Mozilla has already showed asm.js is 3-6x slower in Chrome, which doesn't support it right now.

Yeah they showed a benchmark was 3-6x slower. That's all well and good. I wanna see what the real world implications are. Here's this cool Unreal demo running with asm.js support, it looks great.

Now let me run it in Chrome or Safari and see if it's even remotely passable or not.

JavaScript is usually compiled to native code by WebKit and can have very good performance. 3d WebGL gaming performance both on Chrome and Firefox and Safari is usually a factor of WebGL support in the browser, drivers, etc., rather than JavaScript performance.

You haven't read http://asmjs.org/ yet, I gather.

/be

What happens if NaCL performance is acceptable? By the reasoning you've applied here, doesn't that make the case for NaCL?

Come on, why ask a question like that? We're not discussing NaCl here.

If you want to discuss NaCl that's a whole different issue. It's a totally different standard and quite a bit more complex than asm.js.

Lets not forget mobile devices as well.