11–20 of 25 posts
FF nightly 2015-08-31 24fps
chrome 44.0.2403.157 (64bit) 26fps
MS Edge 20.10240.16384.0 30-33fps
(i7-4770k igfx)
The differences weren't visually very apparent. None of the browsers seemed to have periodic GC lag, which in the past certainly was an issue.
I'm curious: which browser did you develop this with/optimize on?
Firefox 40.0: 1000 Bunnies at 12 FPS
Firefox 40.0: 10000 Bunnies at 12 FPS
Firefox 40.0: 20000 Bunnies at 12 FPS
Firefox 40.0: 30000 Bunnies at 12 FPS
Chrome 44.0: 1000 Bunnies at 60 FPS
Chrome 44.0: 10000 Bunnies at 60 FPS
Chrome 44.0: 30000 Bunnies at 30 FPS
about:config in Firefox says "GPU Accelerated Windows: 0/3" so I guess it is somehow not using the GPU. Although then Im surprised it can render 30k bunnies at 12 FPS. On the other hand, it says "WebGL Renderer: NVIDIA Corporation -- GeForce GT 630/PCIe/SSE2". So I guess it's using the GPU. Also I would expect this WebGL demo to not even run without FF using the GPU. Strange. Any ideas?
Just a black screen on both Firefox Android and Chrome Android.
On my Mint Desktop: Firefox 40.0: 1000 Bunnies at 12 FPS Firefox 40.0: 10000 Bunnies at 12 FPS Firefox 40.0: 20000 Bunnies at 12 FPS Firefox 40.0: 30000 Bunnies at 12 FPS Chrome 44.0: 1000 Bunnies at 60 FPS Chrome 44.0: 10000 Bunnies at 60 FPS Chrome 44.0: 30000 Bunnies at 30 FPS Why this extreme difference between Chrome and Firefox? about:config in Firefox says "GPU Accelerated Windows: 0/3" so I guess it is someho…
The issue seems to be in some kind of limbo, with many users reporting that the compositing mode doesn't even make a difference.
300000 sprites, i7-4712HQ, Linux - Chrome 44: between 10 and 20 fps. - Firefox 40: *very long load time* constant 14 fps
300000 sprites
fps: 59-60
os: Linux
browser: Chrome 44
cpu: i7-3930k
gpu: GTX 970
driver: Nvidia 346.47
300 000 sprites, i5 2500, R9 270, Windows 8 - Chrome 44: 60 FPS constant - Firefox 39: 49 FPS - Firefox 40: 59-60 FPS - IE 11: 10-12 FPS, very poor. The FPS counter doesn't appear on my smartphone (falcon, CM12.1 Browser), but i would estimate the performance is at about 10-15FPS at the default number of sprites, let alone the full 300 000.
For me, (nVidia GTX 980) Chrome beats Firefox on Windows 8.1 by a lot when rendering 300,000 bunnies. - Chrome 44: 100 FPS - Firefox 40: 60 FPS - IE 11: 10 FPS I don't think that FF is limiting itself to 60 FPS as I have a 144Hz monitor and other WebGL demos can render at frame rates well in excess of 60 FPS in firefox.
Seems that screen/window resolution is an important factor.
It also seems ripe for tuning; it appears to leak a dom object every frame and churn through memory at a pretty epic rate :) (at least per chrome dev tools)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For me, (nVidia GTX 980) Chrome beats Firefox on Windows 8.1 by a lot when rendering 300,000 bunnies. - Chrome 44: 100 FPS - Firefox 40: 60 FPS - IE 11: 10 FPS I don't think that FF is limiting itself to 60 FPS as I have a 144Hz monitor and other WebGL demos can render at frame rates well in excess of 60 FPS in firefox.
Firefox's rAF implementation is currently hardcoded at 60 FPS. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=707884
edit: I also have G-SYNC enabled and I noticed that the bug thread says the FF syncs to vsync on Windows. nVidia's G-SYNC might be messing with vsync to achieve higher than 60FPS on supported monitors?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Firefox's rAF implementation is currently hardcoded at 60 FPS. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=707884
That is odd because the three.js demos i run report well in excess of 60 fps in FF when my monitor refresh rate is set 144Hz. The stats.js component only measures up to 100FPS and the simple demos often exceed that. edit: I also have G-SYNC enabled and I noticed that the bug thread says the FF syncs to vsync on Windows. nVidia's G-SYNC might be messing with vsync to achieve higher than 60FPS on supported monitors?