3 ms·
I'm getting a steady 40 FPS on Firefox 56 and 58 on Windows 10. About 5 FPS slower on Chrome 62 on the same machine. And Vivaldi is almost identical to Chrome,
by Santosh83 9y ago
I'm getting a steady 40 FPS on Firefox 56 and 58 on Windows 10. About 5 FPS slower on Chrome 62 on the same machine. And Vivaldi is almost identical to Chrome, which is expected considering they share the same internals. Impressive.
EDIT: ~640,000 particles on all browsers.
- jcelerier 9y ago> Impressive. ... is it ? tech demos ten years ago were already north of 1 million particles. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xN2PkxNRHs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xN2PkxNRHs
- giancarlostoro 9y agoWebGL is a new frontier for many. I myself was impressed by what I could do with three.js at work. Also impressed by other three.js projects / products out there.
- benaadams 9y agoIs performed on CPU; example you linked is performed on GPU so JS speed isn't a factor
- Izmaki 9y ago935040 particles at a steady 91 FPS, 1080p full screen (minus windows launch bar + tabs/frame of browser). This is in Chrome. I don't get the purpose of the site, though.
- SimeVidas 9y agoWeird, it seems to be locked at 60 FPS (with 361k particles) for me. (Firefox Nightly on MacBook Pro 13.)