GPU showdown!

Open:
webglsamples.org/aquarium/aquarium.html

Set fish size to:
1000

Upload your screenshot here to show your FPS!

Attached: Screenshot_2019-09-13 WebGL Aquarium.png (917x403, 1.03M)

1000 is no challenge at all. Let's do 10k.

Attached: file.png (1211x913, 2.96M)

>500
set it to 1000, then talk

sorry, i'm retarded and posted the wrong cap. i did try 1000 and i still got 144fps locked.

Attached: file.png (197x354, 155K)

Attached: bite me.jpg (1903x973, 346K)

let's try 10,000

here's mine.

Attached: Screenshot_2019-09-13 WebGL Aquarium(1).png (917x403, 1.07M)

holy fuck!
1080ti?

of course

75fps using vega 56

try 10,000

Meh

Attached: __.png (1748x708, 2.52M)

nice

Damn phones are useless
At least it can get 60fps in 1000 ;-;

Attached: 1568393724037.jpg (1080x1668, 1.3M)

which phone?

Xiaomeme mi 6

Rx 580 with amdgpu drivers.

Attached: Screenshot at 2019-09-13 19-03-16.png (1585x1304, 2.89M)

What a shitty fucking benchmark.

Attached: 121314.png (2334x1226, 1.49M)

Wtf
Someone explain

Attached: 1568394447160.jpg (1080x1605, 1.23M)

This desu. If you can't be bothered to use up to 100% of the GPU for your shitty test, it isn't a real benchmark.

Is chromium better in webgl performance?

This isn't a GPU benchmark.
It's rather a browser benchmark, showing how better it implements. eg. chrome vs firefox

Attached: fishie.png (153x338, 86K)

>PooMD
Found your problem!

Attached: ___.jpg (1455x833, 375K)

What's the point of setting to 1000? With 1000 I get locked 60 FPS (it works up to refresh rate) on a fuckin' Intel HD 4000. Is your computer made out of wood to get 30 FPS?

Attached: 2019-09-13 13_16_00.jpg (2562x1369, 948K)

>2080ti

Attached: 84552f1e1bdcac8c49e171a39bf9d2ed.jpg (250x250, 11K)

I am getting 5x performance of this benchmark in chromium compared to firefox

I get basically the same fps with a 1660Ti

Attached: 2019-09-13 13_18_01.jpg (2559x1366, 1.09M)

did you try like this, user did?

between 25-30 fps on 10k

Attached: Screenshot_2019-09-13 WebGL Aquarium(1).jpg (3840x2158, 2.15M)

Absolutely based. Guess I don’t have to test since user already did.

G6430

Attached: Screenshot_20190913-202025.jpg (1080x1920, 1.5M)

>1080Ti
>33 fps
>1660Ti
>49 fps
kek, 1080ti btfo.

>use this shitty botnet to enjoy shitty games and bloated content
I'm good, thanks.

bump

Attached: bretty ok.jpg (1920x937, 497K)

firefox is better than chrome

Attached: browser.jpg (1920x1046, 900K)

Quadro m@ster race

Attached: Capture.png (231x446, 185K)

EZ

Attached: Screenshot (75).png (1600x900, 2.64M)

bump

Attached: 60 nigger.png (1920x847, 2.54M)

palemoon also works well, pic related in on an rx 580 with a 1440p 144hz monitor

It's not at all for me.

1660Ti, I get 49fps with 30,000 fish in chrome. With firefox I get 24fps with the same 30,000.

Same monitor, same window size.

R5 2600 + RTX 2060

Attached: Screenshot_2019-09-13 WebGL Aquarium.jpg (1920x916, 768K)

forgot pic

Attached: 2019-09-13-162025_2560x1440_scrot.jpg (2560x1440, 418K)

Same PC, both tested on Firefox
I guess I'll have to download Chrome to test now

Attached: Screenshot_2019-09-13 WebGL Aquarium(1).jpg (1920x916, 763K)

In my defense, it's using my iGPU instead of my dGPU

Attached: fish ai.png (1918x961, 3.67M)

My computer does not appear to support webgl.

what do i win?

Attached: Screenshot_20190913_153126.jpg (1683x1017, 394K)

Damn. Specs?

And now with Chrome. Worth noting I had vsync set for Firefox

Attached: chrome.png (962x505, 942K)

Weird, must be single core CPU based or something, cause I have a worse GPU, but get much better performance.

Or just favors intel I guess?

