Re: hand-wave-y cache performance data

Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> On 1/10/12 8:26 PM, Jason Duell wrote:
> > The take-away would seem to be that we're not doing anything really
> > horrible (yay), and are competitive with IE/Opera, but we could
> > improve somewhat (Chrome tends to be faster).  Nothing earth-
> > shattering or market-defining, IMO.
> 
> The main take-away for me was that for uncached loads of big complex
> pages we do pretty comparably to Chrome, but for cached ones we're
> way slower....

This is how I interpreted it too.

I think also that Taras's concern is more about startup time issues with the cache, with more of an emphasis on worse-case performance as opposed to the best case (good hardware) configurations like this test seems to be emphasizing.

These tech sites seem to be doing these browser performance benchmarks very frequently now. We should perhaps try to incorporate their benchmarks into a new performance reporting system, if for no other reason than to help sanity-check our (to be better) benchmarks.

- Brian