BenchmarkXPRT Blog banner

Category: Performance benchmarking

WebXPRT runs: A decade of growth

Justin Greene
By Justin Greene
on April 13, 2023

In our last blog post, we celebrated the 10-year anniversary of the WebXPRT launch by looking back on the WebXPRT team’s accomplishments over the last decade. The incremental steps and milestone improvements we discussed all contributed to carving out a lasting place for WebXPRT in the benchmarking world and helped to grow its reputation for being a reliable, effective, and easy to use measurement tool.

WebXPRT’s growth is most evident when we look at the rising number of completed test runs over the last 10 years. Since the first WebXPRT launch in 2013, we’ve seen a steady increase in the number of tests people are running. To put the increase in perspective, we had more runs last month alone (17,300) than we recorded in the first 10 months that WebXPRT was available (11,984).

That growth has helped us to reach and surpass the million-run mark, but the most exciting aspect of seeing a consistent increase in WebXPRT testing is the knowledge that the benchmark is proving to be useful to more people in more places around the world. In our next blog post, we’ll discuss WebXPRT’s truly global reach and some of the surprising cities and countries where people have been using it to test their gear.

We’re grateful for all the testers that have helped WebXPRT grow during the last decade. If you have any questions or comments about using WebXPRT, let us know!

Justin

Posted in benchmark, Benchmarking, BenchmarkXPRT, Browser-based benchmarks, Cross-platform benchmarks, History of benchmarking, Performance benchmarking, WebXPRT, WebXPRT 2013, WebXPRT 2015, WebXPRT 3, WebXPRT 4 | Tagged , , , , , , |

Celebrating 10 years of WebXPRT!

Justin Greene
By Justin Greene
on March 30, 2023

We’re excited to announce that it’s been 10 years since the initial launch of WebXPRT! In early 2013, we introduced WebXPRT as a unique browser performance benchmark in a market space that was already crowded with a variety of specialized measurement tools. Our goal was to offer a benchmark that could compare the performance of almost any web-enabled device, using scenarios created to mirror real-world tasks. We wanted it to be a free, easily accessible, easy-to-run, useful, and appealing testing option for OEM labs, vendors, and the tech press.

When we look back on the last 10 years of WebXPRT, we can’t help but conclude that our efforts have been successful. Since those early days, the WebXPRT market presence has grown from humble beginnings into a worldwide industry standard. Hundreds of tech press publications have used WebXPRT in thousands of articles and reviews, and testers have now run the benchmark well over 1.1 million times.

Below, I’ve listed some of the WebXPRT team’s accomplishments over the last decade. If you’ve been following WebXPRT from the beginning, this may all be familiar, but if you’re new to the  community, it may be interesting to see some of the steps that contributed to making WebXPRT what it is today.

In future blog posts, we’ll look at how the number of WebXPRT runs has grown over time, and how WebXPRT use has grown among OEMs, vendors, and the tech press worldwide. Do you have any thoughts that you’d like to share from your WebXPRT testing experience? If so, let us know!

Justin

Posted in benchmark, Benchmarking, BenchmarkXPRT, Browser-based benchmarks, Cross-platform benchmarks, German, History of benchmarking, JavaScript, Performance benchmarking, results, Simplified Chinese, tech press, WebAssembly, WebXPRT, WebXPRT 2013, WebXPRT 2015, WebXPRT 3, WebXPRT 4, WebXPRT Processor Comparison Chart, White papers | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Mobile World Congress 2023: Infrastructure led the way

Mark Van Name
By Mark Van Name
on March 3, 2023

When the tech industry is at its best, a virtuous cycle of capabilities and use cases chases its own tail to produce ever-better tech for us all. Faster CPUs drive new usage models, which in turn emerge and swamp the CPUs, which then must get faster. Better screens make us want higher-quality video, which requires more bandwidth to deliver and causes us to desire even better displays. Apps connect us in more ways, but those connections require more bandwidth, which leads to new apps that can take advantage of those faster connections. And on and on.

Put a finger on the cycle at any given moment, and you’ll see that while all the elements are in motion, some are the stars of the moment. To keep the cycle going, it’s crucial for these areas to improve the most. At Mobile World Congress 2023 (#MWC23), that distinction belonged to infrastructure. Yes, some new mobile phones were on display, Lenovo showed off new ThinkPads, and other mobile devices were in abundance, but as I walked the eight huge halls, I couldn’t help but notice the heavy emphasis on infrastructure.

