Me too. Away3D was faster.
Kevin N.
On 1/10/11 11:14 PM, Kris Meister wrote:
Perhaps if its not using features required in away3d, then you should
use away3dlite.
As far as benchmarks go, its normal that they happen in any industry,
especially in 3d - just look at graphics card reviews.
Often times we spend weeks optimizing our projects for speed, its fair
to say any developer wants to use the fastest library they can.
Making the right benchmarks though, is where it gets too specific, as
depending on any project or different machines you'll get different
results.
As for being free, plenty of times the free version is better than the
pay one. Compare a for-profit encyclopedia to wikipedia, or the
current state of content management systems.
But I have a feeling that the new MoleHill plugin will completely
change that playing field for 3D in Flash, and most projects will just
use the easiest lib to develop in, and I'm really liking away3d for
that.
On Jan 10, 10:24 pm, abowman<[email protected]> wrote:
Same here. The Flare3D version ran slower for me and didn't look as
good.
On Jan 10, 4:44 pm, Bob Warfield<[email protected]> wrote:
If I just fire up the benchmarks as presented by the links, I get almost the
opposite result:
Away3D gives 21-31 fps while Flare3D gives 2-4 fps.
Away3D produced a much better looking scene as well. Flare did use less
memory. FWIW, I don't think of myself as having all that potent a
machine--I'm using the onboard graphics from a mobo that is 3 years old!
The two are quite different sizes by default, with Flare being bigger, so I
agree, some care must be taken to compare apples to apples. I always hope
for faster challengers because everyone rises to the higher bar and everyone
therefore benfits, but in this case, I don't see the claimed advantage for
Flair.
I'll await your revised benchmarks and try again.
Cheers,
BW
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Michael Iv<[email protected]> wrote:
You have got a point , I will change it too look more professional tomorrow
:)
On Mon, Jan 10, 2011 at 11:14 PM, John Brookes<[email protected]>wrote:
Thats just the point. You cant benchmark when you have to eyeball the
result.
Also try movin the camera at 1fps, its fun.
--
Michael Ivanov ,Programmer
Neurotech Solutions Ltd.
Flex|Air |3D|Unity|
www.neurotechresearch.com
http://blog.alladvanced.net
Tel:054-4962254
[email protected]
[email protected]
