<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Webgpu on Pi Stack</title>
    <link>https://www.pistack.xyz/tags/webgpu/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Webgpu on Pi Stack</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://www.pistack.xyz/tags/webgpu/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>three.js vs Babylon.js vs PlayCanvas in 2026: Which WebGL Engine Should You Use?</title>
      <link>https://www.pistack.xyz/posts/2026-08-18-threejs-vs-babylonjs-vs-playcanvas-webgl-engine-comparison/</link>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.pistack.xyz/posts/2026-08-18-threejs-vs-babylonjs-vs-playcanvas-webgl-engine-comparison/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Your browser is now a 3D console. WebGL is supported by every shipping browser, WebGPU is rolling out across all major platforms, and the three.js repository alone sits at &lt;strong&gt;114,577 GitHub stars&lt;/strong&gt; — more than most full frameworks. Yet most teams still struggle with the first question: which engine do you build on? Pick the wrong one and you either drown in boilerplate (raw WebGL is brutal) or lock yourself into an editor workflow you never wanted.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
