ThorVG
Performance CPU and memory comparison of Lottie via thorvg vs mp4 #3787
-
|
Hi, Do you know if there are any performance studies comparing ThorVG to MP4/WebM in terms of CPU and memory usage? We are exploring replacing MP4/WebM formats with Lottie files rendered via ThorVG and would like to quantify the improvements. In addition to any internal or unpublished data, are there any published benchmarks available? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Replies: 1 comment
-
|
Obviously, Lottie animations are rendered at runtime, very compact, scalable, less size while MP4/WebM consists of pre-recorded data, which can be uniform to render but relatively larger size, not scalable. Eventually, performance heavily depends on the complexity of Lottie design assets. Normal animation could be faster with Lottie but when visuals are more complex, MP4/WebM may perform better. Thus, it's difficult to say a general performance benchmark because there are many variables, especially, performance can be vary by "design asset" I recommend testing with your actual assets. It's easy to export animations to MP4 or WebM using the LottieFiles service platform: 
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Obviously, Lottie animations are rendered at runtime, very compact, scalable, less size while MP4/WebM consists of pre-recorded data, which can be uniform to render but relatively larger size, not scalable. Eventually, performance heavily depends on the complexity of Lottie design assets. Normal animation could be faster with Lottie but when visuals are more complex, MP4/WebM may perform better.
Thus, it's difficult to say a general performance benchmark because there are many variables, especially, performance can be vary by "design asset" I recommend testing with your actual assets. It's easy to export animations to MP4 or WebM using the LottieFiles service platform: