Re:Chromium Blog: Moar better graphics (Chrome 18 released)
by silverlight on Thursday March 29, 2012 @09:12AM
(#3770906)
Great news! It also seems to me that his has improved the rendering of SVG, although I don't know if it's actually hardware accelerated now or just faster.
So what's going on here? Is Chrome really that far behind in graphics performance, or is it because Google chooses to focus on other type of 2D graphics than Microsoft? I'm willing to give Google the benefit of the doubt, because these sort of benchmarks tend to be biased when a competitor makes them (and that goes for Google's own V8 tests, too, where IE9 performs poorly), but IE9 came out a year ago, and even though graphics performance might not be the most useful thing to have in a browser right now, I still can't help but feel a bit disappointed.
Re:Chromium Blog: Moar better graphics (Chrome 18 released)
by sp332 on Thursday March 29, 2012 @09:56AM
(#3771075)
If Transgaming sounds familiar: their flagship product is Cider, a proprietary fork of Wine aimed at running Windows apps on Mac OS (just before Wine switched from a MIT license to the LGPL).
Re:Chromium Blog: Moar better graphics (Chrome 18 released)
by Impossible on Thursday March 29, 2012 @11:55AM
(#3771597)
In light of the Adobe announcement that they're charging 9% for apps that use Stage3D and domain memory, SwiftShader WebGL in Chrome is pretty huge. One of the major advantages of Stage3D vs. WebGL was the fast software fallback for machines with sketchy GPUs or drivers.
:) M$ guys have been pushing this demo everywhere they go for IE9 vs every other browser. Only because they were the first to market with GPU acceleration. M$ your doing it wrong.
http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/Performance/SantasWorkshop...
Runs significantly faster and smoother for me now.
These 2 tests also show Chrome 18 to be twice as slow as IE9:
http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/Performance/PsychedelicBro...
http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/Performance/WrigglyWords/D...
So what's going on here? Is Chrome really that far behind in graphics performance, or is it because Google chooses to focus on other type of 2D graphics than Microsoft? I'm willing to give Google the benefit of the doubt, because these sort of benchmarks tend to be biased when a competitor makes them (and that goes for Google's own V8 tests, too, where IE9 performs poorly), but IE9 came out a year ago, and even though graphics performance might not be the most useful thing to have in a browser right now, I still can't help but feel a bit disappointed.
Psychedelic Browsing Chrome 19.0.1081.2 dev-m gives 5983 Revs per minute IE 9.0.8112.16421 gives 1815 revs per minute
Wriggly Words 10K words Chrome 11425 ms IE 19746 ms
Not sure what you are saying is correct.
17: 2 out of 10
18: 10 out of 10
IE9: 4 out of 10
:) M$ guys have been pushing this demo everywhere they go for IE9 vs every other browser. Only because they were the first to market with GPU acceleration. M$ your doing it wrong.
http://imgur.com/a/UXEPg
edit: on a closer look Firefox still renders text better.