5 ms·
It's impressive but runs at 19 FPS on my new desktop with a GTX 660 card. It's still slower than I've seen that demo running on a phone. People are doing amazin
by jebblue 13y ago
It's impressive but runs at 19 FPS on my new desktop with a GTX 660 card. It's still slower than I've seen that demo running on a phone. People are doing amazing things with HTML5 and JavaScript but the performance is always behind a native application, even a Java application.
- gioele 13y ago> but the performance is always behind a native application But the performance will always behind a native application.
- omaranto 13y agoI don't understand how removing the verb in a sentence is supposed to be a correction. :)
- azakai 13y agoFPS really depends on which browser you are on. Since you mentioned Java, note that in some cases JavaScript with asm.js can be faster, for example http://j15r.com/blog/2013/04/25/Box2d_Revisited http://j15r.com/blog/2013/04/25/Box2d_Revisited
- iso8859-1 13y agoIf someone gave JBox2D the same amount of attention box2d.js got to win this benchmark, I suggest that the results would look different. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems like box2d.js was made and optimized just prior to this benchmark, while JBox2D is an old project that was never meant to win any benchmarks.
- cliffbean 13y agoI see much higher framerates than that running the demo on a laptop with a boring integrated Intel GPU. Are you using the released version of Firefox, the nightly Firefox, or a different browser?