BenchmarkXPRT Blog banner

Category: Benchmarking

An XPRT training course

We have a couple of exciting announcements today! A few weeks ago, we promised something special for BatteryXPRT, and we can now show off the all new BatteryXPRT training course. The BatteryXPRT training course is an online, interactive, multi-media tool designed to make learning about the benchmark easy and enjoyable.

You can easily navigate to detailed videos and graphics explaining how to build the benchmark from source code, how to configure your device, how results are calculated, and much more. It’s like the BatteryXPRT design document, white paper, and user manual have come to life!

BattXPRT training

In addition to following the link above, you can also find the course at BatteryXPRT.com. The course works on most popular browsers in Windows and OSX.

In other news, we have a name for the Chrome benchmark, CrXPRT. Thanks for all the suggestions, and let us know what you think of the name.

As promised last week, the CrXPRT Design Document is available to the development community today.  You’ll find it on the CrXPRT tab in the members’ area. If you’re not yet a member, we’d love for you to join here.

If you have any questions about CrXPRT of feedback on the BatteryXPRT course, feel free to contact us at BenchmarkXPRTsupport@principledtechnologies.com.

Eric

Comment on this post in the forums

More details to come

As we’ve been saying the past couple of months, we’re working on a benchmark for Chrome OS. The experimentation phase is winding down, and we are starting to shape the code into a useable benchmark. The design plan will leverage existing WebXPRT tests, of course. However, we’ve gone far beyond that. The benchmark will include video playback, 3D modeling via WebGL, and even an HTML5 game.  The test also uses Chrome OS’ native execution capability. The benchmark will actually use the Portable Native Client (PNaCl), as PNaCl is the recommended tool chain for native client. It also gives the benchmark the ability to run on more platforms.

As we mentioned before, we’re including a battery test as part of the new benchmark. So far, we haven’t found a way to remove the requirement to put the device in developer mode for the battery test.

Next week, we’ll publish a design document for the community to review. As always, the design document is based on the comments and suggestions we received combined with our own research and experimentation.

Eric

Comment on this post in the forums

It makes a difference

Ars Technica reported this week that they tested the developer preview of Android L and saw a whopping 36 percent improvement in battery life! Google made improving battery life a priority, and it sounds like they are succeeding. I can’t wait to test Android L with BatteryXPRT.

This is a spectacular example of how a change in software can change benchmark results, but it’s hardly unique. I’ve written before about how background activity on a phone depressed my friend’s WebXPRT scores. AnandTech used both IE 11 and Chrome 30 to test the Surface Pro 2 with a variety of benchmarks, including WebXPRT, SunSpider, Octane, Browsermark, and others. Browser choice had a noticeable impact on results – about a 40 percent difference for WebXPRT and a 76 percent difference for SunSpider!

People are generally pretty aware that changing the hardware changes performance. However, sometimes they lose track of software differences. When you compare scores, it’s not always possible to keep all the variables the same, but it’s crucial to know what the differences are.

In other BenchmarkXPRT news, we’re making some final adjustments to HDXPRT 2014, and the general release is just around the corner.

Eric

Comment on this post in the forums

In the works

A couple of weeks ago, we mentioned stability issues with BatteryXPRT 2014 for Android when running on systems with only 1 GB of RAM.  After some restructuring, we now have a build that’s stable on those devices. We’re finishing testing, and it’s looking good. We’ll be making the new build available at BatteryXPRT.com and in the Google Play store early next week. Battery life and performance results from the new build are equivalent to those from the previous build, so your existing results are still valid and comparable.

Speaking of BatteryXPRT, we have something special coming soon. I can’t say what it is yet, but we haven’t done anything like it before.

We’re also getting closer to a general release for HDXPRT 2014. As we’ve explained before, the new HDXPRT runs three iterations in less than 2 hours, and will be downloadable, so the entire installation and testing process is much quicker than before. We’re currently working out a few kinks, but we expect the general release very soon.

Also, we’re still accepting ideas for naming the Chrome-related XPRT now in development. Share your ideas at BenchmarkXPRTsupport@principledtechnologies.com.

Eric

Comment on this post in the forums

Testing the waters

A couple of weeks ago, we talked about some of our ideas for a new XPRT designed for Google’s Chrome OS. We’ve been working with some of these ideas and, while we’re still in the experimental stage, things look promising so far.

As we mentioned in the earlier blog, we’re trying WebXPRT as a base for the performance part of the test. So far, the performance component is working well. In addition to modified WebXPRT tests, we’re also trying some things that are not part of the WebXPRT 2013 workload.

We’ve been able to get battery life, but it’s been challenging and we haven’t found a way to avoid using Chrome’s Developer Mode. Accessing Developer Mode in Chrome can be tricky and requires different steps for each hardware manufacturer. We’re hoping to find ways to make battery life testing easier.

I’ve been vague about the tests because they’re likely to change over the next few weeks. We’re experimenting with both browser-based and Native Client-based performance tasks. As they firm up, I’ll be able to share more information.

Challenges aside, we’re excited about this new benchmark, and committed to making it as effective as possible. We’d still love feedback on a name, so feel free to contact us at BenchmarkXPRTsupport@principledtechnologies.com with your ideas.

Eric

Comment on this post in the forums

The name game

In Something shiny, we discussed the leading contender in our search for new benchmark ideas, a benchmark tailored especially for the Chrome OS, and we’ve been looking at what workloads would make sense.

As we said, the ability to measure battery life would be useful. That’s not easy in the Chrome environment. We think we may be able to do it, but the Chromebook may have to be in developer mode. Even so, we can leverage what we’ve learned from BatteryXPRT to get a reliable estimate of battery life in less than a working day.

Measuring performance, however, is a must. We’ve been looking at the existing WebXPRT workloads as well as other applications, such as education apps, online games, HD video playback, music playback, and more. We’re also looking for areas where using native client execution makes sense, such as higher-resolution photo editing.

In addition, we’re thinking about what we might call this benchmark. ChromeXPRT would be obvious, but probably wouldn’t pass Google’s naming restrictions.

Do you have ideas for the benchmark’s name? Are there Chrome-based benchmark workloads you’d love to see? Let us know at BenchmarkXPRTsupport@principledtechnologies.com!

Eric

Comment on this post in the forums

Check out the other XPRTs:

Forgot your password?