GTK2 performance and Dillo

Hi. Dillo is a very small fast web browser (400kb executable). Stephan Lewis
posted some interesting performances tests yesterday comparing GTK1 and GTK2
running Dillo.

Can anyone illuminate further on the size and performance differences
between GTK1 and GTK2?


Robin Rowe MovieEditor com   Hollywood, California   Free motion picture and still image editing software

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Stephen Lewis" <slewis paradise net nz>
To: "Dillo mailing list" <dillo-dev auriga wearlab de>
Sent: Wednesday, October 15, 2003 8:29 PM
Subject: [Dillo-dev] Re: gtk2 and dillo ( was FLTK )

On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 10:20:11AM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote:

  This  is  also  an  RFC  for information on GTK+2 (speed, size,
linkings etc).

  Please  back  your  opinions  with  links,  docs, facts or with
whatever  helps  better  to  understand the point. Maybe a single
email can show there's no way to do it, or maybe not!

I've just been playing with the GTK+2 patch, and I've got some
numbers (I won't call them fact :), and opinions:

These are on a 500Mhz Intel PC, with 256MB RAM.  dillo2 refers to
the patched GTK+2 version, dillo1 is GTK1.2 based ( both todays CVS ).
The machine is running FreeBSD 5.1
The numbers are basically estimated, but I tried each test several
times and got similar results.

Test 1: Base load times
    Time to load+render: ~1s
    Time to quit: instantaneous
    Size (from top): 7MB
    Time to load+render: ~3s
    Time to quit: 0.5s (estimated, "felt" slower than dillo1)
    Size: 14MB

Test2: Loading a 1.8MB html file, styled text, bulletted lists, tables
       of text
    Time to load: 3s
        extra time to finish rendering: 6s
    Time to quit: ~2s
    Size: 56MB
    Time to load: 1m20s real according to the time command, more like
                  2m30s due to swapping
        extra time to finish rendering: 10s
    Time to close: 1m20s
    Size: 220MB

Test3: Loading a trivial 70k html file ( no images or tables, just text
       in a list )
    Time to load+render: 1s
    Time to quit: instantaneous
    Size: 9MB

    Time to load: 5s
    Time to render: <1s
    Time to quit: < 1s
    Size: 16MB

Test4: Loading a 1.5MB html file (fairly simple, no images, few tables)
    Time to load: ~3s
        extra time to finish rendering: ~6s
    Time to quit: ~1s
    Size: 36MB
    Time to scroll entire length of document by holding pagedown: ~26s

    Time to load: 40s
        extra time to finish rendering: 2s
    Time to quit: 16s
    Size: 125MB
    Time to scroll entire length of document by holding pagedown: 20s

A couple of behavioural notes:
1) Progressive rendering wasn't useful in dillo2, you get an initial
   draw (which is largely useless), then dillo2 blocks, then the final
2) Scrolling is implemented in quite a different fashion in GTK2 vs
   GTK1, which has a higher latency, slower "feel".  I suspect that
   GTK+1 would feel as bad using its algorithm if it were using
   anti-aliased fonts ( opinion based on little evidence )
   This isn't really a problem for sequential scrolling, but random
   seeking by dragging the scrollbar is very irritating under GTK+2
   I think this is due to changes relating to the "draw" signal,
   mentioned in the GTK1.2-2.0 changelog:
   ... GTK+ merges all invalid regions, and sends expose events to the
   widget in an idle handler for the invalid regions. ...

The things that I found pretty much unusable were
  - load times ( for anything non-trivial )
  - close times ( for large documents )
  - memory usage

If it's not possible to mitigate these in a GTK+2 version of dillo,
then I personally wouldn't find it to be a usable choice anymore (which
would suck - I like dillo).

On the other hand, if those numbers could be brought down to even, say,
twice what dillo1 requires, I think it would be fine (at least, on my

Stephen Lewis

Dillo-dev mailing list
Dillo-dev lists auriga wearlab de

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]