Category: HDXPRT

TouchXPRT’s future

on February 2, 2017

If you’ve been following the blog, you know that we’ve been reviewing each part of the XPRT portfolio. If you missed our discussions of HDXPRT, BatteryXPRT, WebXPRT, and CrXPRT, we encourage you to check them out and send us any thoughts you may have. This week, we continue that series by discussing the state of TouchXPRT and what we see down the road for it in 2017.

We released TouchXPRT 2016, an app for evaluating the performance of Windows 10 and Windows 10 Mobile devices, last February. We built the app by porting TouchXPRT 2014 performance workloads to the new Universal Windows App format, which allows a single app package to run on PCs, phones, tablets, and even consoles.

TouchXPRT 2016 installation is quick and easy, and the test completes in under 15 minutes on most devices. The app runs tests based on five everyday tasks (Beautify Photos, Blend Photos, Convert Videos for Sharing, Create Music Podcast, and Create Slideshow from Photos). It measures how long your device takes to complete each task, produces results for each scenario, and gives you an overall score.

As we think about the path forward for TouchXPRT, we’re aware that many expect 2017 to be a year of significant change in the Windows world, with two updates scheduled for release. Microsoft is slated to release the Windows 10 Creators Update (Build 1704) in April, and a subsequent version of Windows codenamed Redstone 3 may arrive this fall. Many tech observers believe that the Creators Update will introduce new creativity and gaming features, along with a UI upgrade named Project NEON. Major foundational shifts in the OS’s structure are more likely to appear with Redstone 3. At this point, quite a lot is still up in the air, but we’ll be following developments closely.

As we learn more about upcoming changes, we’ll have the opportunity to reevaluate TouchXPRT workloads and determine the best way to incorporate new technologies. Virtual reality, 3D, and 4K are especially exciting, but it’s too soon to know how we might incorporate them in a future version of TouchXPRT.

Because TouchXPRT 2016 continues to run well on a wide range of Windows 10 devices, we think it’s best to keep supporting the current version until we get a better idea of what’s in store for Windows.

If you have any thoughts on the future of Windows performance testing, please let us know!

Bill

Posted in BatteryXPRT 2014 for Android, BenchmarkXPRT development community, CrXPRT, Future of performance evaluation, HDXPRT, MobileXPRT, PCs, TouchXPRT, TouchXPRT 2016, TouchXPRT development process, TouchXPRT release cycle, WebXPRT 2017, Windows 10 |

WebXPRT in 2017

By Bill Catchings

on December 8, 2016

Over the last few weeks, we’ve discussed the future of HDXPRT and BatteryXPRT. This week, we’re discussing what’s in store for WebXPRT in 2017.

WebXPRT is our most popular tool. Manufacturers, developers, consumers, and media outlets in more than 350 cities and 57 countries have run WebXPRT over 113,000 times to date. The benchmark runs quickly and simply in most browsers and produces easy-to-understand results that are useful for comparing web browsing performance across a wide variety of devices and browsers. People love the fact that WebXPRT runs on almost any platform that has a web browser, from PCs to phones to game consoles.

More people are using WebXPRT in more places and in more ways than ever before. It’s an unquestioned success, but we think this is a good time to make it even better by beginning work on WebXPRT 2017. Any time change comes to a popular product, there’s a risk that faithful fans will lose the features and functionality they’ve grown to love. Relevant workloads, ease of use, and extensive compatibility have always been the core components of WebXPRT’s success, so we want to reassure users that we’re committed to maintaining all of those in future versions.

Some steps in the WebXPRT 2017 process are straightforward, such as the need to reassess the existing workload lineup and update content to reflect advances in commonly used technologies. Other steps, such as introducing new workloads to test emerging browser technologies, may be tricky to implement, but could offer tremendous value in the months and years ahead.

Are there test scenarios or browser technologies you would like to see in WebXPRT 2017, or tests you think we should get rid of? Please let us know. We want to hear from you and make sure that we’re crafting a performance tool that continues to meet your needs.

Bill

Posted in BatteryXPRT 2014 for Android, Future of performance evaluation, HDXPRT, HTML5, Performance benchmarking, Web-based testing, WebXPRT, WebXPRT 2017 |

Machine learning

By Bill Catchings

on November 23, 2016

A couple months ago I wrote about doing an inventory of our XPRT tools. Part of that is taking a close look at the six existing XPRTs. The first result of that effort was what I recently wrote about HDXPRT. We’re also looking at emerging technology areas where the BenchmarkXPRT Community has expertise that can guide us.

One of the most exciting of these areas is machine learning. It has rapidly gone from interesting theoretical research (they called them “neural nets” back when I was getting my computer science degree) to something we all use whether we realize it or not. Machine learning (or deep learning) is in everything from intelligent home assistants to autonomous automobiles to industrial device monitoring to personalized shopping in retail environments.

The challenge with developing a benchmark for machine learning is that these are still the early days of the technology. In the past, XPRTs have targeted technologies later in the product cycle. We’re wondering how the XPRT model and the members of its community can play a role here.

One possible use of a machine-learning XPRT is with drones, a market that includes many vendors. Consumers, hobbyists, builders, and the companies creating off-the-shelf models could all benefit from tools and techniques that fairly compare drone performance.

