// you’re reading...

3D

Son of Papervision! (VectorVision vs. FIVe3D)

ASIDE: So, the original theme of this article was a head to head between PV3D/VectorVision and FIVe3D, but then I realized that an offspring metaphor was really more apt, as explained below. Nonetheless, the following picture is too awesome not to use.

Papervision vs. FIVe3D

An awesome picture.

If you’ve been following this site for any amount of time, you’ve probably noticed that I’ve been spending quite a bit of time with Mathieu Badimon’s excellent FIVe3D engine. Probably too much time, in fact. I’ve talked about the features in other posts, so I won’t go into it here. If this is the first you’ve heard of it, go take a look at Mathieu’s examples, or click ‘FIVe3D’ in the tag cloud to the right to see what it is and some of the things it’s capable of.

It seems that the first thing people do when they see this engine is compare it with Papervision3D. I’ve resisted this for a long time; in my opinion, bitmap-based and vector-based 3D engines seem to be pretty close to the proverbial apples and oranges. However! As of sometime last week, Papervision and FIVe3D have been combined into some sort of (proverbial?) fruit punch, which means that inter-species comparisons make a lot more sense. It’s called VectorVision, and the men responsible for this unholy union are Barcinski & Jean-Jean, two mad scientists from Amsterdam.

Based on my earlier experiments, I’ve been kicking around the idea of a 3D tag cloud for this blog. FIVe3D, of course, seemed like the obvious man for the job due to its simplicity and the fact that Papervision hasn’t had anything in the way of quality text rendering. However, the experiments of the aforementioned Dutchmen made me wonder how Papervision would handle the task. So, I created a similar application using each library. You can see the results below; each image is a separate SWF- just click one to activate it.

FIVe3D Papervision3D
SWF size: 32k SWF size: 60k

Findings

As you can see, there are some differences; and of course, this is as basic as either engine gets. But in terms of pure capability, it looks like the offspring of PV3D and FIVe3D is indeed greater than either. Post your machine/browser and frame rates; I’d like to see what everyone else is getting.

Discussion

51 comments for “Son of Papervision! (VectorVision vs. FIVe3D)”

  1. coool experiment, zack.

    Mac OSX 10.5 / 2.4 Dual / 2 GB RAM / Safari 3:

    PV3D: avg fps 48

    Five3D: avg fps 47

    the PV3D version seems much more fluid and natural for some reason even though the FPS are very similar.

    Posted by jonathan greene | June 1, 2008, 12:07 am
  2. I’ve played with VectorVision.
    I think it’s a great integration, as I’ve been waiting for the time FIVe3D has a CAMERA. :)

    Posted by Symplicity00 | June 1, 2008, 12:58 am
  3. Very cool man.

    DELL XPS M1330
    Intel Core 2 Duo 1.8GHz
    3GB RAM
    W/Vista
    FireFox

    PV3D Avg. 33 fps
    FIVe3D Avg. 20fps

    Posted by Juan Bermudez | June 1, 2008, 3:11 pm
  4. Same for me - Pv3D average 36, FIVe3D around 20.

    Would be also great to compare with Flash 10 built-in 3d.

    Posted by Bartek Drozdz | June 1, 2008, 5:22 pm
  5. That’s interesting that they are so close for you, Jonathan; I forgot to post mine, but I’m getting a dramatic difference:

    C2D 2.2GHz 4GB
    Leopard/Firefox 3

    PV3D: 48fps
    FIVe3D: 31fps

    @Bartek: That’s not a bad idea. I think I’ll do it.

    Posted by Zack Jordan | June 1, 2008, 7:24 pm
  6. Hi,
    here is my test
    quad core q6600 - 4G ram
    plugin flash 10 beta
    firefox - vista

    PV3D: 61 fps
    FIVe3D: 37 fps

    Posted by Hi | June 2, 2008, 2:27 am
  7. Coool comparison.

    (e4600+2gig ram, winxp, ie7).

    five3d: avg 38,5fps
    pv3d: avg 36,5fps

    not a real difference ;)

    great job,

    Flaim

    Posted by Flaim | June 2, 2008, 4:24 pm
  8. @Flaim:
    So FIVe3D beat out PV3D, eh? That’s interesting…

    Posted by Zack Jordan | June 2, 2008, 4:35 pm
  9. Macbook Pro/2.33 core 2 duo/2 gb 667 mhz ram/leopard, firefox 3

    pv3d: 49
    five3d: 34

    Posted by Matt Przybylski | June 3, 2008, 12:48 am
  10. @Zack:

    I’ve tested in just now on a different machine (e4500+2gig ram - so not a real difference- win xp also - flash player version the same - ie7 again):

    pv3d: 37.3
    five3d: 38.2

    Both the machines are mine so they are configured and used more or less in the same manner..

