While Ships2Career ran on my computer, I was noticed by loud noise of the fans on a relatively high CPU load. In the following, I investigated which states of the simulation cause CPU and memory loads, and how they are affected by different browsers. For comparison, my standard Firefox browser and the Edge browser, delivered with the operating system, were available.
To get comparable data, I booted the computer before testing different browsers every time, cleared cookies, and emptied the cache. The simulation always ran with the same ship, at the same position, at the same speed.
It turned out that there is no difference between 'full screen' and 'windowed' within the same browser, there is no difference between 'Map View' and 'Satellite View'. But in 'Tracking Mode' a higher CPU load is to be noted, because the whole map must be moved (which also depends on the zoom factor). Even when I quickly moved the map over a larger area manually, no higher load was found than in the 'Tracking Mode'.
There is a clear difference, however, among the different browsers, whereas Ships2Career in Firefox generates 30 - 40% CPU load, the edge browser is satisfied with 13 - 20%.
Computer: Terra, with Intel i5-3570K @ 3.4 GHz, 64 bit, 8GB RAM,
OS: Windows 10 Home, version 1607, Build14393.447
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660
Stena Brittanica, outside the port of Dover, at full speed, course 135 °
Free Mode Tracking Mode manually moved Memory
Firefox 30% 40% 40% 450 MB
Edge 13% 20% 20% 160 MB
This shows how different HTML code is implemented in the different browsers.
I also did other tests with both browsers and got quite different results, with Edge gaining a small advantage. It was tested with Penguin Mark, Basemark, BMark, CanvasMark, and AnTuTu HTML5 test. In addition, I looked to the kernels, and saw totally different loads on them.
Has anyone had similar experiences, or even figures for comparison?
Is the Ships2 code uniform, or optimized for specific browsers?
Or does nobody wants to be bored with this stuff?