Yet Another JavaScript Benhcmark
Tuesday, 17. March 2009, 15:25:37
It's old news by now, but do we really need yet another one? Peacekeeper "simulates the load placed on the browser by common JavaScript functions as used by popular, modern websites", but weren't all the other ones supposed to be doing that as well?
I'm not really sure what Peacekeeper brings to the table except for even more artificial benchmarks. I can think of one thing, and that's the fact that it isn't owned by a browser vendor. But that doesn't justify their eagerness to convince people that JavaScript is all there is to modern Web sites:
With Peacekeeper, it’s simple to compare different browsers and see which one offers the best performance on your PC.
It's interesting that this time around, it's Microsoft which is the lone voice of reason when they point how how sites today are put together.
Even Opera decided to jump on the JavaScript performance bandwagon
It should be noted, though, that JavaScript performance is likely to become more and more important in the future, so I would say that Carakan is perhaps more about future-proofing Opera than it is about winning at artificial benchmarks with little real relevance today.


sirnh1 # 17. March 2009, 15:42
Microsoft doesn't seem to care for (javascript) speed. They are currently verry happy to (finally) pass that acid 2 test. Give them another 3 or 4 years and they'll start improving their speed
experttease # 17. March 2009, 20:43
Originally posted by sirnh1:
That's probably because it's a huge business opportunity with all the browsers around these days for the average user to test. If benchmarking companies get their foot in the door now with browsers then in a few years time when these benchmarks are even more prolific among users they may well have become a trusted name, and as haavard points out they are vendor neutral, allowing for a unique market position (attracting users to their website in droves = cash).
@haavard
But the main difference in 'real speed' is with the UI, and this is why Opera has loyal users. Cacheing web pages alone saves the most time (*z key, z key, z key* = homepage!), keyboard shortcuts come next then mouse gestures, then opera's rendering speed in 4th place, which only a year or two ago was way ahead of the game anyway, it's not like it's been left behind. No sweat I say. In my early use of opera I liked being able to choose when to render the main page 'Redraw Instantly...after 1sec...2, etc.' I would most like to see improvements in this area. I was delighted to hear that in future builds we may be able to turn off Flash! Just more control over what we see when and where. For instance I made the 'desktop wish' that current and most recently used tabs from last time are loaded first when restarting opera, with the oldest used tab loading last in the background. The other week I discovered 'shift + g'! It's probably been there years but I love it! One click and I remove the crap on a website and can begin reading black text on a white background.
Haavard # 17. March 2009, 22:13
scaRFhogg # 17. March 2009, 23:49
I kind of agree, because those other features increase productivity and actual "browsing speed" far more than a few milliseconds saved in JavaScript execution time.
experttease # 17. March 2009, 23:52
João Eiras # 18. March 2009, 02:11
In other word, I vow to thee.
But they also test a bit of drawing, DOM and layout, but just a tiny bit.
Charles Schloss # 18. March 2009, 03:06