5 ms·
Hm, HTTP/1.1 at 15.5s, HTTP/2 at 23.72s Yeah, I "can see the difference clearly", but I don't think it is the kind of difference they expected or intended. Ed
by shdon 11y ago
Hm, HTTP/1.1 at 15.5s, HTTP/2 at 23.72s
Yeah, I "can see the difference clearly", but I don't think it is the kind of difference they expected or intended.
Edit: Firefox 40 on Windows 7 at work. Will try at home as well.
Oddly enough, the Akamai demo someone else posted gives me 18.47s for HTTP/1.1 and 2.24s for HTTP/2.
- Spone 11y agoHere: HTTP/1.1 at 15.48s and HTTP/2 at 2.06s
- Cshelton 11y agoMine was http/1.1 at 3.4~s and http/2 at 0.75s edit: this was Chrome 44.0.2403.155 m on windows 8 64
- kolme 11y agoWhat browser did you use? Are you sitting behind a proxy? For me: HTTP/1.1 at 13.19s, HTTP/2 at 1.48s
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- richym 11y agoShit happens :) I have HTTP/1.1 at 14.54s, HTTP/2 at 2.22s .. seems more like your configuration thing?
- shdon 11y agoMaybe. But the Akamai demo does show a major improvement for HTTP/2, so I think it is primarily a CDN77 thing. Maybe a bad route.
- JimmaDaRustla 11y ago1.91/0.48
- shdon 11y agoAt home (Firefox 40 on Windows 10) I get 2.34s for HTTP/1.1 and 1.26s for HTTP/2.