News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Seriously.js. Parent comment

Re:Seriously.js by Tomdarkness on Wednesday June 05, 2013 @04:47PM (#5828495)
Hm, that is strange. It does not even tax my CPU enough to kick it out of its lowest speed state, let alone tax any of the cores.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Seriously.js by mischanix on Wednesday June 05, 2013 @07:04PM (#5829249)
That's because all the work here is being done through WebGL shaders. Your parent experienced a software fallback, I guess.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Seriously.js by diydsp on Wednesday June 05, 2013 @05:31PM (#5828755)
Intel announced a year or so ago they could JIT compile javascript and run it on their GPU. Maybe that's why?! If so, welcome to the bold new age of GPGPU and AMD's HSA... :)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Seriously.js by scott_karana on Wednesday June 05, 2013 @06:38PM (#5829132)
Likewise, 5-7%, but I don't have a nice new machine like you do.

Core 2 Quad Q9950 and an nVidia Geforce 8800 GT 512MB.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Seriously.js by joezydeco on Wednesday June 05, 2013 @05:29PM (#5828749)
That's interesting. What kind of CPU?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Seriously.js by Tomdarkness on Wednesday June 05, 2013 @06:34PM (#5829111)
Intel 3930k:

http://i.imgur.com/OF58RZl.png

After the peaks when it is flat at around 3% is when it is playing.

[ Parent | on HN ]