| >> | Anonymous 19jan2021(tu)14:52 No.83039 OP P1| is it my impression or ruffle is faster than adobe flash player ruffle is running flashes without fps drop. |
|
| >> | Anonymous 19jan2021(tu)18:19 No.83042 A P2R1>>83039
only because as a standard script it has access to hardware acceleration
which means not your CPU but your GPU renders graphical shit
too bad Adobe never botheres to implement it into their flash player
my CPU is rather good tho, so it don't really bother me anyway |
|
| >> | !///SWFAnts #ADMIN# 20jan2021(we)00:15 No.83046 SWF P3R2>>83039
1. Ruffle is not sandboxed as much as the flash plugin was in browsers the last couple of years, which slowed it down.
2. Adobe never *fully made the flash plugin take advantage of the computer's graphics card to render. Ruffle uses WebGL, which is GPU-accelerated.
3. Ruffle doesn't support filters yet so glow/blur effects are not rendered, which is what usually slows down flash in fullscreen.
4. Ruffle also doesn't support layer blend modes yet.*You could tell embedded flashes with wmode=direct to enable Context3D for GPU capabilities but doing so disabled things like the glow effect, which relied on CPU calculations. To keep things working like they always had across devices Adobe never enabled GPU rendering by default, and that's probably part of why their support in the Unity 3D game engine fizzled out. At one point in time it looked like flash would be the go-to for 3D gaming online and I think few remembers that Adobe actually tried launching an "app store" for flash files back in 2013. Plus/minus 1 year, I don't remember exactly when it was but it didn't stay online many months. It was too late. |
|
| >> | Anonymous 24jan2021(su)19:53 No.83126 A P4R3>>83046
Tragic.
Even more tragic people hyping up ruffle as everything flash was and more when it's actually lightyears away from even today's flashplayer in terms of performance and security. |
|
