5 ms·

Because Chromium runs far better in my experience, especially on Linux, and especially where graphics and WebGL are concerned. If all I can use are WebExtension

Because Chromium runs far better in my experience, especially on Linux, and especially where graphics and WebGL are concerned. If all I can use are WebExtensions, I may as well use Chromium for the speed.

beerbaron23 10y ago
You really should use Firefox if you are a heavy WebGL user, Firefox is 3 times as fast as Chrome now on Unity3D, an it's the complete opposite, Chrome is more snappy with Java and Firefox with animations/Graphics. Here is my latest benchmark as solid proof: https://www.dropbox.com/s/58doo8csebp9l62/Bench.pdf?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/58doo8csebp9l62/Bench.pdf?dl=0
- darkengine 10y ago
  In my experience on Linux, the difference is night and day, and not in Firefox's favor. Really basic demos struggle to get 30fps while Chromium handles them at the refresh rate of my display no problem. Firefox WebGL works much better on Windows for me; never tried it on OS X. It's probably a Linux-specific issue, but I rarely use Firefox on anything else.
  - beerbaron23 10y ago
    Linux is another beast, on my Ubuntu box Firefox gives similar performance to OSX. But on my Debian stable box Chromium plays a lot better with it and the Firefox build feels like it has a gremlin in it haha.
  - beerbaron23 10y ago
    Also if you want to get to the root of the problem, when you install Firefox 51.0.1 in the URL bar type "about:support" It will list HW acceleration info. You want to make sure electrolysis is running, in the line "Multiprocess Windows: 1/1 (Enabled by user)" should be enabled by default, if it says 0/1 it not active and you will have to manually turn it on. You can also see if the WebGL renderer is loading properly. On my Debian box it says WebGL2 creation failed (drivers), which would explain my poor performance on that box. It's worth a shot since Firefox's WebGL rendering is 4x faster then other browsers, it's worth your time taking a quick check.

beerbaron23 10y ago

You really should use Firefox if you are a heavy WebGL user, Firefox is 3 times as fast as Chrome now on Unity3D, an it's the complete opposite, Chrome is more snappy with Java and Firefox with animations/Graphics. Here is my latest benchmark as solid proof: https://www.dropbox.com/s/58doo8csebp9l62/Bench.pdf?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/58doo8csebp9l62/Bench.pdf?dl=0

darkengine 10y ago
In my experience on Linux, the difference is night and day, and not in Firefox's favor. Really basic demos struggle to get 30fps while Chromium handles them at the refresh rate of my display no problem. Firefox WebGL works much better on Windows for me; never tried it on OS X. It's probably a Linux-specific issue, but I rarely use Firefox on anything else.
- beerbaron23 10y ago
  Linux is another beast, on my Ubuntu box Firefox gives similar performance to OSX. But on my Debian stable box Chromium plays a lot better with it and the Firefox build feels like it has a gremlin in it haha.
- beerbaron23 10y ago
  Also if you want to get to the root of the problem, when you install Firefox 51.0.1 in the URL bar type "about:support" It will list HW acceleration info. You want to make sure electrolysis is running, in the line "Multiprocess Windows: 1/1 (Enabled by user)" should be enabled by default, if it says 0/1 it not active and you will have to manually turn it on. You can also see if the WebGL renderer is loading properly. On my Debian box it says WebGL2 creation failed (drivers), which would explain my poor performance on that box. It's worth a shot since Firefox's WebGL rendering is 4x faster then other browsers, it's worth your time taking a quick check.