Category: browser performance

An update on the issue with WebXPRT 4 in iOS 17

on September 28, 2023

Recently, we informed XPRT blog readers that after updating Apple iPhones and iPads to iOS and iPadOS 17, respectively, we began to see WebXPRT 4 failures on those devices. In the Safari and Google Chrome browsers, WebXPRT 4 test runs were freezing while running the Encrypt Notes and OCR Scan workload. We were able to replicate the issue on every iOS/iPadOS 17 device we tested, and we also confirmed that WebXPRT 4 continues to run without issues on other non-iOS platforms.

Our team has been investigating the situation, and we’ve made some progress. It’s clear that the failed test runs are getting stuck when the WASM-based Tesseract.js Optical Character Recognition (OCR) engine attempts to scan a shopping receipt. During our research, we’ve discovered an issue when the current Tesseract.js engine runs on iOS 17. This issue is broader than WebXPRT 4, and the Tesseract team is aware of the problem. Future versions of iOS 17 or later versions of Tesseract.js may include fixes for the problem, but unfortunately, we don’t know whether or when a fix will be available.

We’re currently investigating possible workarounds for the problem, and hope to be able to start testing soon. Our goal is that any solution we implement will not significantly affect existing WebXPRT 4 scores on non-iOS 17 platforms.

We will continue to share any substantive progress updates with readers here in the blog. Once again, we apologize for any inconvenience this issue causes for WebXPRT 4 users, and we appreciate your patience while we work toward a solution. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact us!

Justin

Posted in Apple, benchmark, BenchmarkXPRT, browser performance, Browser-based benchmarks, Cross-platform benchmarks, Google Chrome, iOS, Performance benchmarking, Phones, Safari, Tablets, WebXPRT, WebXPRT 4 | Tagged Apple, benchmark metrics, benchmarks, Chrome, iOS, iOS 17, OCR, optical character recognition, Safari, Tesseract, WASM, WebXPRT, WebXPRT 4 |

Investigating a possible issue with WebXPRT 4 in iOS 17

By Justin Greene

on September 14, 2023

Yesterday, Apple revealed the iPhone 15 and iPhone 15 Pro at its annual fall event, along with a new version of the iOS mobile operating system (iOS 17). The official iOS 17 launch will take place on September 18^th, but before then, users of newer iPhones can install the OS via the Apple Beta Software Program.

Today, a tech journalist informed us that during their testing of iPhone 15 and iPhone 15 Pro with iOS 17 Beta models, WebXPRT 4 has been freezing while running the Encrypt Notes and OCR Scan workload in the Safari 17 browser. Here in the lab, we were able to immediately replicate the issue on an iPhone 12 Pro with iOS 17 Beta model.

Our initial troubleshooting confirmed that WebXPRT 3 successfully runs to completion on iOS 17 Beta, so it appears that the problem is specific to WebXPRT 4. We also confirmed that WebXPRT 4 freezes at the same place when running in the Google Chrome browser on iOS 17 Beta, so we know that the problem does not occur only in Safari.

We’re currently investigating the issue, and will publish our findings here in the blog as soon as we feel confident that we’ve identified both the root cause and a workable solution, if a solution is necessary. One reason a solution would not be necessary is that the issue is a bug on the iOS 17 Beta side that Apple will resolve before the official launch.

We apologize for any inconvenience this issue might cause for tech reviewers and iPhone users, and we appreciate your patience while we figure out what’s going on. If you have any questions about WebXPRT 4, please don’t hesitate to ask!

Justin

Posted in Apple, benchmark, browser performance, Browser-based benchmarks, Cross-platform benchmarks, Google Chrome, iOS, iPhone, Performance benchmarking, Phones, Safari, WebXPRT, WebXPRT 3, WebXPRT 4 | Tagged Apple, browser benchmark, browsers, Chrome, iOS, iOS 17, iPhone, iPhone 15, iPhone 15 Pro, Safari, WebXPRT, WebXPRT 3, WebXPRT 4 |

A note about CrXPRT 2

By Justin Greene

on August 31, 2023

Recent visitors to CrXPRT.com may have seen a notice that encourages visitors to use WebXPRT 4 instead of CrXPRT 2 for performance testing on high-end Chromebooks. The notice reads as follows:

NOTE: Chromebook technology has progressed rapidly since we released CrXPRT 2, and we’ve received reports that some CrXPRT 2 workloads may not stress top-bin Chromebook processors enough to give the necessary accuracy for users to compare their performance. So, for the latest test to compare the performance of high-end Chromebooks, we recommend using WebXPRT 4.

We made this recommendation because of the evident limitations of the CrXPRT 2 performance workloads when testing newer high-end hardware. CrXPRT 2 itself is not that old (2020), but when we created the CrXPRT 2 performance workloads, we started with a core framework of CrXPRT 2015 performance workloads. In a similar way, we built the CrXPRT 2015 workloads on a foundation of WebXPRT 2015 workloads. At the time, the harness and workload structures we used to ensure WebXPRT 2015’s cross-browser capabilities provided an excellent foundation that we could adapt for our new ChromeOS benchmark. Consequently, CrXPRT 2 is a close developmental descendant of WebXPRT 2015. Some of the legacy WebXPRT 2015/CrXPRT 2 workloads do not stress current high-end processors—a limitation that prevents effective performance testing differentiation—nor do they engage the latest web technologies.

