BenchmarkXPRT Blog banner

Category: Performance benchmarking

Seeing the whole picture

In past posts, we’ve discussed how people tend to focus on hardware differences when comparing performance or battery life scores between systems, but software factors such as OS version, choice of browser, and background activity often influence benchmark results on multiple levels.

For example, AnandTech recently published an article explaining how a decision by Google Chrome developers to increase Web page rendering times may have introduced a tradeoff between performance and battery life. To increase performance, Chrome asks Windows to use 1ms interrupt timings instead of the default 15.6ms timing. Unlike other applications that wait for the default timing, Chrome ends up getting its work done more often.

The tradeoff for that increased performance is that waking up the OS more frequently can diminish the effectiveness of a system’s innate power-saving attributes, such as a tick-less kernel and timer coalescing in Windows 8, or efficiency innovations in a new chip architecture. In this case, because of the OS-level interactions between Chrome and Windows, a faster browser could end up having a greater impact on battery life than might initially be suspected.

The article discusses the limitations of their test in detail, specifically with regards to Chrome 36 not being able to natively support the same HiDPI resolution as the other browsers, but the point we’re drawing out here is that accurate testing involves taking all relevant factors into consideration. People are used to the idea that changing browsers may impact Web performance, but not so much is said about a browser’s impact on battery life.

Justin

Comment on this post in the forums

Looking for a bargain?

There are many benefits to being a member of the community: the XPRT community previews, the source code for the benchmarks, the monthly newsletter, and more. To join the community, all you’ve had to do up until now is sign up and pay a one-time $20 fee. Our goal with the fee was to make sure that people who joined were serious.

Today, we’re announcing a change. We recognize that, for some companies, getting that $20 fee reimbursed can be a hassle. So, if you work for a device maker, OEM, chip manufacturer, or retailer, you’ll be able to join the community for free.

Here’s how it works: Simply fill out the form, use your company e-mail address, and click the option to be considered for a free membership. We’ll send you an email within one business day to verify the address is real and then activate your membership.

Simple, right?

Justin

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

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

TouchXPRT 2014 arrives Friday!

Friday is the big day for TouchXPRT 2014. It will be available for download at TouchXPRT.com and through the Windows App Store no later than 5:00 PM EDT on Friday May 16.

As we mentioned last week, in addition to the new look and more-demanding component tests, TouchXPRT has a number of new features. One feature we are especially excited about is that users will be able to automate their TouchXPRT tests, something they could not do in TouchXPRT 2013.

You can run TouchXPRT 2014 from a command prompt or using scripting mechanisms such as batch files or PowerShell. The scripting interface allows you to set several parameters, including:

  • Start running the test automatically on launch. You can choose to run all of the scenarios to generate an overall score, or run any single scenario for a component test score.
  • Change the number of iterations the test should run.
  • Change the delay before the test starts running after launch.
  • Change the output filename.

You can read the automation details and find specific commands in the Exploring TouchXPRT 2014 white paper.

Also, we’re in the last steps of preparing the HDXPRT 2014 Community Preview. It’s coming in the next couple of weeks, so stay tuned for more information.

Eric

Comment on this post in the forums

Check out the other XPRTs:

Forgot your password?