Construct 3 - many questions (native exporterts)

  • you could make the same example and try today with better hw, and when c2 has made loads of changes to physics, and not using anymore box2d slow physics.

    also why are people using box2d physics which is slow when you got chipmunk that works fast? and many more factors... but i guess you will whine it's about a native exporter <.<

    You have to prove that C2 has better physics now - create the same test with modern C2's physics.

  • well do it. i don't use physics nor do i have to prove to myself anything.

  • well do it. i don't use physics nor do i have to prove to myself anything.

    Lol.

    Why are you talking about physics improvement if you don't use it

    Repeat three times "I will not post anything about things that I do not understand"

  • Ashley

    Please, give me a sign if you have seen this information:

    intel XDK and crosswalk 11 - it runs 40-45 fps on my mobile device.

    The newest Intel XDK and the newest Crosswalk - it runs 45-46 fps on my mobile device.

    Native APK - it runs 57-58 fps on my mobile device.

    Subscribe to Construct videos now
  • paradine - can you provide .capx files? It's difficult to test the performance of the engine, or try different publishing options, when all I have is an APK.

    The same goes for anyone who has a game they think is slow: please send me the .capx source and I will profile it and look for any performance deficiencies in our engine.

    Also that video is from way back before we even introduced asm.js physics, which brings native-like performance to the physics engine. I've seen benchmarks on the web that show asm.js comes in about 1.5x the performance of native, so it should be far better now.

  • Ashley

    Sure, capx of the simple test

    Also try Benchmark with many performance tests - run the HTML5 version, then try defferent types of export.

    To open the Benchmark install Chipmunk physics - if you are not interested in chipmunk test, just ignore the results of this test, and focus on the other tests in this Benchmark

  • paradine and Ashley: I just tested in my MotoG with the latest Cordova with Crosswalk - not using Intel XDK.

    It shows me a solid 60 fps with 8 to 9% CPU usage.

  • paradine and Ashley

    From my recent tests :

    Chrome (HTML5) - 71fps

    Windows 8 (VM) running on MacBook Pro Retina (i-5 2014) NW.js - 60fps

    MacBook Pro Retina (i-5 2014) NW.js - 42fps

    Nexus 7 (2013) (Android 5.1.1) Crosswalk XDK - 60fps

    Samsung Galaxy S4 (2013) (Android 5.0.1) Crosswalk XDK - 57-60fps

    Samsung Note 4 (2014) (Android 5.0.1) Crosswalk XDK - 60fps

  • Samsung Galaxy S3 - first 5 seconds 56-58 then steady and constant 60fps

  • Try Construct 3

    Develop games in your browser. Powerful, performant & highly capable.

    Try Now Construct 3 users don't see these ads
  • Ashley

    Sure, capx of the simple test

    iPhone 4S - Safari - First few seconds 45-60 then a solid 60 with the occasional 59.

  • Let's change it up a bit, can anyone else in the C2 community upload a smooth running android game for me to test please?

    It doesn't have to be uploaded to Google Play, you can also PM me the link to download it.

    (Once again I'm just curious about that, I dont want to support any of the groups here.)

    Wow, things got pretty instense in this topic in the past few days. Here's a great example of a mobile game made with Construct 2 (using Intel XDK):

  • Ashley

    Give me a sign if you have seen this information:

    Sure, capx of the simple test

    Also try Benchmark with many performance tests - run the HTML5 version, then try defferent types of export.

    To open the Benchmark install Chipmunk physics - if you are not interested in chipmunk test, just ignore the results of this test, and focus on the other tests in this Benchmark

  • Guys, thank you very much for testing. May you also test the Benchmark, please?

    paradine and Ashley

    Chrome (HTML5) - 71fps

    MacBook Pro Retina (i-5 2014) NW.js - 42fps

    Cryptwalker

    Thank you very much for testing. Interesting result on MacBook.

    May you also test the Benchmark, please?

  • paradine

    NW.js is (sadly) notoriously slow on OSX. This is an issue with NW.js, not C2 though. I didn't have all the Android devices with me right now to run the Benchmark test, but I did have some iOS devices which I tested through it's browsers. I should probably get an Apple Developers account one day to try this stuff out...

    Chrome (HTML5)

    Score : 7735

    Avg FPS : 56.25

    Avg CPU : 49.72%

    Windows 8 (VM) running on MacBook Pro Retina (i-5 2014) NW.js

    Score : 7044

    Avg FPS : 53.25

    Avg CPU : 56.79%

    MacBook Pro Retina (i-5 2014) NW.js

    Score : 5966

    Avg FPS : 42.75

    Avg CPU : 59.07%

    Nexus 7 (2013) (Android 5.1.1)

    Score : 4858

    Avg FPS : 24

    Avg CPU : 86.62%

    iPad Air 2 (2014) (iOS 9.0.2) through Chrome as it crashed on Safari

    Score : 4791

    Avg FPS : 19.5

    Avg CPU : 93.13%

    iPhone 6s (2015) (iOS 9.0.2) through Dophin Browser

    Score : 5440

    Avg FPS : 30.2

    Avg CPU : 89.7%

  • any news on construct3? This somehow turned into another benchmarking thread.

    Ashley is there any estimate on c3 news? What is the progress so far?

Jump to:
Active Users
There are 1 visitors browsing this topic (0 users and 1 guests)