I heard that using Starling gives better performance than just using Flash pro Native (GPU mode??) when playing flash games on smartphones.
However, according to this article, there is not much difference between GPU mode and Starling although its recorded in late 2012.
My game is tile matching game that uses vectors and many different tile pictures. also upto 64 tiles can be present at the same time.
I don't know how much more performance Starling would provide, but if starling would give more performance, i don't know if its worth the time and effort to learn how to use Starling and change my current codes to use Starling?
This is a test between multiple frameworks that all use Stage3D, which is basically the means to get any hardware benefits from the GPU.
These frameworks do nothing else than helping to streamline your game development and doing some optimizing (object pooling etc.) under the hood.
The basic concept is to have spritessheets (for 2D) , that are also called "Textureatlas`" instead of the "old" method of having separated MovieClips/sprites.
If you dont use this method in your game, then you will have indeed no benefit from Starling or any other Stage3D framework.
So if you your game is coded "like in the old days" you would have to rewrite some parts of it and convert all MovieClips to Spritesheets to benefit from the GPU.
The real Performance-comparison reads like this:
CopyPixels (the PreStage 3D method) had a Perfomance gainof 500%/ SpriteSheet (Stage3D) 4000% compared to the "old way".
It all depends if you`re unhappy with your games curretn performance on current mobile devices or not.