4 ms·

So do regular computers.

• kalleboo 11y ago
  Know of any stats to back that up?
  • 1ris 11y ago
    It's just plain obvious that decoding a gif into a frame buffer is simpler than merely parsing the xml. Not to speak of rendering the vectors and animating them. For rending each pixel in the frame buffers has to be set at last once, for both. In the case of Gif a simple lookup is performed for each pixel. In the case of SVG quite complex algorithms are required. I also suspect that the gif decoding is much cache friendlier. My statistic: The SVG animation stutters, the gif sutters less.
    • kalleboo 11y ago
      It's not obvious to me, since my historical experience has been that a lot of browsers have had very poor performance with GIFs as soon as you have a bunch on a page, or you do something special like add some transparency or layering. Meanwhile, for CSS animations Safari set the bar high with GPU acceleration in their first implementation. I don't know much about SVG so it would be interesting to learn how the real situation is there rather than some hunch.
    • err4nt 11y ago
      I do a lot of testing on mobile and this hasn't been my experience at all. I have no major issues with GIF, but SVG is always 'retina resolution', typically smaller, and we can even make the contents of the SVG responsive in the same manner as the other elements on the page using CSS. My experience has been that SVG, where you are able to use them (browser support requirements) have been a huge hassle-saver! Plus you still have the editable file in your codebase so anybody can pick up any tool and make non-destructive edits :)