Category: WebXPRT

Rebalancing our portfolio

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? |

How we do it

By Eric Hale

on September 15, 2016

In the modern world, we’re awash in statistics and it’s interesting how they sometimes contradict each other. In this season, polls are an obvious example. They seldom agree and sometimes, as in the case of Brexit, they can be spectacularly wrong.

The real world is complicated and there are many ways to look at the data. An approach can be valid for certain cases, but less so for others. This is why it’s so important to explain your methods and calculations.

We’ve talked before about the statistics we use in the XPRTs. There are a set of white papers that describe how the tests work and how we perform the calculations. If you’re interested, a great place to start is the WebXPRT 2013 results calculation and confidence interval white paper, which describes the statistics in detail and links to a spreadsheet with a detailed example.

Any methodology can be improved, so if you have any ideas, let us know!

Eric

Posted in WebXPRT, WebXPRT 2013, WebXPRT 2013 results, White papers |

A Chrome-plated example

By Eric Hale

on September 1, 2016

A couple of weeks ago, we talked about how benchmarks have to evolve to keep up with the changing ways people use their devices. One area where we are expecting a lot of change in the next few months is Chromebooks.

These web-based devices have become very popular, even outselling Macs for the first time in Q1 of this year. Chromebooks run Google Apps and a variety of third-party Chrome apps that also run on Windows, Mac, and Linux systems.

Back in May, Google announced that Android apps would be coming to Chromebooks. This exciting development will bring a lot more applications to the platform. Now, Google has announced that they will be “moving away” from the Chrome apps platform and will be phasing out Chrome app support on other platforms within the next two years.

Clearly, the uses of Chromebooks are likely to change a lot in coming months. Interestingly, part of the rationale Google gives for this decision is the development of powerful new Web APIs, which will have implications for WebXPRT as well.

As we’ve said before, we’ll be watching and adapting as the applications change.

Eric

Posted in Application-based benchmarks, Benchmarking, Chrome OS, Future of performance evaluation, Google, WebXPRT |

Apples to apples?

By Eric Hale

on August 25, 2016

PCMag published a great review of the Opera browser this week. In addition to looking at the many features Opera offers, the review included performance data from multiple benchmarks, which look at areas such as hardware graphics acceleration, WebGL performance, memory consumption, and battery life.

Three of the benchmarks have a significant, though not exclusive, focus on JavaScript performance: Google Octane 2.0, JetStream 1.1, and WebXPRT 2015. The three benchmarks did not rank the browsers the same way, and in the past, we‘ve discussed some of the reasons why this happens. In addition to the difference in tests, there are also sometimes differences in approaches that are worth considering.

For example, consider the test descriptions for JetStream 1.1. You’ll immediately notice that the tests are much lower-level tests than the ones in WebXPRT. However, consider these phrases from a few of the test descriptions:

code-first-load “…This test attempts to defeat the browser’s caching capabilities…”
splay-latency “Tests the worst-case performance…”
zlib “…modified to restrict code caching opportunities…”

While the XPRTs test typical performance for higher level applications, the tests in JetStream are tweaked to stress devices in very specific ways, some of which are not typical. The information these tests provide can be very useful for engineers and developers, but may not be as meaningful to the typical user.

I have to stress that both approaches are valid, but they are doing somewhat different things. There’s a cliché about comparing apples to apples, but not all apples are the same. If you’re making a pie, a Granny Smith would be a good choice, but for snacking, you might be better off with a Red Delicious. Knowing a benchmark’s purpose will help you find the results that are most meaningful to you.

Eric

Posted in Benchmark metrics, Browser-based benchmarks, JavaScript, Performance benchmarking, WebGL, WebXPRT, What makes a good benchmark? |

An anniversary update

By Justin Greene

on July 21, 2016

The Windows 10 Anniversary Update release is scheduled for August 2, and we’ve been running the XPRTs on the Windows Insider preview builds. While we can’t publish performance data from developer builds, we’re happy to say that WebXPRT and TouchXPRT run well on the Anniversary Update.