    FLAIM

    Posted by Flaim | June 3, 2008, 4:08 am
  11. I’ve checked under Firefox2 now on the same rig:

    pv3d=fv3d= 40fps…..

    that is really confusing … the test under firefox is not convincing me at all because the framerates look like glued to each other ;)

    Posted by Flaim | June 3, 2008, 4:11 am
  12. Nice one!

    five3d : 49 fps
    pv3d : 58 fps

    Posted by Mark Barcinski | June 3, 2008, 9:11 am
  13. Mine is a P4 2.8 Ghz using Firefox 2.0.14

    Five3D=29 FPS
    PV3D=36 FPS

    Posted by Rob | June 3, 2008, 1:34 pm
  14. Wow that is realy impressive. super nice effect.
    I will save this page to favorites.

    Andrew /
    http://www.eminentgames.com

    Posted by Andrew | June 3, 2008, 2:15 pm
  15. Zack:

    Another interesting test:

    the same machine as in the beginning but os is now Windows Vista 32 + new flash player (newest 9.x):

    pv3d: 35
    fv3d: 36,4

    I can’t get even near to beating fv3d ! Did u get anything similar ?

    Flaim

    Posted by flaim | June 4, 2008, 3:40 pm
  16. Flaim:

    I have yet to get a FIVe3D result that’s better than PV3D. I wonder if Windows has something to do with it.

    I also noticed that FP10 gave both of them a few extra FPS.

    Posted by Zack Jordan | June 6, 2008, 12:25 am
  17. Zack:
    I’m testing under fp9 - that may be the difference.

    Flaim

    Posted by Flaim | June 6, 2008, 3:35 am
  18. iMac 2.16 Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo
    3 Go DDR2

    Five3D: about 39
    VV3D: about 52

    I had some averages for PV3D at about 11 FPS, can’t explain why.

    Posted by Skoua | June 17, 2008, 11:30 am
  19. That’s a little weird. Maybe there’s something odd in my FPS meter.

    Posted by Zack Jordan | June 17, 2008, 11:47 am
  20. vista
    five 31.6
    pv 37.7

    Posted by pedro | June 18, 2008, 10:21 am
  21. windows machine, intel hamsterinawheelium duo, and a longer memory than mine.

    pv3d: 56fps
    five3d: 34fps

    pv3d wins.

    Posted by philip bulley | June 24, 2008, 4:20 am
  22. os x 10.5
    2.33GHz Intel Core 2
    Safari 3

    pv3d: 50fps
    five3d: 38fps

    but you didn’t mention how many lines of code for each example… ;)

    Posted by collin | June 28, 2008, 9:07 pm
  23. FIVe3D: Average of 48.7
    Papervision3D: Average of 34.2

    windows vista
    Q6600 Qyuad Core Processor
    3 Gigs Ram
    512mb Geforce 8400GS

    Posted by That guy over there | July 7, 2008, 11:17 pm
  24. FIVe3D: 60fps
    pv3d: 60fps

    Windows XP SP3
    Intel Q6700 Quad Core
    2GB RAM
    Firefox 3 + Flash Player 10

    Posted by spinnach | July 17, 2008, 1:15 pm
  25. @spinnach:

    That’s pretty impressive. I wonder what the ceiling for that rig would be.

    Posted by Zack Jordan | July 17, 2008, 1:31 pm
  26. FIVe3D: 50fps
    PV3D: 56,5fps

    Athlon 3200+
    2GB RAM
    XP SP3
    Firefox 3 + Flash Player 9

    Posted by Gary | July 25, 2008, 6:37 am
  27. The PV3D one looks better because it has bigger letters which seen closer from each other in the z-axis…

    2.4 GHz, 2GB RAM, Firefox 3
    Five3D: 40 FPS
    PV3D: 50 FPS

    Posted by Joaqo | July 29, 2008, 11:55 pm
  28. AMD athlon 4400+ 2GB RAM
    FIVe3D: 51fps
    PV3D: 56fps
    FX3 FL9

    Posted by LepLep | August 1, 2008, 11:09 am
  29. MBP 2.4 c2d, 4GB, Firefox3, fp9
    PV3D: 32 fps
    FIVe3D: 15 fps.

    BTW. flash performance on my mac i very low, I can.t figure out why.
    @Matt Przybyslki
    It seems I’ve got almost the same configuration You have, but mine fps’ are half yours. Any idea what can make this differences?

    Posted by sema | August 2, 2008, 1:15 pm
  30. @sema

    That’s really strange. What does it do in Safari?

    Posted by Zack Jordan | August 4, 2008, 6:12 am
  31. P4 2.4GHz, 512MB RAM,
    Radeon9600SE 64-bit 128MB

    Five3D av 21.9
    Papervision3D av 20.8

    Posted by Willem | August 9, 2008, 9:41 am
  32. Has anyone had any success using vector vision with large text fields containing line breaks?

    It seems a custom class would need to be built that can do this, and I really hope someone can so we can use more than just the odd vector word in pv3d.

    Posted by Alex | August 11, 2008, 1:46 pm
  33. Unfortunately, I don’t think that would be practical. If you want a paragraph of text, I think a high-quality Plane with a bitmap of your text would be your only option. FIVe3D and Vectorvision look great, but they’re just not built to handle that much rendering.

    On the other hand, it might be feasible if you rendered the scene once and left it at that. That has its own downsides, of course.

    Posted by Zack Jordan | August 11, 2008, 2:23 pm
  34. nice comparison.

