How long does your browser take to load this?

[vanguard]

Friends,

Please do me this favor.

1. Open your clock (or simply have access to a second hand).
2. Click on this link: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/01/24/1627251
3. Let me know how long it took to load.

I have an iceBook 500 and IE takes about 40 seconds while Mozilla takes about 5 seconds. (Both timed with a second hand, not my perception.)

Also, let me know if you have a broadband connection. I can see that I d/l the entire page in about 1 to 1.5 seconds. Then, I see my CPU at 100% until the page is done rendering (much longer in IE).

Is this normal? What are your times? What kind of machine are you using? Which browser? (If possible, test IE)

Vanguard

[ulrik]

5,7 seconds in IE, nothing Cached, standard IE priority AND while Cinema 4D is rendering a scene and taking approx. 80% of the CPU

I am connecting over a shared broadband airport connection

during the 5,7 seconds, IE's processor %-peak was at around 12%, not more...

19 seconds in Omniweb, Omniweb went to around 50% all the time while it was rendering. Would have been faster if Cinema 4D wouldn't be there rendering I guess.

2,8 seconds in Mozilla. To fast to check top while operating the stopwatch ;)

Cinema 4D, IE, Mozilla and Omniweb all share the same task priority.

[simX]

14 seconds using OmniWeb in Mac OS X, and it looked like the CPU was at 100% usage, but I had some other things going on including installing LimeWire (if I'm interpreting Spy correctly).

[vanguard]

Everybody is getting better IE times but everybody seems to have a better machine (so far).

GadgetLover, hardware specs?

[ulrik]

Originally posted by vanguard
Everybody is getting better IE times but everybody seems to have a better machine (so far).

GadgetLover, hardware specs?

I wouldn't say that. IE doesn't take advantage of the AltiVec engine, and rendering HTML pages means Integer calculations, so also the OS core of OS X wouldn't be accelerated by the AltiVec. Now, the Cube has a slower BUS than the standard tower G4. I'd say the mentioned G4 Cube 450 is at the moment closest to your iBook...

[scope]

10 seconds in OmniWeb. 512kbps Cable, 400MHz G4.

[ksuther]

Shurg, only just over 5 seconds using OmniWeb 4.1sp32. I'm suprised it was that fast :-/
Usually OmniWeb seems much slower. Maybe the builds are getting faster :) The CPU usage is still up there though.

[edX]

5 secs in latest version of icab - rendering is perfect (unless you really want that pesky banner ad)

10 secs in ie

all my specs are below as usual including my broadband connection from pachell/sbc global

[solo]

iceBook 500MHz, 384MB RAM, iCab browser w/DSL connection... 6 seconds to fully load.

[chemistry_geek]

Netscape 6.2.1: 45 seconds; 56K connection (45333 bps), page not cached. AOL IM and Desktop Calendar running in background. During the download I resized the window by clicking the green button in the title bar. CPU usage was not monitored, though when I load a web page in Netscape, the CPU usage sometimes goes to 100% as displayed by "LoadInDock".

[vanguard]

Originally posted by ulrik


I wouldn't say that. IE doesn't take advantage of the AltiVec engine, and rendering HTML pages means Integer calculations, so also the OS core of OS X wouldn't be accelerated by the AltiVec. Now, the Cube has a slower BUS than the standard tower G4. I'd say the mentioned G4 Cube 450 is at the moment closest to your iBook...

Well, it's hard to say without benchmarking. The G4 has is capable of handling four integer instructions at the same time. It's IU (Interger Unit) is divided into two types of operations, simple add/subtract and complex multiple/divide. Add/Subtract instructions can be completed in a single clock. Multiply/divide instructions take several clock cycles.

Anyway, the G4 has three simple units and one complex unit. The G3 has only two simple units and one complex unit.

On the other hand, my G3 has 50mhz on him. On the other hand (up to three hands now) his G4 has more bandwidth to memory which helps to minimize wasted clock cycles. Again, it's hard to say without benchmarking.

Anyway, I'd give him a slight edge in integer operations. Of course, he has a large lead in floating point operations but I doubt that IE rendering does a lot with floats. (Not positive though.)

Vanguard

PS Sorry for changing topics. This hardware stuff excites me. More rendering times would be really great. Thanks in advance.

[vanguard]

Solo,

Can you try IE? I'm wondering if there is something wrong with this machine (or more likely, the software on it). It would be great if you tried it because you have the same hardware.

Thanks in advance,
Vanguard

[BlingBling 3k12]

IE 6.0 on Windows XP : Almost Immediately :)
Using : AT&T Broadband Internet (Cable)

but XP sucks anyways, so damn it all to hell!

[genghiscohen]

Interesting...
350MHz iMac, 768MB RAM, cable modem connection. 13 seconds in OmniWeb, 14 seconds in IE, and 24 seconds (!) in Opera, which is usually my fastest browser.

[mindbend]

iMac 400 OS 10.1 IE 5.1
cable modem

[genghiscohen]

Originally posted by Ed Spruiell
5 secs in latest version of icab - rendering is perfect (unless you really want that pesky banner ad)


Thanks for reminding me about iCab, Ed. 6 seconds to load for me with iCab 2.7, the best by far of the 4 browsers that I've tried on that page.
Wonder what was up with Opera and its 24 seconds to load. It must have choked on something on the page.
:confused:

[BlingBling 3k12]

hmm... iWeb...

