Nitro?
Locked
 
|
It would seem Safari is getting a new JS engine. Apple is touting "up to twice" the performance in Safari; that's almost certainly not coming out of a macro benchmark, though, so I strongly doubt that anyone with an app will see that much of a boost.
All the same, faster JS might be good for Lively on iOS, where perf is currently more pain than I can tolerate for more than a few minutes at a time. This is supposed to be coming with iOS 4.3. _______________________________________________ lively-kernel mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.hpi.uni-potsdam.de/listinfo/lively-kernel |
|
|
Thanks for the info. I'm eager to try it out. In the not so far future Lively should run faster on Mobile Safari anyway.
Best, Robert On Mar 3, 2011, at 3:00 PM, Casey Ransberger wrote: > It would seem Safari is getting a new JS engine. Apple is touting "up to twice" the performance in Safari; that's almost certainly not coming out of a macro benchmark, though, so I strongly doubt that anyone with an app will see that much of a boost. > > All the same, faster JS might be good for Lively on iOS, where perf is currently more pain than I can tolerate for more than a few minutes at a time. > > This is supposed to be coming with iOS 4.3. > _______________________________________________ > lively-kernel mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.hpi.uni-potsdam.de/listinfo/lively-kernel _______________________________________________ lively-kernel mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.hpi.uni-potsdam.de/listinfo/lively-kernel |
Google Crankshaft (Re: Nitro?)
|
|
Closely related to this topic:
Google's new Crankshaft compiler will be a standard feature in Chrome 10 (the next major public release): http://blog.chromium.org/2010/12/new-crankshaft-for-v8.html Microsoft's Chakra VM in IE9 looks promising, too. The race is still on... -- Antero > Thanks for the info. I'm eager to try it out. In the not so far future > Lively should run faster on Mobile Safari anyway. > > Best, > Robert > > > On Mar 3, 2011, at 3:00 PM, Casey Ransberger wrote: > >> It would seem Safari is getting a new JS engine. Apple is touting "up to >> twice" the performance in Safari; that's almost certainly not coming out >> of a macro benchmark, though, so I strongly doubt that anyone with an >> app will see that much of a boost. >> >> All the same, faster JS might be good for Lively on iOS, where perf is >> currently more pain than I can tolerate for more than a few minutes at a >> time. >> >> This is supposed to be coming with iOS 4.3. >> _______________________________________________ >> lively-kernel mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.hpi.uni-potsdam.de/listinfo/lively-kernel > > _______________________________________________ > lively-kernel mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.hpi.uni-potsdam.de/listinfo/lively-kernel > _______________________________________________ lively-kernel mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.hpi.uni-potsdam.de/listinfo/lively-kernel |
|
|
In reply to this post by Robert Krahn-3
It's really true.
I ran my tiny benchmarks (http://weather-dimensions.com/Dan/JavaScriptBenchmark.html) before and after upgrading my iPad's OS. The results... Before: 30M ops/sec 1M sends/sec After: 150M ops/sec 4M sends/sec I found some erratic behavior running normal Lively pages -- we'll be tracking that down in the next couple of weeks. I haven't had a chance to try a new iPad, but the extra processor should make a difference as well. Think Live Web - Dan >On Mar 3, 2011, at 3:00 PM, Casey Ransberger wrote: > >> It would seem Safari is getting a new JS engine. Apple is touting "up to twice" the performance in Safari; that's almost certainly not coming out of a macro benchmark, though, so I strongly doubt that anyone with an app will see that much of a boost. >> >> All the same, faster JS might be good for Lively on iOS, where perf is currently more pain than I can tolerate for more than a few minutes at a time. >> >> This is supposed to be coming with iOS 4.3. >> _______________________________________________ >> lively-kernel mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.hpi.uni-potsdam.de/listinfo/lively-kernel > >_______________________________________________ >lively-kernel mailing list >[hidden email] >http://lists.hpi.uni-potsdam.de/listinfo/lively-kernel _______________________________________________ lively-kernel mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.hpi.uni-potsdam.de/listinfo/lively-kernel |
|
|
Hi Dan Did you try the differential test that you did before? Or did Bert do it? i.e. Squeak vs JS-in-browser on a Mac vs the same on the iPad I seem to recall that the differential was a factor of 12 slower on the iPad. I visited Apple after this and complained to Bud Tribble. Should I guess that the differential is now "only" a factor of 4? Cheers, Alan From: Dan Ingalls <[hidden email]> To: [hidden email] Sent: Fri, March 11, 2011 3:45:14 PM Subject: Re: [lively-kernel] Nitro? It's really true. I ran my tiny benchmarks (http://weather-dimensions.com/Dan/JavaScriptBenchmark.html) before and after upgrading my iPad's OS. The results... Before: 30M ops/sec 1M sends/sec After: 150M ops/sec 4M sends/sec I found some erratic behavior running normal Lively pages -- we'll be tracking that down in the next couple of weeks. I haven't had a chance to try a new iPad, but the extra processor should make a difference as well. Think Live Web - Dan >On Mar 3, 2011, at 3:00 PM, Casey Ransberger wrote: > >> It would seem Safari is getting a new JS engine. Apple is touting "up to twice" the performance in Safari; that's almost certainly not coming out of a macro benchmark, though, so I strongly doubt that anyone with an app will see that much of a boost. >> >> All the same, faster JS might be good for Lively on iOS, where perf is currently more pain than I can tolerate for more than a few minutes at a time. >> >> This is supposed to be coming with iOS 4.3. >> _______________________________________________ >> lively-kernel mailing list >> [hidden email] > >_______________________________________________ >lively-kernel mailing list >[hidden email] >http://lists.hpi.uni-potsdam.de/listinfo/lively-kernel _______________________________________________ lively-kernel mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.hpi.uni-potsdam.de/listinfo/lively-kernel _______________________________________________ lively-kernel mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.hpi.uni-potsdam.de/listinfo/lively-kernel |
|
|
Hi Alan -
When I compare JS in Safari and Squeak native on my Mac (an
old-ish 2.4 GHz core duo) I get:
Squeak native: 542M bytecodes/sec; 12.5M sends/sec
Cog native: 531M bytecodes/sec; 41M sends/sec
JS in Safari: 1000M ops/sec; 33M sends/sec
JS in Chrome: 4260M ops/sec; 49M sends/sec
My Safari is 5.0.4, from around January. I believe it has
the Nitro VM, but I'm not positive.
The Chrome is version 10.0.648.133
I designed the JS benchmark to compare JS and browser speeds, not
to compare against Squeak. We'd have to take some care with
exactly how I did this before attributing a lot of significance.
I believe the sends are exactly comparable, but the 'ops' vs
'bytecodes' I'm not sure about.
It would appear that JS in the browsers is roughly the same speed
as native Squeak at this point.
----------------------------------------------
Hi Dan From: Dan Ingalls <[hidden email]> _______________________________________________ lively-kernel mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.hpi.uni-potsdam.de/listinfo/lively-kernel |
«
Return to Lively Kernel
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |