Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

2414Re: [ydn-javascript] research: why YUI dragdrop is so slow

Expand Messages
  • Peter Michaux
    Jun 19, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Scott,

      The dragdrop perfomance I experience with Yahoo! UI dragdrop v0.10 is
      much worse in Firefox 1.5 than Safari 1.3 on my Mac.

      Perhaps since IE and Safari are designed to run on only one platform,
      there isn't the need for a platform independent layer between the
      browser and the OS like Firefox might need to run on so many different
      platforms. I don't know about browser internals. Just a guess.

      Peter


      On 6/19/06, Scott Schiller <idliketowork@...> wrote:
      >
      > This is more generic and not implementation-specific, but I think it's an interesting topic, and I'd be interested in hearing of any others' findings/experience in the area.
      >
      > From some of the more recent work I've done, I've seen some pretty interesting correlations between javascript animation performance (render speed / frame rate / CPU use) and graphics cards on the PC with Firefox in particular.
      >
      > IE appears to be able to take advantage of ActiveX and/or rendering hardware acceleration which results in lower CPU use and higher frame rates when doing javascript animation, even on older computers or graphics cards. In my particular cases, I'm animating multiple elements at the same time and also applying both PNG and CSS-based opacity effects.
      >
      > Firefox does not perform as well as IE nicely on a computer with an older or onboard graphics card (CPU use is higher / frame rate is lower,) but I've noticed it can be as fast as IE when using a newer, slightly higher-performance graphics card on machines with even slower CPUs.
      >
      > I'm not exactly sure how it all works, but it would make logical sense that the graphics card handles rendering and redraw of elements where possible (particularly transparency/opacity effects,) and where hardware acceleration is not possible on the graphics card itself, the work is offloaded to the CPU - presumably much less efficient - and therefore slower.
      >
      > From what I've seen, onboard/"integrated" graphics cards on typical desktop set-ups such as the Intel 82865G don't perform very well in this regard, so animation in Firefox is slower / requires more CPU in these cases.
      >
      > On my computer at work (A 2.8 GHz P4 with onboard Intel 82865G graphics), IE has no problems with JS animation for most cases; Firefox doing the same work however is noticeably slower. I have seen several 1.6 GHz laptops with nicer graphics cards, which ran the same JS effects smoothly also in Firefox despite having much slower CPUs (eg. a 1.6 GHz with non-onboard graphics runs faster than a 2.8 GHz with onboard, in Firefox.) This seems to be indicative of some video or other hardware acceleration going on.
      >
      > It should be noted that I can run the same effects quite smoothly on an old 866-MHz Pentium III with IE, and again Firefox is slower (also, this system has an old/integrated graphics card - I would imagine with a faster card, I would see similar performance gains.) Several years ago, my old Celeron 433 with onboard graphics would run a Javascript version of "Arkanoid" perfectly smoothly in IE, but Firefox would run slower.
      >
      > Unfortunately most common desktops may not have graphics cards that would enable this kind of performance gain under Firefox; at this point I'm not exactly sure what, if any, hardware feature makes this all happen.
      >
      > For what it's worth, I've spent a fair bit of time playing around with animation and performance experiments on previous personal projects, some more general findings are noted on my site.
      > http://www.schillmania.com/content/projects/javascript-animation-2/
      >
      >
      > - Scott
    • Show all 15 messages in this topic