6 ms·
The chart is messed up... Bonus mess points for choosing 1 instead of 0 as the starting poing on the vertical axis. My best guess to understand it is: - On th
by warpech 7y ago
The chart is messed up... Bonus mess points for choosing 1 instead of 0 as the starting poing on the vertical axis.
My best guess to understand it is:
- On the horizontal axis, we have consecutive Chrome releases.
- On the vertical axis, we have total time of benchmark execution, relatively to Chrome 75
The source of the data is the "js-framework-benchmark"[0] run in a controlled environment in Chrome[1]
[0]: https://github.com/krausest/js-framework-benchmark https://github.com/krausest/js-framework-benchmark
[1]: https://krausest.github.io/js-framework-benchmark/2020/table_chrome_80.html https://krausest.github.io/js-framework-benchmark/2020/table...
- cl3misch 7y agoIf the y axis is relative benchmark time, it has to start at 1.
- warpech 7y agoWhy? What if Chrome 76, 77, 78, 79, 80 were faster than 75? The line needs space to go down.
- davrosthedalek 7y agoWhile the data has to start at 1 (or 100%), the axis absolutely does not.
- dylan604 7y agoWhat happens during the first second of time before reaching 1?
- reubenmorais 7y agoStarting at 1 is standard when you're showing measures relative to a baseline. It's a multiplier. 1.4 = 1.4x measure over the baseline.
- knorker 7y agoIs it? I've never seen a graph do this. Even e.g. fund performance comparing to index, normalized to starting value, show below-the-line in all graphs I've seen. E.g. this https://www.blackrock.com/uk/intermediaries/products/230286/blackrock-overseas-government-bond-tracker-fund-class-d-acc-fund https://www.blackrock.com/uk/intermediaries/products/230286/... Doesn't start from zero, but is very clear that it doesn't start from unity either.
- stingraycharles 7y agoIt’s pretty easy to understand this chart. In finance absolute numbers make more sense as they are “static”, but in benchmarks it’s typically not very useful to show eg the time spent, as this depends entirely on your hardware and is not very interesting. Rather, you solely want to compare with other numbers, and as such you normalize everything to 1.00 as the starting point. This type of chart is extremely common in benchmarks.
- knorker 7y agoI'm not saying it's hard to understand. And how are finance numbers, in what I linked to, static? I have no problem with normalizing the number. That seems like the obvious best way. That's why they also do it in the finance graph I linked to.
- stingraycharles 7y agoSorry, I think static was not the correct word; I think I meant absolute, ie Tesla stock being worth $1k is the same for everyone. This is not the case with benchmarks, where the numbers are fairly meaningless and different for everybody, depending on their hardware.
- de_Selby 7y agoIt seems clear enough to me. And you too since your guesses are all right. > Bonus mess points for choosing 1 instead of 0 as the starting point on the vertical axis... What purpose would a block of whitespace at the bottom serve?
- warpech 7y agoThe length of the line between 0 and 1 would put the measurements in right perspective.
- jakear 7y agoNot really... would the performance ever be “0”? No. So it doesn’t make sense to be on the graph. Really, it should be logarithmic: 100 ops/s, 10 ops/s, 1 op/s, .1 ops/s.
- warpech 7y agoI think you are right. It is just a new perspective for me, though I can read in other comments that it's quite common in benchmarks. Charts that I'm used to have units like FPS or MS on an axis that starts at 0.