Just got GPU-z.

In renderperftest at 3000 objects, GPU load is at 100%, CPU load at 10%.

In that fish test, with just 20 fish, GPU load is at 70% (?!?!?!) while CPU is at 10%.

GPU usage goes up to 100% at 1000 fish, still minimal CPU usage.

So not looking too good for this being a C2 issue... Unless those developers are missing some optimizations/workarounds that Scirra is also missing.

The fact that I could render 150,000 cubes though... I mean, how can 3D be optimized so much that it's like 500 times faster than 2D?

TiAm That demo doesn't seem to work for me. It tells me that it's running at 60fps when it's actually running at like 2fps. Also, again, it's hard to say if it's GPU or CPU bottlenecked.

I'd still really like to see a non C2 2D webGL *rendering speed* benchmark! That could tell us once and for all if it really is an intel problem (and I really really really really hope it's not) or a C2 problem.

Does such a thing exist?

Yeah, bunnymark isn't a real rendering performance test, it's probably CPU/memory bottlenecked.

I don't know why people are talking about multicore and CPU limitations. You do realize the problem is PURELY on the GPU side, right? Unless it's harder for the CPU to keep up with 3000 objects in renderperftest than it is for the GPU to draw it...

So.... the consensus is that webGL simply doesn't work (at any reasonable level, anyway) on Intel cards?

That's bananas. If this is really true, it's a *huge* deal for anyone making HTML5 games. It's a support nightmare no matter what, as, even if it's listed in huge red text in the minimum specifications, people simply expect 2D games to run well on low/mid-end machines.

Also, that's 20% of potential buyers gone just like that.

I do tend to believe it's a C2 problem, or at least a 2D problem however. I just tried out this benchmark, which renders 150,000 cubes. On my integrated chip it runs at 40fps easily.

Compare that to my C2 renderperftest which could only manage 3500 sprites at 30fps. Something has to be up. I just can't believe that 2D performance is that bad. Unfortunately I haven't been able to find any non-C2 2D webGL benchmarks - if anyone could point me to one, that would be awesome.

scaffa I didn't make a tutorial, but it's pretty simple. Just set the canvas size, then set the layout scale as a ratio of the original canvas size to the new canvas size.

TiAm I can definitely try to make a super stripped down version, yeah. Will take some time, but it's probably a good idea.

However, if the same issue is happening to the renderperf benchmark, clearly the problem isn't my code? Can anyone else with an Intel integrated chip confirm or deny my findings?

R0J0hound thanks, that was my guess too. I tried turning off webGL but didn't see any improvement. Anyway, my game requires webGL so that's out.

Can you think of an efficient way to draw lots of big thick circles? It's for a 'warp' effect at the end of my levels. Currently, I draw a whole load of big sprites which are empty circles. However naturally this absolutely slaughters the framerate because the GPU is drawing probably 90% empty pixels.

Hey,

I've found a weird performance issue related to the Draw Circle action.

Basically, drawing a circle with a line width of >1 leads to a huge difference in draw calls. In my example, it's 95% CPU usage for draw calls vs 5% CPU usage, the only difference being a line width of 1.0001 vs. a line width of 1.

Am I missing something here? Or is drawing lots of circles always going to be inefficient?

SgtConti

Just for clarification, did you try shrinking the window down ridiculously small? Did you get 60fps then? If not, then there's definitely some stuff that needs working out. The jittering seems to mostly be caused by fillrate issues which leads me to assume it's still GPU related.

Unfortunately I can't share the capx as there's a lot of copyrighted material in there.

SgtConti It's definitely true that there's some more CPU optimization that can be done. However I know that it's definitely a GPU issue, because if you shrink the window size enough, the game will certainly run at 60fps (except, I guess, on super slow CPU's). If that's not the case for you, please do let me know.

Tetriser Well that's interesting that on an entry-level AMD chip, the game is fine. Are you *sure* about that? Did you try native (auto) resolution? Even if not, was it a stable fps all the time during gameplay?

Ashley

The Intel HD Graphics control panel is pretty basic, but it did have an option to turn off anti-aliasing. I tried it and there was no difference, so the settings don't seem to be the cause of the problem.

Anyway, I've tried four machines, one basically factory fresh, all with the same results. So I highly doubt it's a weird config issue. Do you have access to an Intel HD Graphics machine to test on?