When comparing Pixi.js vs Starling JS, the Slant community recommends Pixi.js for most people. In the question“What are the best JavaScript game engines?” Pixi.js is ranked 6th while Starling JS is ranked 12th. The most important reason people chose Pixi.js is:
Pixi is a WebGL renderer, but can fall back to canvas if WebGL is not supported or turned off.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Supports WebGL w/ canvas fallback
Pixi is a WebGL renderer, but can fall back to canvas if WebGL is not supported or turned off.
Pro Will be familiar to ActionScript developers
Pixi.js uses a code structure that's very similar to ActionScript.
Pro Free and open source
Starling is available for free with code available on GitHub.
Pro Lightweight
Starling is just 12k lines of code and doesn't try to do everything - but what it does, as efficient as possible.
Pro Strong community support
Forum is always active with knowledgeable developers and with lot of inside info, and post mortems.
Cons
Con Not a complete solution
Pixi only provides the renderer.
Con Early in development
No stable release of JavaScript version of Starling has yet been released.