BenchmarkXPRT Blog banner

Tag Archives: TensorFlow

WebXPRT 5: AI tests now, lots of room for growth

In past blog posts, we’ve discussed our goal of developing one or more experimental WebXPRT workloads focused on local, browser-side AI technologies. While many of us regularly interact with cloud-based AI apps and services through a browser, on-device AI capabilities are growing rapidly, and we want WebXPRT to continue to evolve with them.

There are several driving factors behind that growth. Web API technologies keep maturing, giving browsers direct access to the hardware they need for real inference work. Advanced GPU and NPU technology is now widely available in consumer devices, so the local computing power necessary to run AI applications on-device is in reach for many users. And for many organizations, there are compelling reasons to execute increasingly vital work like LLM inferencing and agentic coding tasks on local machines—such as data privacy, regulatory compliance, and cost control.

The reasons for the experimental workload approach

The expansion of on-device AI is exactly the type of shift we built the experimental workload concept to capture. As we shared when we first announced the WebXPRT 5 workload lineup, an experimental workload section gives us the flexibility to put cutting-edge measurement tools in users’ hands—even if those tools won’t yet run on every platform WebXPRT has traditionally supported. Experimental scores stay separate from the main overall score and are completely optional, so we can add tests without affecting comparability or asking anyone to retest. That approach maintains WebXPRT’s strengths while preparing the benchmark for the future—and giving all of us valuable information today.

The AI functions that WebXPRT 5 measures today

WebXPRT 5 already includes four workloads that utilize AI capabilities: Video Background Blur with AI, Detect Faces with AI, Image Classification with AI, and Document Scan with AI. These workloads use machine learning—computer vision and OCR models such as a Caffe-based face detector, SqueezeNet for image labeling, and an LSTM-based OCR engine. WebXPRT’s ability to measure how well devices handle those types of workloads has real value, and it reflects the kinds of light browser-side inference tasks that have been in widespread use for a while.

We recognize, though, that there’s a clear need for more demanding local, browser-based AI workloads—especially LLM inference. We’re targeting that need with our experimental work. Like pretty much everyone else, we’re also developing in the midst of an incredibly dynamic technical environment. We want to purposefully move forward without sacrificing WebXPRT’s stability and reliability for the sake of expedience.

The main decisions we face

Choosing a Web AI framework. We’re still researching our open-source framework options, including candidates like ONNX Runtime Web, Transformers.js, MediaPipe, and TensorFlow.js. The ground here continues to shift. For example, Transformers.js v4 now supports a WebGPU backend and spans a very broad range of model architectures. So, one of our ongoing challenges is picking a durable foundation.

Choosing a web API. Of the primary options we’re investigating, WebGPU now has the broadest browser support (Chrome, Edge, and partial support in Firefox and Safari). WebNN remains the most promising option in the long term because it can directly target NPUs, but it’s still not ready for production—its W3C spec only reached Candidate Recommendation status in early 2026, and browser support outside of flagged, experimental builds isn’t there yet. Our web API outlook hasn’t changed much from before: WebGPU is the most practical path today, and WebNN may be an exciting possibility for tomorrow.

Choosing and sizing workloads. We’ll ideally find workloads demanding enough to genuinely stress new hardware, but light enough to run on slightly older gear without forcing huge model downloads or overextending the test’s runtime. The sweet spot for browser inference today tends to be small, quantized models, and memory ceilings and cold-start downloads are real constraints. Striking the right balance is another part of the challenge we’re working through.

We appreciate your patience

We’ve been talking about experimental WebXPRT AI workloads for a while. While we wish we already had everything worked out, we think the end product will be worth the wait. We appreciate your patience as we work through the details, and we’ll keep updating you here in the blog as we make progress.

As always, we’re open to suggestions. If you have ideas for a browser-based AI workload scenario, a framework or API you think we should weigh, a browser-based AI application you want us to consider, or any other related thoughts, please let us know!

