All users were logged out of Bugzilla on October 13th, 2018
This should block 21762, jst's tracking bug for DHTML perf.
Clicking and holding on the little red arrows make my CPU peek at about 33% using Mozilla Build 2001101117 on a PIII-733 Win2k system. The page on IE6 sometimes peeks as high as 40% when scrolling.
Component: Browser-General → DOM Level 0
QA Contact: doronr → desale
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla1.1
Dan, I'm not seeing any more than ~40% cpu use on either 500MHz linux or win32. In fact, it scrolls quite byootifully! (is this wfm?)
using build 2001122203 on win2k with a PIII,500MHZ on win2k also displays this smooth and fine :) wfm ?
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 17 years ago
Resolution: --- → WORKSFORME
Hmm... WFM, heh? This concerns me a bit. Is the goal for Mozilla to be adequate or beat IE's numbers? The following observations were done using build 2001122509 on Win2k (SP2) with a PII 266 and a 4 meg Matrox Millenium II video card. For instance, in the case of the DHTML demo at the URL in the URL field, Mozilla does display the animation pretty well. There are very minor hiccups (short freezes) as the images are scrolled but, for the most part, Mozilla displys the animations pretty well. In fact, the scrolling is pretty close to the same in both Mozilla and IE5.5 SP2. However, IE only spikes at 75% CPU and is generally in the upper 50's to middle 60's whereas Mozilla spikes at 92% CPU and is generally in the mid to upper 80's. So, looking at this, Mozilla's performance seems adequate, but does not beat out IE. Maybe this should be under some other general performance bug (and if someone knows of that bug, please let me know) but I'd like to know if the Mozilla team has any stated performance goals and whether they are aiming to make Mozilla an adequate performer or are actively striving to beat the competition? Jake
Performance on an Athlon 700 (512k cache model) with 128 and a Voodoo3 (no reasonable system based performance bottlenecks) and no apps running on 0.9.7 flatly sucks. Sure, it sucks in IE too, but I don't that's not unusual. The fact that it's poor in Mozilla should be of concern though... Recomminding re-opening...
Seriously. On a 500MHz Linux and a 500MHz win2k and 450MHz Mac OS 9, I don't seeing _anything_ wrong with how this dhtml (which makes the whining comments about IE **** irrelevant).
No longer blocks: 21762
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
Target Milestone: mozilla1.1 → Future
Seriously. On win98 it's slow. Rather than saying people are whining, a better, more constructive use of time might be asking people for more detailed ysem configurations to see what differences may be at fault for slowing the display. Here, with a minimum of background processes, Win98SE, build 2001122803, the page works great when the images aren't yet loaded. Once they're all loaded, it slows noticebly. ideas?
this CPU spike issue is probably caused by Mozilla painting more frequently than IE unnecessarily. Another issue could be the video card. firstname.lastname@example.org think you can profile the testcase or get someone with similar hardware/setup to profile this?
basic, I'd be happy to profile this test case on my system, but what kind of profile are you looking for? My observations were based on watching cpu usage in the Win2k task manager. Is there anything specific you can recommend that I use to get a more scientific analysis of usage of system resources? I'm just not experienced with that kind of stuff. I'm really just going off observation. Any help would be appreciated :-) As for John Morrison's comments, what's eating you today? I'm not using a 500Mhz machine, I'm using a 266Mhz machine and IE uses less CPU (please compare apples to apples). In addition, I asked a simple question that you flatly ignored choosing instead to use a personal attack calling me a "whiner" (nice argumentative skills and attitude). Thirdly, you removed this bug from the DHTML tracking bug out of spite or something. Seriously, in the future, try to avoid using Bugzilla as your personal anger management tool. Jake
Okay, I retract the adjective 'whining' [note: not the noun], which comes off a bit harsh, but is far short of a "personal attack". (Although speaking of personal attacks, see comment #12, above). If someone is interested in profiling this example, digging into the code and producing a patch, then, great, go ahead. However, I have also now tested on 266MHz win98/rh6.2/macos9.2 and they all perform smoothly on those systems. Yes, the CPU spikes in mozilla; it does in IE6 on win98 as well [although the spike in IE6 is lower primarily because it doesn't scroll the images as quickly]. But it doesn't "suck" in either mozilla or IE6 for these systems. It is possible that this depends on some specific hardware configuration (video card, ram, ...). In fact, if it "sucks" on a given system in both IE and mozilla, then that pretty clearly suggests a hardware issue.
email@example.com: what we need is a profile of what part of the code is causing this. You probably would need a debug build...
John, Retraction accepted and apologies for any comments of my that could be construed as a personal attack (although I called it like I saw it rather than using it as an excuse to avoid a question). However, If you read comment #7, which I don't think you really did, I think you would realize that I plainly stated that performance was relatively decent on my PII 266 and, in fact, pretty much equivalent to IE (not sure how performance could "suck" with a faster processor as in comment #8???). I also asked a valid question about CPU usage which, I think, you finally answered (after some cajoling) in comment #13. The final question I asked which has yet to be addressed directly is whether a goal of Mozilla is to have better DHTML performance than IE (or any other browser, for that matter) on an equivalent platform (such as me running both Mozilla and IE on the same 266Mhz machine). If this is simply a naive question, please let me know. I don't claim to be an expert in these matters. However, if you believe this is so, please provide some reasoning for this or direct me to a resource that explains it. All I want is for Mozilla to be the best damned browser out there. Let's not let that fact get lost in these discussions. jake
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.