In the past, the Chromebook market skewed heavily toward low-cost devices with down-bin, inexpensive processors, making this limitation less of an issue. Now, however, more Chromebooks offer top-bin processors on par with traditional laptops and workstations. Because of the limitations of the CrXPRT 2 workloads, we now recommend WebXPRT 4 for both cross-browser and ChromeOS performance testing on the latest high-end Chromebooks. WebXPRT 4 includes updated test content, newer JavaScript tools and libraries, modern WebAssembly workloads, and additional Web Workers tasks that cover a wide range of performance requirements.

While CrXPRT 2 continues to function as a capable performance and battery life comparison test for many ChromeOS devices, WebXPRT 4 is a more appropriate tool to use with new high-end devices. If you haven’t yet used WebXPRT 4 for Chromebook comparison testing, we encourage you to give it a try!

If you have any questions or concerns about CrXPRT 2 or WebXPRT 4, please don’t hesitate to ask!

Justin

Posted in battery life, benchmark, Benchmark metrics, Benchmarking, browser performance, Chrome OS, Chromebooks, CrXPRT, Google Chrome, History of benchmarking, HTML5, JavaScript, Laptops, Performance benchmarking, WebAssembly, WebXPRT, WebXPRT 2015, WebXPRT 4 | Tagged battery life, benchmark, Chrome, Chrome OS, Chromebooks, CrXPRT, CrXPRT 2, CrXPRT 2015, WebXPRT, WebXPRT 2015, WebXPRT 4 |

Check out the WebXPRT 4 results viewer

By Justin Greene

on July 6, 2023

New visitors to our site may not be aware of the WebXPRT 4 results viewer and how to use it. The viewer provides WebXPRT 4 users with an interactive, information-packed way to browse test results that is not available for earlier versions of the benchmark. With the viewer, users can explore all of the PT-curated results that we’ve published on WebXPRT.com, find more detailed information about those results, and compare results from different devices. The viewer currently displays over 460 results, and we add new entries each week.

The screenshot below shows the tool’s default display. Each vertical bar in the graph represents the overall score of a single test result, with bars arranged from lowest to highest. To view a single result in detail, the user hovers over a bar until it turns white and a small popup window displays the basic details of the result. If the user clicks to select the highlighted bar, the bar turns dark blue, and the dark blue banner at the bottom of the viewer displays additional details about that result.

In the example above, the banner shows the overall score (227), the score’s percentile rank (66^th) among the scores in the current display, the name of the test device, and basic hardware disclosure information. If the source of the result is PT, users can click the Run info button to see the run’s individual workload scores. If the source is an external publisher, users can click the Source link to navigate to the original site.

The viewer includes a drop-down menu that lets users quickly filter results by major device type categories, and a tab that with additional filtering options, such as browser type, processor vendor, and result source. The screenshot below shows the viewer after I used the device type drop-down filter to select only desktops.

The screenshot below shows the viewer as I use the filter tab to explore additional filter options, such processor vendor.

The viewer also lets users pin multiple specific runs, which is helpful for making side-by-side comparisons. The screenshot below shows the viewer after I pinned four runs and viewed them on the Pinned runs screen.

The screenshot below shows the viewer after I clicked the Compare runs button. The overall and individual workload scores of the pinned runs appear in a table.

We’re excited about the WebXPRT 4 results viewer, and we want to hear your feedback. Are there features you’d really like to see, or ways we can improve the viewer? Please let us know, and send us your latest test results!

Justin

Posted in benchmark, Benchmark metrics, Benchmarking, BenchmarkXPRT, browser performance, Browser-based benchmarks, Cross-platform benchmarks, Performance benchmarking, results, results submission, WebXPRT, WebXPRT 4 | Tagged benchmark, BenchmarkXPRT, browser benchmark, browser performance, cross-platform, results, results submission, WebXPRT, WebXPRT 4 |

The role of potential WebXPRT 4 auxiliary workloads

By Justin Greene

on June 22, 2023

As we mentioned in our most recent blog post, we’re seeking suggestions for ways to improve WebXPRT 4. We’re open to the prospect of adding both non-workload features and new auxiliary tests, e.g., a battery life or WebGPU-based graphics test scenario.

To prevent any confusion among WebXPRT 4 testers, we want to reiterate that any auxiliary workloads we might add will not affect existing WebXPRT 4 subtest or overall scores in any way. Auxiliary tests would be experimental or targeted workloads that run separately from the main test and produce their own scores. Current and future WebXPRT 4 results will be comparable to one another, so users who’ve already built a database of WebXPRT 4 scores will not have to retest their devices. Any new tests will be add-ons that allow us to continue expanding the rapidly growing body of published WebXPRT 4 test results while making the benchmark even more valuable to users overall.

If you have any thoughts about potential browser performance workloads, or any specific web technologies that you’d like to test, please let us know.

Justin

Posted in battery life, Benchmarking, browser performance, Browser-based benchmarks, Cross-platform benchmarks, results, WebGPU, WebXPRT, WebXPRT 4 | Tagged battery life, benchmarks, BenchmarkXPRT, BenchmarkXPRT Development Community, browser benchmark, browser performance, cross-platform, WebGPU, WebXPRT, WebXPRT 4 |

Category: browser performance

An update on the issue with WebXPRT 4 in iOS 17

Investigating a possible issue with WebXPRT 4 in iOS 17

A note about CrXPRT 2

Check out the WebXPRT 4 results viewer

The role of potential WebXPRT 4 auxiliary workloads

Check out the other XPRTs: