Have everyone noticed that the performance of “moveclip” in “starling” is much higher than that of “bitmapFont” (not by the same order of magnitude)
The rendering performance of film editing is higher than that of image fonts, which is a qualitative leap.
Why is there such a big performance difference between using texture atlases for both?
The answer should be proper batching, imho.
Starling do some tricks to batch fonts, afaik it fast (never hit any problems with speed on fonts actually)