1. #1
    Ext JS Premium Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    526
    Vote Rating
    29
    MrSparks has a spectacular aura about MrSparks has a spectacular aura about

      0  

    Default IE Performance / Browser Benchmarks

    IE Performance / Browser Benchmarks


    My Benchmark Update for 4.1 Pr1

    Big improvement over the initial 4.0.0 release. (Well done Sencha Dev!)

    IE8 : There still quite a way to go on IE8, thats currently 2.5 times slower under 4.1 pr1 than it was under 3.3.1

    Chrome : Approximately 0.7 times slower under 4.1 pr1 than it was under 3.3.1

    FF : Good news here, running approximately 0.7 times faster under 4.1 pr1 than it was under 3.3.1

    Opera : Approximately 0.2 times slower under 4.1 pr1 than it was under 3.3.1

    Here's a break down of the numbers. (image attached)

    Benchmarks were measured against "Themes Example"

    Best Mr Sparks
    Attached Images

  2. #2
    Sencha - Ext JS Dev Team dongryphon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    1,403
    Vote Rating
    147
    dongryphon is a splendid one to behold dongryphon is a splendid one to behold dongryphon is a splendid one to behold dongryphon is a splendid one to behold dongryphon is a splendid one to behold dongryphon is a splendid one to behold dongryphon is a splendid one to behold

      0  

    Default


    I assume the numbers are in seconds?

    The machines on which we are testing put Themes between 2 and 2.4 seconds for 4.1 and 2x+ that for 4.0.7. Curious what you are using hardware-wise. We did experiment at one point with VM's but found them unreliable for benchmark testing and have since purchased several real machines (one for each IE version)
    Don Griffin
    Engineering Manager - Frameworks (Ext JS / Sencha Touch)

    Check the docs. Learn how to (properly) report a framework issue and a Sencha Cmd issue

    "Use the source, Luke!"

  3. #3
    Ext JS Premium Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    526
    Vote Rating
    29
    MrSparks has a spectacular aura about MrSparks has a spectacular aura about

      0  

    Default


    Quote Originally Posted by dongryphon View Post
    I assume the numbers are in seconds?

    The machines on which we are testing put Themes between 2 and 2.4 seconds for 4.1 and 2x+ that for 4.0.7. Curious what you are using hardware-wise. We did experiment at one point with VM's but found them unreliable for benchmark testing and have since purchased several real machines (one for each IE version)

    @ dongryphon

    Figures are in seconds.

    My system (Physical Machine) specs are:

    Intel Pentium 4 - 3.2GHz
    4GB Dual DDR - CL2.5
    300GB 10K SATA - Raid 1
    NVidia GeForce 7800 GS

    Agree VM’s are a little unreliable if the host has other workloads outside of the benchmarks tests.

    Happy run profile/test/provide as much info as you need.

  4. #4
    Ext JS Premium Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    526
    Vote Rating
    29
    MrSparks has a spectacular aura about MrSparks has a spectacular aura about

      0  

    Default


    For comparisons sake, I've just ran 4.1 on what I would consider to be a high spec box. i.e. higher than what most business users would have access to.

    2x Intel Xeon 2.5Ghz (Dual Core)
    4GB DDR3 - CL3
    NVIDIA Quadro VNS 290
    300GB 10k SATA - Raid 1

    4.1 Themes under IE 8 averages out at 4.25 Seconds
    3.3.1 Themes under IE 8 averages out at 1.76 Seconds

    Still seeing approximately 2.4 x speed reduction under 4.1

  5. #5
    Ext JS Premium Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    378
    Vote Rating
    38
    rich02818 is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    Don, on the same dev machines, what are the times for 3.3.4? Bettering that time is the actual target for business usefulness.

  6. #6
    Sencha Premium Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    157
    Vote Rating
    9
    ZachG will become famous soon enough

      0  

    Default


    Quote Originally Posted by dongryphon View Post
    We did experiment at one point with VM's but found them unreliable for benchmark testing and have since purchased several real machines (one for each IE version)
    How are they compared to what you see in IE Tester? That's what we use and it's a pretty close approximation.

  7. #7
    Sencha User
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    84
    Vote Rating
    2
    saprot is on a distinguished road

      0  

    Default


    +1

    Quote Originally Posted by rich02818 View Post
    Don, on the same dev machines, what are the times for 3.3.4? Bettering that time is the actual target for business usefulness.

  8. #8
    Sencha - Community Support Team edspencer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Palo Alto, California
    Posts
    1,939
    Vote Rating
    9
    edspencer is a jewel in the rough edspencer is a jewel in the rough edspencer is a jewel in the rough

      0  

    Default


    I think we can share that (not in the office right now so I don't have access) but be aware it's not quite apples for apples (there are more components in the 4.x version).
    Ext JS Senior Software Architect
    Personal Blog: http://edspencer.net
    Twitter: http://twitter.com/edspencer
    Github: http://github.com/edspencer

  9. #9
    Ext JS Premium Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    526
    Vote Rating
    29
    MrSparks has a spectacular aura about MrSparks has a spectacular aura about

      0  

    Default


    Quote Originally Posted by edspencer View Post
    I think we can share that (not in the office right now so I don't have access) but be aware it's not quite apples for apples (there are more components in the 4.x version).
    I can't see any more components on the themes example under 4.1 pr1, so as another I've compared the most basic of the Sencha examples that could be classified an "app" on IE 8 and Chrome 15

    IE 8
    4.1 Complex layout under IE 8 averages out at 2.453 Seconds
    3.3.1 Complex layout IE 8 averages out at 0.576 Seconds

    Chrome 15
    4.1 Complex layout under Chrome averages out at 0.965 Seconds
    3.3.1 Complex layout Chrome averages out at 0.385 Seconds

    Ok now an "ultra simple" comparison using the Sencha “Absolute Layout with Forms” example.

    IE 8
    4.1 Absolute Layout with Forms under IE 8 averages out at 1.52 Seconds
    3.3.1 Absolute Layout with Forms IE 8 averages out at 0.45 Seconds

    Chrome 15
    4.1 Absolute Layout with Forms under Chrome averages out at 0.42 Seconds
    3.3.1 Absolute Layout with Forms Chrome averages out at 0.333 Seconds

    I think there something more "fundamental" in 4.1 that’s causing the performance issues. Apples for Apples, 4.1 pr1 (IE or Chrome) isn’t performing as well as it did under 3.3.1
    Last edited by MrSparks; 30 Oct 2011 at 4:50 AM. Reason: Corrected IE benchmark time

  10. #10
    Ext JS Premium Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    526
    Vote Rating
    29
    MrSparks has a spectacular aura about MrSparks has a spectacular aura about

      0  

    Default


    Possible cause if perf issues.

    I've just been reviewing the Senchacon 2010 layout video. Jamie talks about an issue spotted in 3.x that was causing a huge overhead.

    See 23:00 onwards
    http://vimeo.com/17917111

    Specifically Jamie talks about the following erroneous function.
    Code:
    // private  ==> used by Fx
            adjustWidth : function(width) {
                var me = this;
                var isNum = (typeof width == "number");
                if(isNum && me.autoBoxAdjust && !me.isBorderBox()){
                   width -= (me.getBorderWidth("lr") + me.getPadding("lr"));
                }
                return (isNum && width < 0) ? 0 : width;
            }
    Looking through the 4.1 pr1 release this function is commented out on debug with comments, however on debug and ext-all its not commented out. Could be nothing but thought it was worth a mention.