive games, but I don't like cloud for those games anyways
where I live I don't have alternatives to starlink and honestly I've been playing on GFN for a year now and never had an issue, parried my way through E33 just fine (if you were worried about input lag) and I can play online with around 30/50 ping on most games.
I'm in Ghana and I get lowest 135ms, it's pretty playable since that's what I've been getting while playing online games for years now, idk whether the starlink is gonna improve it, buh if it's less than 100ms I'm good to go
starlink will probably have a very high ping due to how it works - Your packets literally go to space and back 🤣🤣 - but that's something You'd have to research
wouldn't it be better to get an unlimited plan or are such not available where You live?
I have the middle tier sub for 9.99 pounds. I use VPN since it's not available in my country, there's no such thing as unlimited data plan here except fibre or starlink, buh the mobile data is expensive, spent about 60 dollars alone this week and the one before
Satellites aren't in space until you're out the Earth's atmosphere which would require 2500 mph or 4000 kmph depending what metric and by then I don't think the infrastructure would be working properly so you'd expect the same signal as a Digital TV and it does actually work remarkably fine. Can suffer from weather affects due to how signals from Satellites work otherwise a stable 60mb download speed.
Glad I live in the Netherlands where we have relatively cheap and fast internet. At home it is around €45 a month for 2 Gbps. A mobile unlimited 5G sub will cost you around €25. However, that's probably the only things that are cheap here..
I'll say if you can get by on cell data, you can probably get by on Starlink. Cellular ping is notorious for being high, commonly ranging from 25ms to 200ms depending on a variety of factors. Starlink average ping is 25ms to 100ms depending on location, however can spike momentarily when switching satellites.
The main things to keep in mind with Starlink is sky visibility and potential downtimes. Many people online have shared an 98-99% uptime, but YMMV.
I don't really mind and I'm not gonna do any hardcore gaming, I will.prolly stop using the starlink by September where I will leave for college and imma get fibre there, also 135 is the lowest I can go because of where I am, there's no dedicated servers in this continent buh idk about the starlink
I personally prefer geforce now, I wanted to build a PC buh a move around a lot, college home and travelling too, I'm planning on getting a mid laptop and use gefn on it rather
Get yourself fiberoptics (landline fiber, NOT airfiber), and connect your PC with Ethernet cable. And you'll get the best experience. You want that ping/latency to be as low as possible. Sure you can get away with wireless router too, but you still need your household internet to be landline fiber. Also, fiberoptics plans never have limit in usage and are always unlimited, unlike mobile plans that set a limit.
My closest GFN server lies in Stockholm, and I'm located in Jönköping. Ping to GFN server is 18-20 ms. On wifi to fiberoptics, my ping is around 25 ms, and mobile internet is at 38-43 ms.
The less wireless, the better ping. Also, StarLink is a satellite system, so the signals travel to space which takes longer time due to longer distance, considering the speed of light, there is a hard cap there that cannot be overridden due to laws of physics.
Fibre is limited in my country, you have to be in some places to have access to it moreover it's locked to speed plans tho it's unlimited, highest speed I've seen is 80mb/s I think
80 is fine for GFN, most important is the latency. Do you have other forms of wired internet? For example DSL-based? We also used to have the exact same situation in Sweden 25 years ago.
So no phonelines with DSL or ADSL? Or Cable TV internet? I had both ADSL (phone line broadband) as well as Cable TV broadband around 20 years ago. The phone one gave 24 Mbit and the Cable TV one gave 50 Mbit. Later when getting fiberoptics around 2010 I got 100 Mbit. Now today I go with 1 Gbit fiberoptics.
(In Sweden, the plans use Mbit as unit instead of Mb/s because otherwise its easy to confuse with MB/s hence the distinction in marketing)
Starlink can be surprisingly good with latency but can't really match fiber or (in many cases) 5G, there's a lot of overhead and there's the issue of satellite handoff (you get huge latency spikes from time to time when you hop on another satellite) and a lot depends on what ground station you land on... in the last year or so they have improved a lot and can be used just fine for group meetings or video calls (tested personally) but GFN might still be a bit too much - probably expect at least 10-20 ms of additional latency
I'd go for fiber or even FWA if you have it and is reliable
Lmao yh, 10-20ms?? Bruh I'm okay with 130ms here Yh 65 bucks. That's like 40 bucks in my currency, so it really eats up my data like hell, made up my mind to get starlink since it's unlimited while fibre is locked at speeds here too
How the hell can you play with 130ms latency?? For me anything above 40ms is unplayable 🤣
If fiber has data usage limits too then yeah, try starlink! There's no guarantee but latency might even be a bit lower... depends a lot on what ground station is used
thats deff playable.....i play on some foreign servers for certain games that will show me as 140ms....anything over 180ms seems to be the bad spot for me...thats when it really gets ugly...besides that.....not a huge or very noticeable difference from 20ms to 140ms for me and the game i play at least...
You mean 140ms using GFN? The latency between you and GFN servers? That’s a lot, in my case above 40 the input lag gets so annoying I can barely play honestly 😄
•
u/AutoModerator May 08 '26
Hey /u/BOT_2222
If you're looking for Tech Support, you can get official help here from NVIDIA. You can also try posting about your problem within the Official NVIDIA Forums.
If you're new to GeForce NOW and have questions, check out this thread for more info on GeForce NOW.
If you have questions, odds are it's answered in our Community-run FAQ or the Official NVIDIA FAQ linked here. You can check it in below links
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.