5G, for example, is real now—but it’s far from everywhere. Telecom providers have to figure out how to profitably build out the networks necessary to support it. The whole industry must solve the problems of delivering 5G at huge scale, handle the traffic increases it will bring, switch and route the data, and ultimately make sure the end devices can take full advantage of that data. Management and security remain vital whenever data is flying around, so those softer pieces of infrastructure also matter greatly.

Inevitably and always, to know if we as an industry are meeting these challenges, we must measure performance—both in the raw speed sense and in the broader sense of the word. Are we seeing the full bandwidth we expect? Are devices handling the data properly and at speed? Where’s the bottleneck now? Are we delivering on the schedules we promised? Questions such as these are key concerns in every tech cycle—and some of them are exactly what the XPRTs focus on.

As we improve our infrastructure, we hope to see the benefits at a personal level. When you’re using a device—whether it’s a smart watch, a mobile phone, or a laptop—you need it to do its job well, respond to you quickly, and show you what you want when you want it. When your device makes you wait, it can be helpful to know if the bandwidth feeding data to the device is the bottleneck or if the device simply can’t keep up with the flow of data it’s receiving. The XPRTs can help you figure out what’s going on, and they will continue to be useful and important as the tech cycle spins on. If history is our guide, the infrastructure focus of MWC23 will lead to greater capabilities that require even better devices down the line. We look forward to testing them.

Posted in 5G, benchmark, Benchmark metrics, BenchmarkXPRT, Future of performance evaluation, Laptops, Mobile devices, Mobile World Congress, Performance benchmarking, Phones, Trade Shows | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Comparing the performance of popular browsers with WebXPRT 4

Justin Greene
By Justin Greene
on February 2, 2023

If you’ve been reading the XPRT blog for a while, you know that we occasionally like to revisit a series of in-house WebXPRT comparison tests to see if recent updates have changed the performance rankings of popular web browsers. We published our most recent comparison last April, when we used WebXPRT 4 to compare the performance of five browsers on the same system.

For this round of tests, we used a Dell XPS 13 7930, which features an Intel Core i3-10110U processor and 4 GB of RAM, running Windows 11 Home updated to version 22H2 (22621.1105). We installed all current Windows updates, and updated each of the browsers under test: Brave, Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge, Mozilla Firefox, and Opera.

After the update process completed, we turned off updates to prevent them from interfering with test runs. We ran WebXPRT 4 three times on each of the five browsers. The score we post for each browser is the median of the three test runs.

In our last round of tests, Edge was the clear winner, with a 2.2 percent performance advantage over Chrome. Firefox came in last, about 3 percent slower than Opera, which was in the middle of the pack. With updated versions of the browsers, the only change in rank order was that Brave moved into a tie with Opera.

While the rank order from this round of tests was very similar to the previous round, we did observe two clear performance trends: (1) the range between high and low scores was tighter, dropping from a difference of 7.8 percent to 4.3 percent, and (2) every browser demonstrated improved performance. The chart below illustrates both trends. Firefox showed the single largest score improvement at 7.8 percent, but the performance jump for each browser was considerable.

Do these results mean that Microsoft Edge will always provide a speedier web experience, or Firefox will always be slower than the others? Not necessarily. It’s true that a device with a higher WebXPRT score will probably feel faster during daily web activities than one with a much lower score, but your experience depends in part on the types of things you do on the web, along with your system’s privacy settings, memory load, ecosystem integration, extension activity, and web app capabilities.

In addition, browser speed can noticeably increase or decrease after an update, and OS-specific optimizations can affect performance, such as with Edge on Windows 11 and Chrome on Chrome OS. All these variables are important to keep in mind when considering how WebXPRT results translate to your everyday experience.

Have you used WebXPRT to compare browser performance on the same system? Let us know how it turned out!

Justin

Posted in benchmark, Benchmark metrics, BenchmarkXPRT, Brave, Browser-based benchmarks, Chrome OS, Chromium, Cross-platform benchmarks, Firefox, Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge, Mozilla, Opera, Performance benchmarking, results, WebXPRT, WebXPRT 4 | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , |

CES 2023: Adapting to changing realities

Justin Greene
By Justin Greene
on January 6, 2023

The last time the XPRTs attended the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas was in January 2020, shortly before shutdowns due to the global pandemic began. More than 171,000 people attended that year’s show, the 2021 show was totally virtual, and CES shortened the 2022 show after many exhibitors and media pulled out during the Omicron surge. While some aspects of the event are returning to normal this year, about one-third of the typically jam-packed Las Vegas Convention Center space is empty, and only about 100,000 people are likely to attend. Nevertheless, the show is still enormous and full of fascinating new technology.

