Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mobile CPUs and the Performance Inequality Gap

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 63 posts

Re: Mobile CPUs and the Performance Inequality Gap

#51

Post by pjmlp »

scarface74 wrote: post #49
pjmlp wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Still possible with service workers without having the poor browser chew a SPA framework.

How do service workers help if you can’t depend on having a network connection? Are you really saying that it would he more performant that you have to make a round trip just to perform validation? How slow would the hardware have to be for a network round trip to be faster?

By reading from the cache the necessary static HTML and CSS.

Validations always need to be done on both sides, unless one does not value security.

All of this is possible with vanilaJS, using builtin browser features, no need to kill the poor CPU with an additional bloated framework.

I used to be big in native apps, until having seen too many examples of what used to be done in VB/Acess back in the day.

So unless it is a game using OpenGL ES 3.0, Vulkan, Metal, something that requires AR/VR, real time audio, GPGPU for machine learning, or direct access to hardware sensors, it might be quite doable as PWA.

Re: Mobile CPUs and the Performance Inequality Gap

#52

Post by imtringued »

endorphone wrote: post #40
Macha wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Geekbench is not measuring raw performance in terms of operations per second. It's measuring very specific use cases (their current blurb mentions AI and ML, in the past mentioned synthetic tests to approximate browsers). Because thermal constraints would prevent Apple from competing in a brute force approach, Apple have been more willing to include specialised hardware for tasks like AI/ML as in the A12 CPU. Of cour…

Operations per second is a notoriously useless measure. Which is why we have higher-level benchmarks like GeekBench that are actually incredibly broad in what they test, performing a lot of real-world type activities in a larger macro-benchmark suite. The Bionic chips aren't cheating to a win. They win GeekBench, and virtually any other cross-platform activity that you can throw at them. As I mentioned in another pos…

The Geekbench score is a pretty useless metric when you have a specific workload in mind. If you are choosing a machine for video editing you're not going to look at the Geekbench score. If you are choosing a machine for compiling code you're not going to look a the Geekbench score. If you need a machine for gaming you're not going to look at the Geekbench score. If you have no specific requirements then you might not even care about having the best performance.

Re: Mobile CPUs and the Performance Inequality Gap

#53

Post by endorphone »

imtringued wrote: post #52
endorphone wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Operations per second is a notoriously useless measure. Which is why we have higher-level benchmarks like GeekBench that are actually incredibly broad in what they test, performing a lot of real-world type activities in a larger macro-benchmark suite. The Bionic chips aren't cheating to a win. They win GeekBench, and virtually any other cross-platform activity that you can throw at them. As I mentioned in another pos…

The Geekbench score is a pretty useless metric when you have a specific workload in mind. If you are choosing a machine for video editing you're not going to look at the Geekbench score. If you are choosing a machine for compiling code you're not going to look a the Geekbench score. If you need a machine for gaming you're not going to look at the Geekbench score. If you have no specific requirements then you might no…

At this point the conversation turns completely useless where we all tell ourselves that no benchmark matters.

Only they do. The Bionic chips are ridiculously performant, and are bound to have a much wider range with even moderate cooling.

Re: Mobile CPUs and the Performance Inequality Gap

#54

Post by scarface74 »

pjmlp wrote: post #51
scarface74 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do service workers help if you can’t depend on having a network connection? Are you really saying that it would he more performant that you have to make a round trip just to perform validation? How slow would the hardware have to be for a network round trip to be faster?

By reading from the cache the necessary static HTML and CSS. Validations always need to be done on both sides, unless one does not value security. All of this is possible with vanilaJS, using builtin browser features, no need to kill the poor CPU with an additional bloated framework. I used to be big in native apps, until having seen too many examples of what used to be done in VB/Acess back in the day. So unless it…

Validation does need to be done on both sides. But validations on the client side means no round trips and you can do validations even when you’re not online. Also even if the content is “static”, if you don’t have access to the network, how do you do simple things like display totals from service charges, a receipt of all the items delivered - propane as deliveries and tank repairs, alarm installation or at home nurse care where they had a checklist?

Even with CRUD apps you need to display dynamic content based on user interaction.

I used to be big in native apps, until having seen too many examples of what used to be done in VB/Acess back in the day.

So you haven’t seen the poor performance of ASP.Net Web Forms with the huge hidden field to maintain state and redrawing the screen for every interaction and a network round trip?

Re: Mobile CPUs and the Performance Inequality Gap

#55

Post by pjmlp »

scarface74 wrote: post #54
pjmlp wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By reading from the cache the necessary static HTML and CSS. Validations always need to be done on both sides, unless one does not value security. All of this is possible with vanilaJS, using builtin browser features, no need to kill the poor CPU with an additional bloated framework. I used to be big in native apps, until having seen too many examples of what used to be done in VB/Acess back in the day. So unless it…

Validation does need to be done on both sides. But validations on the client side means no round trips and you can do validations even when you’re not online. Also even if the content is “static”, if you don’t have access to the network, how do you do simple things like display totals from service charges, a receipt of all the items delivered - propane as deliveries and tank repairs, alarm installation or at home nur…

Not to the point that it actually matters, in a world were plenty of people are deploying node, django and rails applications.

Re: Mobile CPUs and the Performance Inequality Gap

#57

Post by scarface74 »

pjmlp wrote: post #55
scarface74 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Validation does need to be done on both sides. But validations on the client side means no round trips and you can do validations even when you’re not online. Also even if the content is “static”, if you don’t have access to the network, how do you do simple things like display totals from service charges, a receipt of all the items delivered - propane as deliveries and tank repairs, alarm installation or at home nur…

Not to the point that it actually matters, in a world were plenty of people are deploying node, django and rails applications.

if you haven’t noticed, the world is moving away from server side rendering - even Microsoft is pushing toward client side rendering.

Re: Mobile CPUs and the Performance Inequality Gap

#58

Post by BossingAround »

stefan_ wrote: post #29

What is even the hypothesis here? Websites are slow because Android devices are slow? Lest we remind our web developer friends of the cache hierarchy, the slowest part of all here is still fetching the fricking page over the internet . On this mobile Twitter page alone two spinners are spinning simultaneously. If, after all the network stuff, you are still taking a second to render in a world where smartphones can pl…

> the slowest part of all here is still fetching the fricking page over the internet.

That may be true, but have you tried browsing the web on an older device? Once the webpage is loaded, I can't say the experience is very nice on my iPad mini 2. Now, granted, that's a 2013 device. All I'm saying is that after all the "network stuff" you mention is done, the device power matters greatly, especially on JS-heavy sites.

Re: Mobile CPUs and the Performance Inequality Gap

#59

Post by nicoburns »

Jonnax wrote: post #17

This is essentially Qualcomm vs Apple in the mobile market. But the question I've got from looking at the the Geekbench site: iPhone 11: https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/1611448 AMD 3900x 12 Zen 2 12 Core: https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/1611445 The iPhone has higher single core performance than a desktop CPU with a 105W TDP. Of course it has more cores. But am I missing something here? Is this test actually…

I read an analysis somewhere (anandtech?) which suggested that a lot of the performance of Apple's chips could be attributed to them having a really large / fast cache system.

Re: Mobile CPUs and the Performance Inequality Gap

#60

Post by pjmlp »

scarface74 wrote: post #57
pjmlp wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to the point that it actually matters, in a world were plenty of people are deploying node, django and rails applications.

if you haven’t noticed, the world is moving away from server side rendering - even Microsoft is pushing toward client side rendering.

I notice what our customers pay for and write on their RFPs, everything else are just caravans passing by our shovel store.
Post reply on HN