Justin

Web AI frameworks: Possible paths for the AI-focused WebXPRT 4 auxiliary workload

A few months ago, we announced that we’re moving forward with the development of a new auxiliary WebXPRT 4 workload focused on local, browser-side AI technology. Local AI has many potential benefits, and it now seems safe to say that it will be a common fixture of everyday life for many people in the future. As the growth of browser-based inference technology picks up steam, our goal is to equip WebXPRT 4 users with the ability to quickly and reliably evaluate how well devices can handle substantial local inference tasks in the browser.

To reach our goal, we’ll need to make many well-researched and carefully considered decisions along the development path. Throughout the decision-making process, we’ll be balancing our commitment to core XPRT values, such as ease of use and widespread compatibility, with the practical realities of working with rapidly changing emergent technologies. In today’s blog, we’re discussing one of the first decision points that we face—choosing a Web AI framework.

AI frameworks are suites of tools and libraries that serve as building blocks for developers to create new AI-based models and apps or integrate existing AI functions in custom ways. AI frameworks can be commercial, such as OpenAI, or open source, such as Hugging Face, PyTorch, and TensorFlow. Because the XPRTs are available at no cost for users and we publish our source code, open-source frameworks are the right choice for WebXPRT.

Because the new workload will focus on locally powered, browser-based inference tasks, we also need to choose an AI framework that has browser integration capabilities and does not rely on server-side computing. These types of frameworks—called Web AI—use JavaScript (JS) APIs and other web technologies, such as WebAssembly and WebGPU, to run machine learning (ML) tasks on a device’s CPU, GPU, or NPU.

Several emerging Web AI frameworks may provide the compatibility and functionality we need for the future WebXPRT workload. Here are a few that we’re currently researching:

  • ONNX Runtime Web: Microsoft and other partners developed the Open Neural Network Exchange (ONNX) as an open standard for ML models. With available tools, users can convert models from several AI frameworks to ONNX, which can then be used by ONNX Runtime Web. ONNX Runtime Web allows developers to leverage the broad compatibility of ONNX-formatted ML models—including pre-trained vision, language, and GenAI models—in their web applications.
  • Transformers.js: Transformers.js, which uses ONNX Runtime Web, is a JS library that allows users to run AI models from the browser and offline. Transformers.js supports language, computer vision, and audio ML models, among others.
  • MediaPipe: Google developed MediaPipe as a way for developers to adapt TensorFlow-based models for use across many platforms in real-time on-device inference applications such as face detection and gesture recognition. MediaPipe is particularly useful for inference work in images, videos, and live streaming.
  • TensorFlow.js: TensorFlow has been around for a long time, and the TensorFlow ecosystem provides users with a broad variety of models and datasets. TensorFlow is an end-to-end ML solution—training to inference—but with available pre-trained models, developers can focus on inference. TensorFlow.js is an open-source JS library that helps developers integrate TensorFlow with web apps.

We have not made final decisions about a Web AI framework or any aspect of the future workload. We’re still in the research, discussion, and experimentation stages of development, but we want to be transparent with our readers about where we are in the process. In future blog posts, we’ll discuss some of the other major decision points in play.

Most of all, we invite you to join us in these discussions, make recommendations, and give us any other feedback or suggestions you may have, so please feel free to share your thoughts!

Justin

A note about AIXPRT

Recently, a member of the tech press asked us about the status of AIXPRT, our benchmark that measures machine learning inference performance. We want to share our answer here in the blog for the benefit of other readers. The writer said it seemed like we had not updated AIXPRT in a long time, and wondered whether we had any immediate plans to do so.

It’s true that we haven’t updated AIXPRT in quite some time. Unfortunately, while a few tech press publications and OEM labs began experimenting with AIXPRT testing, the benchmark never got the traction we hoped for, and we’ve decided to invest our resources elsewhere for the time being. The AIXPRT installation packages are still available for people to use or reference as they wish, but we have not updated the benchmark to work with the latest platform versions (OpenVINO, TensorFlow, etc.). It’s likely that several components in each package are out of date.

If you are interested in AIXPRT and would like us to bring it up to date, please let us know. We can’t promise that we’ll revive the benchmark, but your feedback could be a valuable contribution as we try to gauge the benchmarking community’s interest.

Justin

Considering WebAssembly for WebXPRT 4

Earlier this month, we discussed a few of our ideas for possible changes in WebXPRT 4, including new web technologies that may work well in a browser benchmark. Today, we’re going to focus on one of those technologies, WebAssembly, in more detail.

