3 ms·
I guess the way to benchmark browsing to get most realistic numbers would be to record normal browser behavior of a decently-sized sample of people (say 1000) a
by Will_Do 10y ago
I guess the way to benchmark browsing to get most realistic numbers would be to record normal browser behavior of a decently-sized sample of people (say 1000) and automatically repeat the behavior of a representative subsample (10-50 may be enough).
This would take forever and cost quite a lot of money, however, so the much more reasonable solution is to simply turn off the cache for everything.
I don't agree with Apple or Techcrunch that CR's methodology is wrong -- pretty much anyone would make that same decision because the alternative is too much work for too little reward.
- Johnny555 10y agoWebsites change over time -- they'd have to download a static copy of the websites and store them locally for repeatable tests (but then it no longer reflects the real world, since websites often tailor themselves for each user). And since browsing activity changes over time too, they'd have to regularly update the test, which means that tests are not comparable over time.
- pfranz 10y agoI don't think that's unreasonable to address. For CPU and GPU benchmarks they often run BenchMark2014 so you can see improvements compared to previous years and BenchMark2017 to see the latest and greatest because hardware architecture, game engine design, and graphics APIs change. You just need to figure out how best to present that to the user.
- slantyyz 10y agoIIRC, the sites that are visited during the test are off a CR server used specifically for the tests, not the Internet at large.