7 ms·
At 2000 kIPS you may have a few generations of javascript engines to go before we get there. That's not meant to take away from this project - it truly is amaz
by javanix 13y ago
At 2000 kIPS you may have a few generations of javascript engines to go before we get there.
That's not meant to take away from this project - it truly is amazing what can be interpreted in the browser now.
- tekacs 13y agoJust for reference's sake this does vary a fair bit by computer and browser - mine never drops below ~8kIPS and runs mostly at ~15kIPS (and up to ~23kIPS). Whilst this is nothing like the several orders of magnitude required for more capable interactive behaviour, it does make my load times noticeably faster than those claimed on the page. :) (I'm Chrome on Linux, i7 4th Gen, incidentally)
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- kuschku 13y agoI'm getting here > speed 1640kIPS on the old Nexus 7, don't you mean 8kkIPS? (This value was the average while booting Linux)
- Hello71 13y agopsst, the SI prefix for 10^6 is M
- antsar 13y agoYou mean to say, 10^7 isn't KKK?
- tekacs 13y agoAbsolutely so, yes. Thanks. :) 8 - 23 MIPS ain't so bad, right?
- wnesensohn 13y agoFor reference, that's about as fast as a Motorola 68030 @50MHz [1] which was used in the AppleIIx, and while that was no slouch when it was released, you wouldn't want to run a modern development environment on such a machine either ;) [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorola_68030 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorola_68030
- dkersten 13y agoA little faster than an Arduino and a little slower than a PIC24. Not too bad.
- gngeal 13y agoDynamic translation of x86 sequences could give you some boost, as could use of asm.js.
- Dylan16807 13y agoSome things would do badly at that speed. But serving basic web queries would be fine, and give you a better feel for what is slow when milliseconds spent processing turn into actual seconds.