Javascript Performance Thread
-
- Posts: 2230
- Joined: June 25th, 2010, 9:29 am
- Location: Budapest, Hungary
Re: TM and JM Performance Thread
We wont see a performance boost, because the AWFY page uses Firefox builds witch already contain TI.
-
- Posts: 670
- Joined: January 31st, 2005, 5:37 am
- Location: Berlin
- Contact:
Re: TM and JM Performance Thread
WonderCsabo wrote:We wont see a performance boost, because the AWFY page uses Firefox builds witch already contain TI.
http://arewefastyet.com/?a=b&view=regress does, http://arewefastyet.com/ doesn't.
-
- Posts: 50
- Joined: January 28th, 2007, 11:33 am
- Location: Germany
- Contact:
Re: TM and JM Performance Thread
where did u see a boost on http://www.arewefastyet.com/?a=b&view=regress&runs=300 ???
i only see regressions since middle of august
i only see regressions since middle of august
-
- Posts: 895
- Joined: March 14th, 2010, 3:44 am
Re: TM and JM Performance Thread
iwod wrote:Great, next would be to further optimize for V8 benchmarks to wipe the smug face off Chrome.
That will come with the implementation of incremental and generational GC.
-
- Posts: 1030
- Joined: June 28th, 2008, 4:57 am
Re: TM and JM Performance Thread
The main page will display the TI-enabled results once bug 683410 lands.
-
- Posts: 26
- Joined: October 28th, 2010, 1:33 am
Re: TM and JM Performance Thread
Finally something happening!
Here is what I'm seeing (compared to two days ago): V8 improved from 4109 to 4607, Kraken improved from 5351.2 ms to 4573.1 ms and Sunspider also went down from 258 ms to 246.3 ms. Nice. But Peacekeaper took a turn for the worse I'm afraid: the score went down from 5241 to 4671.
There are also regressions in some of the subtests in Kraken and V8 but I don't got the numbers.
Oh well, at least things are moving again.
Here is what I'm seeing (compared to two days ago): V8 improved from 4109 to 4607, Kraken improved from 5351.2 ms to 4573.1 ms and Sunspider also went down from 258 ms to 246.3 ms. Nice. But Peacekeaper took a turn for the worse I'm afraid: the score went down from 5241 to 4671.
There are also regressions in some of the subtests in Kraken and V8 but I don't got the numbers.
Oh well, at least things are moving again.
-
- Posts: 2230
- Joined: June 25th, 2010, 9:29 am
- Location: Budapest, Hungary
Re: TM and JM Performance Thread
I think the about:config pref for TI should contain the word "jit". In that case, you can search for "jit", and all JS engine prefs come up.
I remember some dev suggested the same for profiling. Guys, do you think it worths opening a bug?
I remember some dev suggested the same for profiling. Guys, do you think it worths opening a bug?
-
- Posts: 277
- Joined: September 14th, 2010, 4:15 am
Re: TM and JM Performance Thread
Make sure you guys are testing the latest version of V8 (version 6) when comparing inference on/off
javascript.options.typeinference set to true:
V8: 5472
Highest scores:
Crypto: 13707
DeltaBlue: 10546
other scores:
Richards: 7692
Sunspider: 232.4ms +/- 0.9%
Kraken: 3961.6ms +/- 0.6%
---------------------------------------------------
javscript.options.typeinference set to false:
V8: 4193
Highest scores:
Richards: 6563
Crypto: 5816
Other scores:
DeltaBlue: 4708
Sunspider:
260.1ms +/- 2.0%
Kraken:
5322.7ms +/- 0.4%
--------------------------------------------
Note: the browser must be restarted for javascript.options.typeinference to take affect
javascript.options.typeinference set to true:
V8: 5472
Highest scores:
Crypto: 13707
DeltaBlue: 10546
other scores:
Richards: 7692
Sunspider: 232.4ms +/- 0.9%
Kraken: 3961.6ms +/- 0.6%
---------------------------------------------------
javscript.options.typeinference set to false:
V8: 4193
Highest scores:
Richards: 6563
Crypto: 5816
Other scores:
DeltaBlue: 4708
Sunspider:
260.1ms +/- 2.0%
Kraken:
5322.7ms +/- 0.4%
--------------------------------------------
Note: the browser must be restarted for javascript.options.typeinference to take affect
-
- Posts: 307
- Joined: August 18th, 2007, 11:12 am
Re: TM and JM Performance Thread
Seems like there's a performance regression for http://bellard.org/jslinux/
It used to boot up in 6 seconds. Now with TI it boots up in 13 seconds.
EDIT: Found bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=670885
It used to boot up in 6 seconds. Now with TI it boots up in 13 seconds.
EDIT: Found bug https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=670885
-
- Posts: 491
- Joined: November 12th, 2010, 9:12 am
Re: TM and JM Performance Thread
Mark342 wrote:Make sure you guys are testing the latest version of V8 (version 6) when comparing inference on/off
javascript.options.typeinference set to true:
V8: 5472
Highest scores:
Crypto: 13707
DeltaBlue: 10546
other scores:
Richards: 7692
Sunspider: 232.4ms +/- 0.9%
Kraken: 3961.6ms +/- 0.6%
---------------------------------------------------
javscript.options.typeinference set to false:
V8: 4193
Highest scores:
Richards: 6563
Crypto: 5816
Other scores:
DeltaBlue: 4708
Sunspider:
260.1ms +/- 2.0%
Kraken:
5322.7ms +/- 0.4%
--------------------------------------------
Note: the browser must be restarted for javascript.options.typeinference to take affect
I think I read somewhere that there's some overhead for including TI in the browser and turning off the pref only doesn't get rid of it due to the complexity of the code needing a lot of changes in the javascript engine to work , since most people don't run with TI disabled. If you could, could you test with the build just before TI landed on the trunk.
-
- Posts: 199
- Joined: October 14th, 2003, 12:39 am
Re: TM and JM Performance Thread
They removed the 'old' engines from the regression page
- Zlip792
- Posts: 1340
- Joined: May 7th, 2011, 1:47 pm
- Location: Pakistan
Re: TM and JM Performance Thread
Is TI graph is in actual (JM+TI) graph? or JM+TI will be added later?
-
- Posts: 1033
- Joined: July 18th, 2003, 10:09 pm
Re: TM and JM Performance Thread
Anyone know when is Incremental GC landing? It seems to be read and finished
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=641027
But dont know what is stopping it to land.
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=641027
But dont know what is stopping it to land.
-
- Posts: 235
- Joined: March 13th, 2011, 1:15 pm
Re: TM and JM Performance Thread
They also removed the 'old' engines from the regular page and didn't replace it with TI...
-
- Posts: 517
- Joined: June 23rd, 2010, 5:48 pm
Re: TM and JM Performance Thread
Is Firebug killing javascript performance after TI landed for anyone else? I tried updating to the latest stable Firebug 1.8.2 and then to 1.9.0a1 but it still slows down v8 benchmark by ~4x and sunspider by ~2x. I made sure that Firebug's javascript profiling is disabled (with Firebug profiling enabled v8 is ~10x slower).