You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I don’t know if any of you have carried out any comparative tests.
But in my running environment, I can clearly feel that SC’s settings interface is particularly prone to stuttering and frame drops, while TM has always been very smooth.
As for script execution efficiency, I haven’t carried out any rigorous tests, but it does seem to be slightly slower than TM. However, this may simply be a perceived difference due to the inability to easily adjust the execution order.
你有没有觉得 ScriptCat 的性能不如 Tampermonkey? / Have you noticed that ScriptCat isn’t as efficient as Tampermonkey?
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
中文描述
不知道你们有没有做过对比测试,在我的运行环境中,我能明显感觉到 SC 的设置界面特别容易出现卡顿、掉帧,而 TM 则一直都很流畅。
至于脚本的执行效率,我没做过严谨的测试,但是似乎也会比 TM 慢一些。不过也许只是因为无法方便地调整执行顺序导致的感官误差。
English Details
I don’t know if any of you have carried out any comparative tests.
But in my running environment, I can clearly feel that SC’s settings interface is particularly prone to stuttering and frame drops, while TM has always been very smooth.
As for script execution efficiency, I haven’t carried out any rigorous tests, but it does seem to be slightly slower than TM. However, this may simply be a perceived difference due to the inability to easily adjust the execution order.
0 votes ·
All reactions