3 ms·
This is anecdotal, but when I built a JS image segmentation tool I found that FF was significantly faster than Chrome when working with the lower level stuff li
by travisoneill1 8y ago
This is anecdotal, but when I built a JS image segmentation tool I found that FF was significantly faster than Chrome when working with the lower level stuff like ArrayBuffer, etc. I assume they are using a lot of this here since they are probably dealing with the WebGL API which needs to receive data as a buffer.
- blotter_paper 8y agoMaybe because FF started optimizing for asm.js earlier? Just an ignorant guess.
- masswerk 8y agoChrome was always significantly slower with typed arrays. I remember early benchmarks, where array buffers were actually slower than plain arrays (which also aligned with my own tests).