I'm getting 15 FPS in Chrome on my Surface Pro.
It uses OpenGL ES it seems, doesn't work in IE 11.
Edit: It would be interesting to know if this would perform better using WebGL and running it in IE 11, anyone has any thoughts on that?
60fps (cap I think) on Firefox 25 on i5 desktop.
It's GPU-, not CPU bound.
Yeah I assumed this when I noticed even the Retina laptops with the i7s weren't doing as well. I have an Nvidia GTX 560 Ti which must be doing most of the work.
Re:JavaScript particle simulator
by consciousness on Tuesday November 19, 2013 @06:21PM
(#6765232)
32 FPS - Chrome - Windows 7 - Thinkpad X1 Carbon i7
&
22 FPS on Firefox..
Huh. A bug should be filed..
Re:JavaScript particle simulator
by verisimilidude on Tuesday November 19, 2013 @06:19PM
(#6765214)
45 FPS: Chrome on 2012 Macbook Pro. Looks fantastic.
51 FPS on new Macbook Pro Retina
It's gorgeous... reminds me of the good old "visualization" days of Winamp and MusicMatch
I could be wrong, but my understanding is that WebGL uses the exact same API as ES, including the same stripped down shader language.
Re:JavaScript particle simulator
by pleasemakeitbig on Tuesday November 19, 2013 @06:12PM
(#6765168)
25 FPS on Chrome/2013 Macbook Pro
Weird! I get 60 on Chrome 31.0.1650/2013 Macbook Pro.
Re:JavaScript particle simulator
by TallboyOne on Tuesday November 19, 2013 @06:19PM
(#6765212)
60fps on chrome
Re:JavaScript particle simulator
by filipedeschamps on Tuesday November 19, 2013 @06:11PM
(#6765166)
20 FPS - Chrome - MacBook Air/2011
I'm getting 38 FPS on a 2012 Macbook Air with Chrome. Didn't expect the HD4000/HD3000 difference to be so big.
It looks like most of the heavy lifting is done in shaders, so asm.js probably wouldn't improve it much.
It looks like there's some sort of gravity involved. So then how do you get around the O(n^2) problem of comparing the contribution of each particle to every other particle? Did they implement an quadtree of some sort, or is it something else?
It looks like it's using a fluid solver. So, it's not that every particle is interacting with every other particle, but that there's a flow vector being established at each point on the screen and that's being added to each particle's position.
Disclaimer: I haven't actually analyzed the source.
I'm wondering what optimization you can to that do with a quadtree. The only way I can see is if you sacrifice accuracy on distant particles by quantizing and counting. You could use geometric hashing to do the same thing.
Anyway, I don't think this demo is exhibiting inter-particle attraction, but I'm not positive.
Re:JavaScript particle simulator
by brian_cloutier on Tuesday November 19, 2013 @07:38PM
(#6765639)
Exactly right. The most common scheme uses a quadtree and runs around O(n log n).
It's pretty slow on my computer. Would ASM.js work better?