WebGL / WebGPU experiences

WebGL and WebGPU are browser APIs for hardware-accelerated (GPU) graphics: WebGL (mature, widely supported) and WebGPU (newer, more powerful, but still rolling out across browsers). They are used for 3D scenes, product 3D configurators, big-data visualizations, interactive maps, special effects, browser games. The goal is complex interactive graphics right in the browser without plugins. Honestly about 'for tasks that need graphics', this is key: WebGL/WebGPU are justified when 3D or heavy graphics are the essence of the product (a furniture/car configurator, 3D viewing, data viz, a game). For a regular site (content, forms, a typical UI) it is excessive and often HARMFUL: heavy 3D scenes load the CPU/GPU and battery, slow down weak devices, bloat loading. A 'wow effect' for effect's sake can worsen, not improve, the experience. We will honestly assess whether you need such graphics. Honestly about performance and devices: GPU graphics require a performance budget and mandatory testing on various devices (especially weak and mobile). What flies on a powerful PC can lag or drain the battery on a phone. It is real engineering work, not 'added 3D'. Honestly about WebGPU maturity and compatibility: WebGPU is more powerful but still rolling out — support checks and fallbacks (e.g. to WebGL) are needed for devices/browsers without it. WebGL is more mature but has its own limits. We honestly account for compatibility. Honestly about accessibility and SEO: content drawn in a canvas (WebGL/WebGPU) is invisible to screen readers and search engines as text — alternatives/descriptions are needed for accessibility and SEO-important content. This must be built in. Honestly about cost: it is expensive specialized development (3D, shaders, optimization), with fewer specialists. Honestly about the effect: for graphics tasks it gives impressive in-browser interactivity, but it is heavy specialized development, not justified for everyone. Honestly about access: a real graphics task, a budget, specialists are needed. An important boundary: this is GPU graphics; WebAssembly (computation) — 1055; regular frontend — other sections. Picture this: instead of 'flat images' — interactive 3D graphics where it is genuinely needed, accounting for devices and accessibility. The base price starts from 90,000 ₽ (depends on scene complexity).

• Interactive 3D graphics/visualization/configurator in the browser is needed.
• Heavy graphics lag on weak and mobile devices.
• You want 'wow' 3D but there is no real graphics task (excessive/harmful).
• Content in a canvas is invisible to SEO and inaccessible (no alternatives).

• WebGL/WebGPU graphics development for a real task (3D, data viz, configurator)
• An honest assessment: is GPU graphics needed or excessive/harmful
• A performance budget and testing on various devices (incl. weak/mobile)
• Compatibility: WebGPU check + fallback (WebGL etc.)
• Accounting for accessibility and SEO (alternatives for canvas content)
• Honest boundaries (for graphics tasks; excessive/harmful for a regular site; device load; no 'wow' at any cost)
• A link with WebAssembly (1055) for heavy computation
• Handover and review with you

• Impressive interactive 3D graphics right in the browser (where needed)
• Performance accounting for various devices
• Accessibility and SEO accounted for (alternatives for canvas)
• Honest boundaries (for graphics tasks; not for a regular site; no 'wow for wow')

• We assess whether there is a real graphics task for WebGL/WebGPU
• If yes — we develop with a performance budget and compatibility
• We build in accessibility/SEO, honestly set boundaries with you

• Is adding flashy 3D graphics to a site always a plus?

  No, honestly: WebGL/WebGPU are justified when 3D/graphics are the essence of the task (a configurator, 3D viewing, data viz, a game). For a regular site it is excessive and often HARMFUL: heavy scenes load the CPU, GPU and battery, slow weak devices, bloat loading. 'Wow' for effect's sake can worsen the experience. We will honestly assess whether you need such graphics rather than add 3D for impression at any cost.

• Will 3D graphics work the same on all devices?

  No, honestly: GPU graphics require a performance budget and testing on various devices. What flies on a powerful PC can lag and drain the battery on a phone or a weak laptop. Plus WebGPU is still rolling out — support checks and fallbacks for devices without it are needed. We honestly build in performance and compatibility rather than promise 'works the same everywhere' by default.

• And what about graphics SEO and accessibility?

  It is an important nuance, honestly: content drawn in a canvas (WebGL/WebGPU) is invisible to search engines and screen readers as text. If the graphics contain SEO-important content or must be accessible, text alternatives and descriptions are needed. Without them you lose in SEO and accessibility. We honestly build in alternatives rather than leave important content locked in an invisible canvas.