So you're suggesting I record the positions of my objects during a sample bit of gameplay, then re-animate them using that database? That's a really clever idea. The problem in my use case is the sheer number of objects (around 1000-2000 onscreen) I'd need to track...logging all that data would be bound to induce some slowdown.
BTW, I tested your link, and I saw much what I expected: after a breif 'settling down' period, IE produced the smoothest result...virtually no jank. Chrome had a much lower cpu usage than IE, but it's jank did not 'settle down' after awhile. Firefox, needless to say, janked the worst.
....third time writing this. My power, Internet, and cable are out. And my phone is being special....
Because my power is out, the server went down. Meaning you probably were hosting the game for yourself and would need a second browser tab to see the movement I was trying to describe.
I do have an idea. I noticed people on 120hz+ seem to have little to no issues.
60hz should still look smooth though.
So I thought, maybe the game logic is running faster than the rendered frames! For instance, the game is changing an objects position logically like 90 times a second....but visually a solid 60. This would have what should be smooth movement look jittery.
Same if the internal side of things runs slower,
Maybe a way d time or something works?
I could be way off. But hopefully that makes sense and maybe inspires new ideas.
I think that would explain why the high refresh monitors also look much smoother. Aside from the benifits of higher refresh of course.