this post was submitted on 30 Dec 2023
485 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

59534 readers
3195 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Aurix@lemmy.world 41 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Fighting games with Wi-Fi instead of Ethernet? Sounds more like a dream. This genre is particularly demanding on stable low latency connections and current technology absolutely doesn't offer it. Spreading across frequencies sounds like a latency vs reliability trade-off.

[–] MeaanBeaan@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I feel like this is really dependent upon the game. Guilty Gear Strive for instance uses roll back net code and my personal experience playing it online over wifi is that it feels practically identical to playing locally. Here and there I might have minor issues if the person I'm playing against has horrible Ping but for the most part wifi is flawless.

[–] Aurix@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

That game does have pretty good netcode, but it cannot do everything. If the Wi-Fi connection drops packets there are bound to be problems even with low ping. Not every Wi-Fi setup is the same and it also depends on your surroundings like the physical distance between devices and how much interference.

Sometimes the issue is only visible for one player. If you can, absolutely do use a wired connection. It will undoubtedly be better even with a good Wi-Fi setup.

[–] highenergyphysics@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Back when 5G cellular was first rolling out, a professor brought in a Qualcomm senior level manager and the topic was how 6G was being developed for long distance low latency capabilities.

How much of that was industry bullshit, no idea but it sounds like they had a pulse on the tech now that we hear about it years later.

[–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The lowest latency links right now are already wireless point to point links.

[–] binomialchicken@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

My PhD in electrical engineering.

[–] binomialchicken@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Care to elaborate or point to a reliable source?

[–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 months ago

It should be fairly intuitive. Sending electromagnetic radiation through copper or fiber will add physical distance versus a direct line of sight link. And the refractive index of light in the atmosphere is significantly lower, so the radiation actually propagates faster. Over long distances, those microseconds will add up.

The best example of this is the stock exchange in Chicago (and elsewhere) uses a low latency microwave link to save several milliseconds over the fiber links.

[–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

In theory the speed of light is higher in free space than it is in copper.