    Intel Core 2 Duo 1.8GHz, 2GB RAM,
    Win XP,
    Flash Player 10,
    five3d 43,
    vv 58

    Posted by Aram | August 13, 2008, 5:20 am
  35. pv3d: 58.2
    five3d: 55.3
    (xp/t9500/4Gb/quadrofx3600m)

    Posted by alan | August 29, 2008, 10:33 am
  36. Macbook, OSX 10.5, Firefox 3.0.1

    53D: 36.2
    PV3D: 49.8

    I am getting hitching in both versions. I have talked to other OSX owners and we are getting hitching in nearly all tests of 3D on Macs vs. essentially no hitching on Windows computers.

    Has anybody else had this problem? Any ideas of the cause?

    Posted by Jeff Tunnell | August 31, 2008, 12:54 pm
  37. Five3D:
    40 FPS

    PV:
    60 FPS

    Vista Home Premium
    4GB RAM
    1.83 Core2Duo

    what is your opinion on Flash Player 10 and its new 3D features? do you think it would make Five3D obsolete?

    Posted by John | October 7, 2008, 10:49 am
  38. No, I don’t think so. My guess is that all the 3D engine guys (PV3D, Away3D, Five3D, etc.) will just use the new native stuff as the core of their engines. It’s pretty basic 3D, after all, and doesn’t offer all the features of the most basic open-source 3D engine.

    Posted by Zack Jordan | October 21, 2008, 7:10 am
  39. Would you mind posting the source code for the two demo files?

    Posted by Shawny | November 6, 2008, 10:05 am
  40. I’ll have to look it up. I did these a long time ago and I’m not sure what I did with it.

    Posted by Zack Jordan | November 6, 2008, 10:09 am
  41. I’m mostly interested in the Papervision version. I’m trying to get my head around how the vector tags are created spatially. So if I have values for the tags coming from an xml list, I am interested in seeing how those xml name values are created using vectorvision.

    Thanks.

    Posted by Shawn | November 7, 2008, 8:47 am
  42. Intel Quad Q9400
    64 bit Vista
    Nvidia GeForce 8800 GT
    8 GB RAM
    flash player 10
    firefox 3

    PV3D Avg. 60.0 fps
    FIVe3D Avg. 60.0 fps

    So, when compairing file sizes, I prefer Five3D.

    But… It seems it’s been pretty quite here, even the last update of FIVe3D -site was a looong time ago. nothing has happened…
    I wonder if it means no more FIVe3D..?

    Posted by Timo K | January 13, 2009, 9:13 am
  43. nice =)
    Intel Pentium 4© 3Ghz
    2 GB Ram
    GeForce mx440 agp8x

    FIVe3D set:60 actual:25 averege:30
    Papervision3D set:60 actual:40 averege:45

    papervision looks faster

    Posted by kirill | February 17, 2009, 4:38 am
  44. seems like FIVe3D is also processor intensive than PV3D…

    Posted by trypt | April 1, 2009, 5:55 am
  45. I have 60fps for both files, on XP Pro, Intel 2.4GHz, Core2, 3GB

    Also, check out my website; for the home page I used Five3D. The swf size for the whole thing, except the flv-s is 59KB!!! And look at the text quality. By the way, if you take a look, please let me know if the playback gets jagged. Thanks a lot!

    Posted by Dragos | April 1, 2009, 2:55 pm
  46. I might be a little bit late to the party.
    average of 60fps on both.
    Firefox : 3.0.8
    flash player : 10,0,12,36 Debug
    system:
    XP
    quad core 2.4 (6400)
    2 gig ram (800mhz)

    Posted by Chris Brown | April 2, 2009, 5:51 am
  47. Ehem, actually on linux (native flash 10 player) five3d sucks badly. Both have same fps (~50) but five3d freezes. I’ll prefer five3d anyways. it works quite well on other platforms.

    Posted by Onur Gunduz | April 5, 2009, 11:18 pm
  48. IBM T43 M740@1.46G 2GB
    xp sp3
    opera 9.6

    FIVe3D averege:30.3
    Papervision3D averege:41.5

    Posted by hades.jr | August 28, 2009, 1:16 pm
  49. Core 2 Duo 2.4
    2 GB DDr2
    Vista
    nvidia 9600 GT
    Mozilla FireFox 3.5.x

    Five3D Fps: 48.xx Avg
    PaperV3D Fps: 60.xx Avg

    I think Five3D best for Size Optimized Websites and Five3D best for Speed Optimized websites.

    Posted by flashmad | September 17, 2009, 11:16 am
  50. Power PC G4
    768 Mo ram
    Mac Os 10.4.11

    PV : 25,8 avg
    F3D : 15,0 avg

    Posted by SAMsan | October 3, 2009, 9:06 am
  51. Core 2 Duo 6600
    2 GB DDR2
    Windows 7
    GeForce 8800 GTX
    Mozzila FireFox 3.5.4

    Five3D Fps: 60.00 Avg
    PaperV3D Fps: 60.20 Avg

    Posted by Mike | October 29, 2009, 2:00 pm

Post a comment