3 ms·
For what it's worth, this test has little to do with JS execution speed. See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=622358#c3 https://bugzilla.mozilla.or
by bzbarsky 16y ago
For what it's worth, this test has little to do with JS execution speed. See https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=622358#c3 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=622358#c3 for an analysis of a profile of the test in Firefox. In brief, 80% is canvas operations due to the emulator making 1024 putImageData calls for every single frame. The time spent actually running JS is about 10% of the total time.
- pnp 16y agoI updated the page with a graph from FF4.0b9 which is a bit improved over b8. The Javascript is now respectively similar. You're right about the 80/10 split. FF4's rendering speed is an outlier compared to Safari/Chrome/Opera on the same hardware. To better compare the faster browsers I'd need to run multiple emulators per page. EDIT: b9 improved over 8, not itself.