WebAssembly (WASM) is a binary instruction format that works across all modern browsers. WASM provides a sandboxed environment that operates at native speeds and takes advantage of common hardware specs across platforms. WASM’s capabilities offer web developers a great deal of flexibility for running complex client applications in the browser. That level of flexibility may enable workload scenario options for WebXPRT 4 such as gaming, video editing, VR, virtual machines, and image recognition. We’re excited about those possibilities, but it remains to be seen which WASM use cases will meet the criteria we look for when considering new WebXPRT workloads, such as relevancy to real life, consistency and replicability, and the broadest-possible level of cross-browser support.

One WASM workload that we’re investigating is a web-based machine learning workload with TensorFlow for JavaScript (TensorFlow.js). TensorFlow.js offers pre-trained models for a wide variety of tasks, including image classification, object detection, sentence encoding, and natural language processing. TensorFlow.js originally used WebGL technology on the back end, but now it’s possible to run the workload using WASM. We could also use this technology to enhance one of WebXPRT’s existing AI-themed workloads, such as Organize Album using AI or Encrypt Notes and OCR Scan.

We’re can’t yet say that a WASM workload will definitely appear in WebXPRT 4, but the technology is promising. Do you have any experience with WASM, or ideas for WASM workloads? There’s still time for you to help shape the future of WebXPRT 4, so let us know what you think!

Justin

Moving forward with WebXPRT 4

In the coming months, we’ll be moving forward with the first stages of the WebXPRT 4 development process. It’s been a while since we last asked readers to send their thoughts about web technologies and workloads that may be a good fit for WebXPRT 4, but we’re still very much open to ideas. If you missed our previous posts about possible changes for WebXPRT 4, we recap the most prominent ideas below. We also request specific feedback regarding a potential battery life component.

  • Community members have asked about a WebXPRT 4 battery life test. Any such test would likely be very similar to the performance-weighted battery life test in CrXPRT 2 (as opposed to a simple rundown test). While WebXPRT runs in almost any browser, cross-browser compatibility issues could cause a WebXPRT battery life test to run in only one browser. If this turned out to be the case, would you still be interested in using the battery life test? Please let us know.
  • One of the most promising ideas is the potential addition of one or more WebAssembly (WASM) workloads. WASM is a low-level, binary instruction format that works across all modern browsers. It offers web developers a great deal of flexibility and provides the speed and efficiency necessary for running complex client applications in the browser. WASM enables a variety of workload scenario options, including gaming, video editing, VR, virtual machines, image recognition, and interactive educational content.
  • We are also considering adding a web-based machine learning workload with TensorFlow for JavaScript (TensorFlow.js). TensorFlow.js offers pre-trained models for a wide range of tasks including image classification, object detection, sentence encoding, and natural language processing. We could also use this technology to enhance one of WebXPRT’s existing AI-themed workloads, such as Organize Album using AI or Encrypt Notes and OCR Scan.
  • Other ideas include using a WebGL-based workload to target GPUs, and simulating common web applications.

We’ll start work on WebXPRT 4 soon, but there’s still time to send your comments and ideas, so please do so as quickly as possible!

Justin

The Introduction to AIXPRT white paper is now available!

Today, we published the Introduction to AIXPRT white paper. The paper serves as an overview of the benchmark and a consolidation of AIXPRT-related information that we’ve published in the XPRT blog over the past several months. For folks who are completely new to AIXPRT and veteran testers who need to brush up on pre-test configuration procedures, we hope this paper will be a quick, one-stop reference that helps reduce the learning curve.

The paper describes the AIXPRT toolkits and workloads, adjusting key test parameters (batch size, level of precision, number of concurrent instances, and default number of requests), using alternate test configuration files, understanding and submitting results, and accessing the source code.

We hope that Introduction to AIXPRT will prove to be a valuable resource. Moving forward, readers will be able to access the paper from the Helpful Info box on AIXPRT.com and the AIXPRT section of our XPRT white papers page. If you have any questions about AIXPRT, please let us know!

Justin

Check out the other XPRTs:

Forgot your password?