4 ms·

Using https://lukewagner.github.io/test-tanks-compile-time/ https://lukewagner.github.io/test-tanks-compile-time/ Chrome 63: 3143.7ms (3.9mb/s) Firefox 57: 14

Using https://lukewagner.github.io/test-tanks-compile-time/ https://lukewagner.github.io/test-tanks-compile-time/ Chrome 63: 3143.7ms (3.9mb/s) Firefox 57: 1499ms (8.3mb/s) Edge 41: 97.3ms (127.2mb/s) !!!

MrMid 9y ago
Wow. Firefox 59: 474 ms Edge 41: 164 ms The difference is smaller with newer FF, but that is amazing from Edge!
- computerphage 9y ago
  Edge is doing something very different, see the sibling comments for details.
pimeys 9y ago
Firefox nightly on Linux: 165.6 ms (74.8 MB/s) Chromium: 1835 ms (6.7 MB/s)
isaacaggrey 9y ago
Could someone explain how Edge is performing so well or any references to what they have done in this regard? Has the Edge team already implemented this streaming and tiering compiler technique?
- DiThi 9y ago
  You tell Edge, "compile this", Edge replies "done!" when what it has done is just verifying it's valid WASM. When you then call a function, it's compiled.
  - qznc 9y ago
    So it is actually sad. It means you just downloaded a lot of stuff and only used a fraction of it.
luke_wagner 9y ago
To wit, as described in their blog post: https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2017/04/20/improved- https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2017/04/20/improved- Edge validates and compiles wasm code lazily. Thus, this simplistic benchmark isn't really measuring compile time on Edge. In contrast, Firefox, Chrome and Safari are doing some amount of AOT compilation before WebAssembly.instantiate() resolves.
- ehsankia 9y ago
  Here's a stupid question, but is the result of the Firefox and Chrome "instantiate" the exact same? Is the compilation doing the same job, or one could be performing more optimizations? Aka faster compilation but slower execution.
  - computerphage 9y ago
    They're doing slightly different things, but not to nearly the extent of Edge which is doing something very different.

MrMid 9y ago

Wow. Firefox 59: 474 ms Edge 41: 164 ms The difference is smaller with newer FF, but that is amazing from Edge!

computerphage 9y ago
Edge is doing something very different, see the sibling comments for details.

pimeys 9y ago

Firefox nightly on Linux: 165.6 ms (74.8 MB/s) Chromium: 1835 ms (6.7 MB/s)

isaacaggrey 9y ago

Could someone explain how Edge is performing so well or any references to what they have done in this regard? Has the Edge team already implemented this streaming and tiering compiler technique?

DiThi 9y ago
You tell Edge, "compile this", Edge replies "done!" when what it has done is just verifying it's valid WASM. When you then call a function, it's compiled.
- qznc 9y ago
  So it is actually sad. It means you just downloaded a lot of stuff and only used a fraction of it.

luke_wagner 9y ago

To wit, as described in their blog post: https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2017/04/20/improved- https://blogs.windows.com/msedgedev/2017/04/20/improved- Edge validates and compiles wasm code lazily. Thus, this simplistic benchmark isn't really measuring compile time on Edge. In contrast, Firefox, Chrome and Safari are doing some amount of AOT compilation before WebAssembly.instantiate() resolves.

ehsankia 9y ago
Here's a stupid question, but is the result of the Firefox and Chrome "instantiate" the exact same? Is the compilation doing the same job, or one could be performing more optimizations? Aka faster compilation but slower execution.
- computerphage 9y ago
  They're doing slightly different things, but not to nearly the extent of Edge which is doing something very different.