Riddik

Phaser 2 vs pixi vs Phaser 3 (amount of sprites per screen)

Recommended Posts

Hey!

Did anybody compare Phaser and pixi for performance? We're going to make isometric game. bottom line is about objects you could render per screen. What do you think? What to choose? Phaser 2, PIXI, or maybe Phaser 3?  Need the canvas renderer of course, not webgl.

 

Update: I've the same question in the phaser slack channel. It seems that the PIXI would be better for isometric game then Phaser 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/1/2018 at 7:59 PM, Riddik said:

Need the canvas renderer of course, not webgl.

Why? I think WebGL is better for performance than Canvas because WebGL works on GPU, not CPU.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, 8Observer8 said:

Why? I think WebGL is better for performance than Canvas because WebGL works on GPU, not CPU.

Because WebGL still has poor support on mobile devices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Riddik said:

Because WebGL still has poor support on mobile devices.

This isn't true.

It'll be older browsers that they are worried about, not Opera Mini, even so though, WebGL has excellent support, the percentage of users without support (depending on where your target market are) is tiny (caniuse shows 0.83% global for <KitKat Android, Opera Mini users won't be stuck with it—thats 2% anyway, its tiny—, iOS has supported and supported well for a long time).

Publishers/sponsors requiring it is another matter though. 0.83% is pretty compelling. It's totally dependent on the actual target market, largely split by geography, so the numbers might vary.

On 2/1/2018 at 4:59 PM, Riddik said:

Update: I've the same question in the phaser slack channel. It seems that the PIXI would be better for isometric game then Phaser 2.

What was the reason?

Phaser 2 uses Pixi, albeit a slightly older version (I think, may have changed), so I'd expect them to be almost comparable in performance. Phaser doesn't add much (anything?) to the rendering layer, so perf should be mostly the same (the older version, if true, could accrue more of a difference, maybe that accounts for it).

It's not a like-for-like comparison though, Phaser is a framework, Pixi is a rendering lib.

Phaser 3 (I think) uses a different rendering mechanism, again, I'd expect perf to be comparable or better though otherwise it would be a very odd choice to ditch Pixi as a rendering engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.