The story for HDXPRT 2014 is more complicated. Back in May, we reported that it would not run on more recent versions of Windows. However, we’ve identified steps that enable HDXPRT to run on the current stable Windows 10 build, as well as the latest Anniversary Update preview. It’s running well, but it’s possible that testers will encounter other issues as Microsoft releases new builds.

We have included the steps below. We’re considering an update to HDXPRT 2014 that will incorporate these changes. If you have any comments or suggestions related to HDXPRT, please let us know.

Justin

Summary
In addition to the normal system configuration requirements for HDXPRT, testers must also overwrite HDXPRT’s CPU-Z files with newer versions and change the default browser from Microsoft Edge to Internet Explorer. After configuring the system for HDXPRT testing, testers may encounter errors related to administrative privileges when attempting to launch Microsoft Edge. Returning User Account Control settings to their default pre-configuration state resolves the problem.

Process
1. Install the latest version of CPU-Z.
      a. Open any browser and download the latest version of CPU-Z for Windows
          (currently CPU-Z 1.76).
      b. Install CPU-Z on the system, using the default settings and installation path.
2. Install the HDXPRT 2014 benchmark using the default installation process. Reboot the system
    after installation.
3. Copy all the files from the C:\Program Files\CPUID\CPU-Z\ directory to the C:\Program Files
    (x86)\HDXPRT\bin, and overwrite the existing CPU-Z files.
4. Change the default browser from Microsoft Edge to Internet Explorer:
      a. Open the Windows Settings app and select System/Default apps.
      b. Under Web browser, click the Edge icon, and select Internet Explorer from the list.
      c. At the Before you switch window, click Switch anyway.
      d. Close the Settings app.
5. Adjust SmartScreen and security settings:
      a. Open Internet Explorer.
      b. Go to Settings/Internet options/Security, and make the following changes for the Internet
           and Trusted Sites zones:
            i. Select Custom Level.
            ii. Disable SmartScreen Filter.
            iii. Under Launching applications and unsafe files, click Enable (not Secure).
            iv. Click OK, and click Apply. If a warning message appears, click Yes.
6. Restart the system.
7. Open HDXPRT and run the benchmark normally.

If, after installing HDXPRT, you encounter an error related to administrative permissions when trying to open Microsoft Edge, return User Account Controls to the default setting, and restart the system. The default User Account Control setting is the third notch from the bottom: “Notify me only when apps try to makes changes to my computer.”

Posted in BenchmarkXPRT development community, Collaborative benchmark development, HDXPRT, HDXPRT 2014, Performance benchmarking, TouchXPRT, Uncategorized, WebXPRT 2015, Windows 10, Windows 10 Anniversary Update |

Getting it right

By Eric Hale

on June 2, 2016

Back in April Bill announced that we are working on a cross-platform benchmark. We asked for your thoughts and comments, and you’ve been great! We really appreciate all the great ideas.

We’ve been using code from MobileXPRT and TouchXPRT as the basis for some experiments. In his post, Bill talked about the difficulty of porting applications. However, even though we have expertise in porting applications, it’s proving more difficult than we originally thought. Benchmarks are held to a higher standard than most applications. It’s not enough for the code to run reliably and efficiently, it must compare the different platforms fairly.

One thing we know for sure: getting it right is going to take a while. However, we owe it to you to make sure that the benchmark is reliable and fair on all platforms it supports. We will, of course, keep you informed as things progress.

In the meantime, keep sending your ideas!
Eric

Posted in Android, Application-based benchmarks, Benchmark metrics, Benchmarking, BenchmarkXPRT development community, Collaborative benchmark development, Future of performance evaluation, iOS, MobileXPRT, Performance benchmarking, TouchXPRT, WebXPRT, Windows 10 |

Category: WebXPRT

Rebalancing our portfolio

How we do it

A Chrome-plated example

Apples to apples?

An anniversary update

Getting it right

Check out the other XPRTs: