1

I'm working on a CPU-intensive HTML5 canvas game that uses Createjs and Box2D.js

The game runs at half the frame rate on AMD-processor computers compared to similar spec Intel ones and I can't figure out why.

Is there any reason why CPU architecture would affect either Canvas, CreateJS or Box2D.js performance?

The game is an early prototype found at ==> http://niboon.x10.mx/deluge/game/

I have turned off the intensive custom shader before but there was still a big discrepancy between AMD and Intel CPUs.

Please toss any plausible ideas my way, I'm stumped.

Niboon Tangnirunkul
  • 13
  • 4
  • Is the performance ratio bigger for your game than for other CPU-intensive tasks (like `gzip`)? AMD CPUs are known to be slow in general, clock for clock, on many CPU-intensive workloads. Also, which specific microarchitectures are you comparing? CPU model numbers are fine, or e.g. Piledriver vs. Haswell. AMD CPUs certainly have some performance glass-jaws. e.g. Piledriver is horrible with 256b AVX stores. They also have different cache setups. – Peter Cordes May 14 '16 at 04:44
  • Also, isn't this going to depend on the browser running the Javascript? Did you control for all other factors, like graphics hardware and driver version, operating system (including 32 vs. 64bit), and browser version? Or if you're using integrated graphics on one or both test machines, then you could throw in a graphics card to see whether it's a CPU or GPU bottleneck. Or profiling tools might help determine that. (IDK, I haven't done graphics development). – Peter Cordes May 14 '16 at 04:50
  • In my experience in single threaded performance, AMD scores less than half of the performance per clock of their intel counterparts on the latest CPUs (Bulldozer, Piledriver, etc). Here is hoping Zen will close the gap. – Dougvj May 14 '16 at 04:52
  • It might help if you can include results from Octane benchmark (http://chromium.github.io/octane/) for the different systems. Also which browsers are you testing with? – Gabriel Southern May 14 '16 at 04:52
  • Thank you for the replies! I will try the Octane benchmark on the systems soon. I tested on an AMD FX-8350 which uses Piledriver, a Core i5 and a Core i7m. And even the Core i7m outperforms the FX-8350 which is puzzling. I was testing with Firefox and Google Chrome. The browser doesn't seem to affect much, only a few frames difference. – Niboon Tangnirunkul May 14 '16 at 13:49
  • And the issue definitely seems to be CPU bottlenecked given the usage stats. All machines are running on 64-bit Windows 10. Since this is web technology, the single threaded performance is definitely what's going to matter most. If there really is a lower performance on AMD processors, any suggestions on what operations are affected? What kinds of operations require 256-bit AVX stores? – Niboon Tangnirunkul May 14 '16 at 13:58

0 Answers0