Just one day into the show, I’ve already noticed some interesting changes in the virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) areas since I last attended in 2020. One change is a significant expansion in the sensory capabilities of VR equipment. For a long time, VR technologies have focused almost solely on visual and audio input technology and the graphics-rendering capabilities necessary for lag-free, immersive experiences. In 2020, I saw companies working on various types of haptic feedback gear, including full-body suits, that pushed the boundaries of VR beyond sight and sound. Now, several companies are demonstrating significant progress in “real-feel touch” technologies for VR. One such company is HaptX, which is developing a set of gloves (see the picture below) that pump air through “microfluidic actuators” so that users can feel the size and shape of virtual objects they interact with in a VR environment. While we often think of VR being used for gaming and entertainment, advances in realistic, multi-sensory capabilities can lead to VR becoming a valuable tool for all kinds of industrial and professional training applications.

A show attendee tries out HaptX gear.

Another change I’ve noticed is how AR seems poised to move from demos to everyday life by means of integration with all types of smartphone apps. I enjoyed speaking with a representative from a Korean AR company called Arbeon. Arbeon is developing an app that will allow users to point their phone’s camera at an object (a wine bottle in the picture below), and see an array of customizable, interactive AR animations surrounding the object. You’ll be able to find product info, see and leave feedback similar to “likes” and reviews, attach emojis, tag friends, and even purchase the product, all from your phone’s AR-enhanced camera and screen. It’s an interesting concept with limitless applications. While VR is here to stay and getting better all the time, I personally think that AR will become much more integrated into everyday life in the coming years. I also think AR apps for phones will allow the technology to take off more quickly in the near term than clunkier options like AR eyeglasses.

The large screen displays how Arbeon’s AR phone app interacts with objects like a wine bottle.

Of course, thinking about AR has led me to wonder if we’ll be able to incorporate AR-related workloads into future XPRTs. As new technologies place new and unprecedented levels of processing demand on our computing hardware, the need for objective performance evaluation will continue. Providing reliable, objective performance data is why the XPRTs exist, and planning for the future of the XPRTs is why we’re at CES 2023. If you have any thoughts about how the XPRTs can help to evaluate new technologies, we’d love to hear from you!

Justin

Posted in AR, Augmented reality, Benchmarking, CES, Consumer Electronics Show, Future of performance evaluation, graphics, Las Vegas, Performance benchmarking, Trade Shows, Virtual reality, VR Demo | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , |

We want your thoughts about experimental WebXPRT 4 workloads

Justin Greene
By Justin Greene
on December 8, 2022

Two weeks ago, we discussed how users can automate WebXPRT 4 testing by appending several parameters and values to the benchmark’s URL. One of these lets you enable any available experimental workloads during the test run. While we don’t currently offer any experimental workloads for WebXPRT 4, we are seeking suggestions for possible future workload scenarios, or specific web technologies that you’d like to be able to test with an experimental workload.

The main purpose of optional, experimental workloads would be to test cutting-edge browser technologies or new use cases, even if the experimental workload doesn’t work on all browsers or devices. The individual scores for the experimental workloads would stand alone, and would not factor in the WebXPRT 4 overall score. WebXPRT 4 testers would be able to run the experimental workloads one of two ways: by adjusting a value in the WebXPRT 4 automation scripts, as mentioned above, or by manually selecting them on the benchmark’s home screen.

Testers would benefit from experimental workloads by learning how well certain browsers or systems handle new tasks (e.g., new web apps or AI capabilities). We would benefit from fielding workloads for large-scale testing and user feedback before we commit to including them as core WebXPRT workloads.

Do you have any general thoughts about experimental workloads for browser performance testing, or any specific workloads that you’d like us to consider? Please let us know.

Justin

Posted in AI, Automation, benchmark, Benchmark metrics, Benchmarking, BenchmarkXPRT, Browser-based benchmarks, Collaborative benchmark development, Cross-platform benchmarks, Future of performance evaluation, Performance benchmarking, WebXPRT, WebXPRT 4, What makes a good benchmark? | Tagged , , , , , , , , |

Check out the other XPRTs:

Forgot your password?
© Principled Technologies, Inc. 2024   |   Privacy policy

Cookie Notice: Our website uses cookies to deliver a smooth experience by storing logins and saving user information. By continuing to use our site, you agree with our usage of cookies as our privacy policy outlines.

x