Cause I'm running a 9700k and 1660Ti

Attached: 2019-09-13 16_36_59.png (809x818, 1.43M)

>must be single core CPU based or something
Quite likely, I'll see if some /pcbg/ Ryzen 3000 owners will pop in

FISH WALL FISH WALL FISH WALL

Attached: FISH WAAAAAAAAAAAAL.png (1740x895, 2.94M)

3700x

Attached: Screenshot_20190913_155005.jpg (1683x1017, 440K)

What's your graphics card though? and what browser?

gtx1060, waterfox, on linux

Attached: Screenshot_20190913_155155.jpg (1683x1017, 373K)

i was

That's pretty terrible performance... wonder if it's because of linux, waterfox, or the CPU...

1000 sits at 60 FPS.
10k also sits at 60 FPS.
30K is is the only usable measurement.

Attached: Annotation 2019-09-13 135331.png (1920x1095, 3.69M)

>09/13/19(Fri)11:11:11
Neat.

Attached: 1360x768_120KB-5934_poop-nq8.png (1440x848, 35K)

is this supposed to be a challenge?

Attached: step_up_your_game_AMDFAGS.png (521x843, 965K)

No, needle dick, it isn't.

specs?

Attached: 2019-09-13 17_06_49.png (293x400, 316K)

Thanks!

Also, Numix is my fav.

nice site

Attached: Capture.png (1904x395, 4K)

You need to enable WebGL first, user!

8700k
2080ti

Looks to be cpu bound.

stay mad, mayo sandwich.

Yeah for sure
9700k here with a significantly worse GPU.

Attached: 2019-09-13 17_10_34.png (261x380, 252K)

What's it like being worse than a mac

Attached: Screen Shot 2019-09-13 at 4.10.51 PM.png (1204x602, 708K)

>mayo sandwich
I'll stay mad if you keep asking stupid questions, butt breath.

iPad is bretty gud

Attached: 54B692B8-7700-4931-82DA-46764921E7E7.jpg (509x910, 164K)

which ipad

i7-7700
GTX 1080

Attached: fish.png (1249x897, 3.12M)

Even my two year old android phone gets 60fps at only 1000 fish.

Attached: SmartSelect_20190913-171937_Samsung Internet.jpg (1083x1883, 1.21M)

Attached: Screenshot_20190913-172221.png (1440x2560, 3.51M)

Pro a12x

>pro
>not 120fps

My iPhone beats my GTX 1060

Wow! Mind sharing your CPU worth? (Building price)

Attached: tenor.gif (350x254, 1.56M)

>1080Ti
you just got rekt by a $300 card

Attached: JXaTOqA.jpg (2560x1297, 766K)

Attached: Annotation 2019-09-13 144331.png (904x543, 53K)

vega 56 and 2700x. 30000 is the only thing that goes below 60fps

Attached: fishies.jpg (3837x2159, 1.94M)

this guyits a slightly OC;d 1700x
this is a stupid fucking benchmark since it stresses nothing and is dependent on a very specific technology and its compatibility with certain web browsers

33 seems kinda weak for a 1080TI
Here is my 1080 TI 40fps

Attached: 1545375090962.png (1148x824, 2.31M)

and actually it's software rendering anyways so whatever

here's chromium, but i get all kinds of artifacts

Attached: Screenshot_20190913_165033.jpg (1683x1017, 462K)

He was already beat by me with a $260 card.

Yep, I know that it's very unreliable, just like the guy said.

fixed with some chrome flags

Attached: Screenshot_20190913_165850.jpg (1683x1017, 499K)

>It's rather a browser benchmark, showing how better it implements. eg. chrome vs firefox
Out of MS Edge, MS Edge chromium, Vivaldi, Firefox, stock chrome, and chromium
MS Edge chromium was the fastest, with stock chrome coming second and Chromium was 3rd

Attached: 1546097889540.jpg (1921x951, 620K)

30k

Attached: 1568113293633.jpg (1919x951, 697K)

Attached: fish.jpg (1920x1080, 671K)

Attached: fish2.jpg (1920x1080, 736K)

fluctuating a lot between 20-30, mostly low 20s
A5 2016

Attached: Screenshot_20190914-031523.png (1080x1920, 2.56M)

FK YOU ALL

Attached: laptop2.jpg (485x321, 29K)

Javascript was a mistake. I can't believe we just let developers run their unaudited code on our machines without even a second thought. That site makes my fucking fan loud.