The best approach we’ve come up with to define a machine-learning XPRT starts with identifying common areas such as computer vision, natural language processing, and data analytics, and then, within each of those areas, identifying common algorithms such as AlexNet, GoogLeNet, and VGG. We would also look at the commonly used frameworks such as Caffe, Theano, TensorFlow, and CNTK.

The result might differ from an existing XPRT where you simply run a tool and get a result. Instead, it might take the form of sample code and workloads. Or, maybe even one or two executables that could be used in the most common environments.

At this point, our biggest question is, What do you think? Is this an area you’re interested in? If so, what would you like to see a machine-learning XPRT do?

We’re actively engaging with people in these emerging markets to gauge their interest as well. Regardless of the feedback, we’re excited about the possibilities!

Bill

Posted in Collaborative benchmark development, Drones, Future of performance evaluation, HDXPRT, Machine learning |

How do you say that?

By Eric Hale

on November 10, 2016

I recently saw this video, and heard something that I had never imagined: “Next we tested with what I assume is pronounced web-export.” I’ve had people ask if it was an acronym, but I ‘ve never heard it pronounced “export.”

How do we pronounce XPRT? The same way we pronounce “expert.” So, it’s “Benchmark expert,” “Web expert,” “Touch expert,” and so on. CrXPRT is pronounced “C‑R expert” and HDXPRT is pronounced “H‑D‑expert.”

When I was working in Australia, I got teased about my accent quite a bit, and my case-hardened American R was a particular target. So, when I say the letters out loud, is comes out something like “eks‑pee‑arrr‑tee,” (arrr like a pirate would say it) and “expert” is the closest match. This is true for most Americans. However, in many other accents, it’s more like “eks‑pee‑ah‑tee,” and “ex-paht” is much closer to “export.”

Yes, I think way too much about this stuff.

Eric

Posted in BenchmarkXPRT, BenchmarkXPRT development community, CrXPRT, HDXPRT, MobileXPRT, TouchXPRT, WebXPRT |

HDXPRT’s future

By Bill Catchings

on November 3, 2016

While industry pundits have written many words about the death of the PC, Windows PCs are going through a renaissance. No longer do you just choose between a desktop or a laptop in beige or black. There has been an explosion of choices.

Whether you want a super-thin notebook, a tablet, or a two-in-one device, the market has something to offer. Desktop systems can be small devices on your desk, all-in-ones with the PC built into the monitor, or old-style boxes that sit on the floor. You can go with something inexpensive that will be sufficient for many tasks or invest in a super-powerful PC capable of driving today’s latest VR devices. Or you can get a new Microsoft Surface Studio, an example of the new types of devices entering the PC scene.

The current proliferation of PC choices means that tools that help buyers understand the performance differences between systems are more important than they have been in years. Because HDXPRT is one such tool, we expect demand for it to increase.

We have many tasks ahead of us as we prepare for this increased demand. The first is to release a version of HDXPRT 2014 that doesn’t require a patch. We are working on that and should have something ready later this month.

For the other tasks, we need your input. We believe we need to update HDXPRT to reflect the world of high-definition content. It’s tempting to simply change the name to UHDXPRT, but this was our first XPRT and I’m partial to the original name. How about you?

As far as tests, what should a 2017 version of HDXPRT include? We think 4K-related workloads are a must, but aren’t sure whether 4K playback tests are the way to go. What do you think? We need to update other content, such as photo and video resolutions, and replace outdated applications with current versions. Would a VR test would be worthwhile?

Please share your thoughts with us over the coming weeks as we put together a plan for the next version of HDXPRT!

Bill

Posted in Application-based benchmarks, BenchmarkXPRT development community, Collaborative benchmark development, Future of performance evaluation, HDXPRT, HDXPRT development process, Performance benchmarking, What makes a good benchmark?, Windows 10 |

Rebalancing our portfolio

By Bill Catchings

on September 29, 2016

We’ve written recently about the many new ways people are using their devices, the growing breadth of types of devices, and how application environments also are changing. We’ve been thinking a lot about the ways benchmarks need to adapt and what new tests we should be developing.

As part of this process, we’re reviewing the XPRT portfolio. An example we wrote about recently was Google’s statement that they are bringing Android apps to Chrome OS and moving away from Chrome apps. Assuming the plan comes to fruition, it has big implications for CrXPRT, and possibly for WebXPRT as well. Another example is that once upon a time, HDXPRT included video playback tests. The increasing importance of 4K video might mean we should bring them back.

As always, we’re interested in your thoughts. Which tests do you see as the most useful going forward? Which ones do you think might be past their prime? What new areas do you like to see us start to address? Let us know!

Over the coming weeks, we’ll share our conclusions based on these market forces and your feedback. We’re excited about the possibilities and hope you are as well.

Bill

Posted in Android, Application-based benchmarks, BenchmarkXPRT development community, Chrome OS, Collaborative benchmark development, CrXPRT, Future of performance evaluation, HDXPRT, WebXPRT, What makes a good benchmark? |

Category: HDXPRT

TouchXPRT’s future

WebXPRT in 2017

Machine learning

How do you say that?

HDXPRT’s future

Rebalancing our portfolio

Check out the other XPRTs: