2 ms·
Yes, WebVR is more performant (many webpages struggle to achieve even 60fps). But minimum 90fps, at a much higher resolution is a challenge even running on bare
by fredliu 10y ago
Yes, WebVR is more performant (many webpages struggle to achieve even 60fps). But minimum 90fps, at a much higher resolution is a challenge even running on bare metal right now. And that is needed for even the simplest VR experience (unless you don't move your head that much, but then what's the point of VR).
- ngokevin 10y agoTrue, the 2D web may have had its performance issues, but the 3D web can actually be surprisingly performant. Browsers with the new WebVR API implementations can maintain high framerates starting with 90.
- comex 10y agoEven with a JIT and garbage collector? Because there's a difference between 90 FPS and "90 FPS, except when it stutters"... I think the future of VR has a place for the web, but I'm skeptical there's a place for JavaScript. Good thing we'll have WebAssembly... eventually.
- zamalek 10y agoI'm running a DK2 on a GTX 660Ti and, now that there are more games that support VR, I'm starting to get those stutters. It breaks the experience entirely.