609704 - Slower drawImage than Chrome in Peacekeeper movie test

Status: NEW

(Core :: Graphics: Canvas2D, defect)

Description

[Trev]

User-Agent:       Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.12) Gecko/20101026 Firefox/3.6.12
Build Identifier: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:2.0b8pre) Gecko/20101104 Firefox/4.0b8pre

In test 12 of Peacekeeper, it uses drawImage to render over 300 images like a movie.  The first use of drawImage is the basic 3 parameters and it FF4 is faster than Chrome there.  But, it also uses drawImage to create a ripple effect below the image.  This uses 9 parameters and FF4 is slower.  I've also tested it with just 5 parameters and FF4 is still slower.

I've created two test cases, 11e.html and 11f.html.  11e.html uses the 5 parameter drawImage while 11f.html uses the 9 parameter.  My times for both are:

FF4:
11e.html: 535ms
11f.html: 676ms

Chrome7:
11e.html: 210ms
11f.html: 266ms

I've also tested it with "layers.accelerate-none" set to true and "layers.accelerate-all" set to false.  My numbers didn't change that much.

Reproducible: Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Run the test11e.html and test11f.html attachments in FF4 and Chrome
2. Notice the speed difference
3.
Actual Results:  
FF4 is slower

Expected Results:  
FF4 is as fast or faster than Chrome

Comment 1

[Trev]

Attachment: frame0.jpg

Image for test case

Comment 2

[Trev]

Attachment: test11e.html

5 parameter drawImage

Comment 3

[Trev]

Attachment: test11f.html

9 parameter drawImage

Comment 4

[Vladimir Vukicevic [:vlad] [:vladv] (needinfo me, slow to respond)]

Is that a version of Chrome with hw accel for canvas?  Not sure if that's enabled by default or not.

Also, just for reference -- the 5-param (img + 4) version's arguments are the destination rectangle.  So drawImage(img, x, y, w, h) takes the entire image and draws it into the (x, y, w, h) rect on the canvas, scaling to fit.  The full 9-param version specifies both a source rectangle and a destination rectangle.

So I think what you're likely seeing here is slow scaling in pixman, especially since you're on XP and thus aren't getting d2d; but even with d2d we could be faster.

Comment 5

[Trev]

I'm using Chrome 7.0.517.41.  Looking around on the internet, I think I have to use a command line flag to enable hw accel for that version.

Comment 6

[Olli Pettay [:smaug][[e-mail]]]

This needs some profiling.

On linux we're still quite a bit slower.

Comment 7

[Olli Pettay [:smaug][[e-mail]]]

On Linux most of the time is spent in Xorg code, in pixman_image_composite

Comment 8

[Benoit Girard (:BenWa)]

We're a bit faster than Chrome on mac.