[Dak RIT]

approx. 4.7 seconds with OmniWeb 4.1 sp 29. Running MacOS X 10.1.2. Quicksilver PowerMac G4 (867MHz G4+, 1.1GB RAM, 37 processes running using 21.8% CPU power when idle, T3 connection averaging 1.3MB / sec sustained max, peaks of 2MB/sec).

Haven't tried using other browsers.

Cheers,
Dak

[edX]

iWeb:confused:



that is a bunch of blingbling:D

[edX]

I'm wondering if there is something wrong with this machine (or more likely, the software on it

vanguard, have you ever invested in one of the defragmentation and optimization programs that i am always running off at the keyboard about? want to put some zip back in your mac and keep it there? stop clinging to "i have to do it the linux way" and do what your HD is yelling at you to do. get one of these and use it regularly. (every 2-4 weeks depending on your use)

there are a few tricks you linux guys can learn from us old mac farts;)

[AdmiralAK]

20 seconds on a dial up connection, in OS 9, using netscape 4.7.x

[GadgetLover]

IE 5.1 = 10 seconds (with EVERYTHING loaded and visible; full web page access).

OmniWeb = 7 seconds

(PowerBook G3 FireWire 400MHz with 512MB RAM and DSL)

[ksv]

9 secs in IE, 333 MHz iMac, 2:11 ADSL. Mac OS X is generally slow in OS X, so I didn't expect anything more :rolleyes:
I guess it'll load in less than a second on my G3 PowerMac in OS 9, though :D
Sad but true, the OS 9 IE 5.1 is way faster than the OS X version...

[ulrik]

Originally posted by vanguard
[B]

Well, it's hard to say without benchmarking. The G4 has is capable of handling four integer instructions at the same time. It's IU (Interger Unit) is divided into two types of operations, simple add/subtract and complex multiple/divide. Add/Subtract instructions can be completed in a single clock. Multiply/divide instructions take several clock cycles.

It can, but neither does IE use this feature nor the OS core. The OS X core uses the AltiVec for floating point handling. If an app needs to activate the SIMD for integers, the programmers have to do it by hand, and till now, IE is not optimized for AltiVec.



Anyway, I'd give him a slight edge in integer operations. Of course, he has a large lead in floating point operations but I doubt that IE rendering does a lot with floats. (Not positive though.)


Yes, the G4 has a better Integer performance, but all I wanted to say is that the AltiVec just doesn't make a big difference in IE and HTML rendering...then again, I wouldn't say that the Integer performance of a Cube 450 and your iBook 500 is that different. I am using a 466 Mhz iBook for presenting my database applications to customers, and I have to say the 4D performance (read: mostly integer performance) is REALLY impressive for such an old machine.

Sure the Cube is faster, but I think it was *closest* to your machine.

[tagliatelle]

Dell Optiplex G1 PII 350 mhz 192MB RAM
5 seconds with ie5.5

[ERICBRIAN2002]

I am at my friends house and he has a sony vaio 1.5ghz pentium 4 and it toke a long 15 sec using a reagular 56k connection running windows xp. this connection sucks

[vanguard]

ulrik,

The IU/ALU is used by everything that does integer calculations. It's seperate from the Altivec unit.

Still, you're right, the cube was the closest to my machine. I was just thinking aloud about how close it was.

Vanguard

PS Edited to fix a spelling error.

[ulrik]

Originally posted by vanguard
[B]ulrik,

The IU/ALU is used by everything that does integer calculations. It's seperate from the Altivec unit.

You got me wrong. All I wanted to say is that the AltiVec doesn't accelerate integer calculations if the App is not tuned to use it. All floating point operations under OS X take advantage of the AltiVec, regardless if the app is programmed to do it. There is kind off an abstraction layer (I am lacking the proper word in english) running above the complex unit which tries to "pack" similar floating point operations into SIMD operation which could be accelerated by the AltiVec.

Example: I am writing an app which executes four times 3,5*4,5
Without ANY more code, OS X will run this calculation over the Altivec

But if I do four times 3*4, OS X won't use the AltiVec by it's own, I - as a programmer - would have to tell the App to do so.



That's all i wanted to say.

[serpicolugnut]

In IE 5.1 - 5 secs
In MachO Mozilla - 4 secs
In OmniWeb 4.1 - 3.5 secs
In iCab 2.7 - 4 secs

All of these under OS X 10.1.2, on a Cable Modem connection distributed through Airport (version 1). These are on a dual G4/800 w/ 1.5GB RAM.

[edX]

serpicolugnut- wasn't it you i just saw proclaiming icab to be the slowest rendering browser of all over at versiontracker?;)

i would also love to know what you have done with omniweb to get it to blaze so fast. omniweb is repeatedly slow in all these comparisons except for yours.what have you turned on or off to get it to work so well?

[TommyWillB]

IE OS X = 6 seconds

IE W2K running in virtual PC 5 on OSX = 9 seconds

:)

[ksuther]

Wow, this is almost as silly as my "Post your df -kl!" thread :)

[gumse]

5 seconds in OmniWeb 4.0.6

[senne]

10 sec with cable, 1MB/s

[MacPain]

took me about 7 seconds with ie 5.1 on x.1.2

i'm on a 512 cable line and had a 32k/sec download going on. ^^