Category: Google Chrome

A note about CrXPRT 2

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 |

Comparing the performance of popular browsers with WebXPRT 4

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 Brave, browser, browser benchmark, browser performance, Chrome, Chrome OS, Firefox, Microsoft Edge, Mozilla, Opera, WebXPRT, WebXPRT 4, Windows 11 |

The versatility of XPRT benchmarks

By Justin Greene

on October 13, 2022

We’ve designed each of the XPRT benchmarks to assess the performance of specific types of devices in scenarios that mirror the ways consumers typically use those devices. While most XPRT benchmark users are interested in producing official overall scores, some members of the tech press have been using the XPRTs in unconventional, creative ways.

One example is the use of WebXPRT by Tweakers, a popular tech review site based in The Netherlands. (The site is in Dutch, so the Google Translate extension in Chrome was helpful for me.) As Tweakers uses WebXPRT to evaluate all kinds of consumer hardware, they also measure the sound output of each device. Tweakers then publishes the LAeq metric for each device, giving readers a sense of how loud a system may be, on average, while it performs common browser tasks.

If you’re interested in seeing Tweakers’ use of WebXPRT for sound output testing firsthand, check out their Apple MacBook Pro M2, HP Envy 34 All-in-One, and Samsung Galaxy Book 2 Pro reviews.

Other labs and tech publications have also used the XPRTs in unusual ways such as automating the benchmarks to run during screen burn-in tests or custom battery-life rundowns. If you’ve used any of the XPRT benchmarks in creative ways, please let us know! We are interested in learning more about your tests, and your experiences may provide helpful information that we can share with other XPRT users.

Justin

Posted in Apple, Benchmark metrics, Benchmarking, Browser-based benchmarks, Cross-platform benchmarks, Google Chrome, Performance benchmarking, Web-based testing, WebXPRT, WebXPRT 3, WebXPRT 4 | Tagged Apple, battery life, HP, Netherlands, Samsung, Sound, Tweakers, WebXPRT, WebXPRT 4, XPRTs |

An update on Chrome OS XPRT benchmark development

By Justin Greene

on September 15, 2022

In July, we discussed the Chrome OS team’s decision to end support for Chrome apps, and how that will prevent us from publishing any future fixes or updates for CrXPRT 2. We also announced our goal of beginning development of an all-new Chrome OS XPRT benchmark by the end of this year. While we are actively discussing this benchmark and researching workload technologies and scenarios, we don’t foresee releasing a preview build this year.

The good news is that, in spite of a lack of formal support from the Chrome OS team, the CrXPRT 2 performance and battery life tests currently run without any known issues. We continue to monitor the status of CrXPRT and will inform our blog readers of any significant changes.

If you have any questions about CrXPRT, or ideas about the types of features or workloads you’d like to see in a new Chrome OS benchmark, please let us know!

Justin

Posted in battery life, benchmark, Chrome OS, Chromebooks, Chromium, CrXPRT, Google Chrome, Performance benchmarking | Tagged benchmark, Chrome, Chrome OS, Chromebooks, Chromium, CrXPRT |

XPRT possibilities with ChromeOS Flex

By Justin Greene

on August 25, 2022

Recently, Tom’s Guide published an interesting article about how they used ChromeOS Flex to turn a ten-year-old Apple MacBook Pro into a functioning Chromebook by replacing the laptop’s macOS operating system with ChromeOS. ChromeOS Flex is a free Google tool that allows users to create a bootable USB drive that they can then use to install ChromeOS on a wide variety of hardware platforms that traditionally run other operating systems such as macOS or Windows. Because ChromeOS is a cloud-first, relatively low-overhead operating system, the ChromeOS Flex option could breathe new life into an old laptop that you have lying around.

Never having encountered a MacBook Pro with ChromeOS, we were interested to learn about Tom’s experience running XPRT benchmarks in this new environment. WebXPRT 4, WebXPRT 3, and the CrXPRT 2 performance test apparently ran without any issues, but we have not yet seen a CrXPRT 2 battery life result from a ChromeOS Flex environment. We plan to experiment with this soon.

We were happy to publish the results on our site, and will consider any ChromeOS Flex results we receive for publication. If you submit results from ChromeOS Flex testing, we ask that you use the “Additional information” field in the results submission form to clarify that you ran the tests in a ChromeOS Flex environment. This will prevent any possible confusion when we see a submission that lists a traditional macOS or Windows hardware platform along with a ChromeOS version number.

Do you have experience running CrXPRT or WebXPRT with ChromeOS Flex? We’d love to hear about it!

Justin

Posted in Apple, Battery life, Chrome OS, Chromebooks, CrXPRT, Google Chrome, Laptops, Performance benchmarking, results, results submission, WebXPRT, WebXPRT 4, Windows | Tagged Apple, Chrome, Chrome OS, Chromebooks, ChromeOS Flex, CrXPRT, MacBook, macOS, WebXPRT, Windows |

An update on Chrome OS support for CrXPRT

By Justin Greene

on July 14, 2022

In March, we discussed the Chrome OS team’s plan to end support for Chrome apps in June and instead focus their efforts on Chrome extensions and Progressive Web Apps. After receiving feedback on their published timeline, the Chrome OS team decided to extend Chrome app support for Enterprise and Education account customers through January 2025. Because we publish our Chrome app (CrXPRT) through a private BenchmarkXPRT developer account, and because we have not seen any further updates to the support timeline, we don’t assume that the support extension will apply to CrXPRT.

Since June has come and gone, and the support extension probably does not apply to our account, we do not expect to be able to publish any future fixes or updates for CrXPRT. As of now, and up through Chrome 105, the CrXPRT 2 performance and battery life tests are still working without a hitch. We will continue to run the benchmark on a regular basis to monitor functionality, and we will disclose any future issues here in the blog and on CrXPRT.com. We hope the app will continue to run both performance and battery life tests well into the future. However, given the frequency of Chrome updates, it’s difficult for us to predict how long the benchmark will remain viable.

As we mentioned back in March, we hope to begin development of an all-new Chrome OS XPRT benchmark by the end of this year. We’ll discuss that prospect in more detail in future blog posts, but if you have ideas about the types of features or workloads you’d like to see in a new Chrome OS benchmark, please let us know!

Justin

Posted in Battery life, battery life, benchmark, BenchmarkXPRT, Chrome OS, Chromebooks, Chromium, CrXPRT, Google Chrome | Tagged battery life, benchmark, BenchmarkXPRT, Chrome, Chrome OS, Chrome Web Store, Chromebooks, extensions, Progressive Web Apps |

Category: Google Chrome

A note about CrXPRT 2

Comparing the performance of popular browsers with WebXPRT 4

The versatility of XPRT benchmarks

An update on Chrome OS XPRT benchmark development

XPRT possibilities with ChromeOS Flex

An update on Chrome OS support for CrXPRT

Check out the other XPRTs: