Zonbu boot time & Firefox performance timing

Timex IronmanThe low power consumption and utter silence of the Zonbu are very appealing.

Amusingly, the Zonbu has caused me to notice how ungodly loud the water cooler is in my dining room.

But do these environmental benefits come at a significant performance and boot time cost over a regular PC? I set out, stop watch in hand, to find out how the Zonbu compared with my desktop PC in this regard…

Start your engines


The first test was to measure the length of time it takes to boot both machines from a cold start – literally from when I pushed the power button.

My Zonbu boots from power-on to the login screen in 1m 30s. My login screen has my username saved, so after typing my password I can continue and it takes an additional 28s to get to a usable desktop, for a total time of 1m 58s.

Not exactly speedy.

Pitching a lower powered system as a replacement for traditional PCs means fighting common perceptions about the sacrifices that will have to be made. Demonstrating rapid boot time will go a long way to overcoming that objection.

Isn’t it interesting how much of our observations relate to psychology more so than technology? Marketing is a funny thing.

I would suggest this be an area of focus, I have a hunch there are some optimizations in the boot process that could lead to shaving a significant amount of time off that start-uptime.

Desktop XP PC

By comparison, my desktop PC went from power-on to a usable desktop is 1m 10s, 48s faster than the Zonbu. To be fair, I don’t have login enabled on my XP desktop, but then neither do a lot of people. Also, my XP machine doesn’t connect to any network shares, while the Zonbu is (I assume) establishing a connection with the S3 storage servers.

For the purpose of this experiment, the machines were using the same physical ethernet cable, which I moved between boxes to test. Everything downstream of the ethernet cable was identical.

Winner: Windows Xp – 1m10s versus Zonbu 1m 58s

The Checkered Flag

When it came to shutting the machines down, there was a significant difference as well. It took the Zonbu 39s to go from the desktop to being powered off, while it only took the XP machine 16s to clean up and shut down.

I’m not sure how important this particular metric is, as I usually walk away as soon as I click the shutdown button anyway, but I did want to be thorough. The things I do for you, my readers.

Launch your browsers

Next up I wanted to compare application launch times. I configured Firefox to open to a blank start page and cleared the cache.

The Zonbu launches Firefox in 1.7s, while XP launches Firefox in 1.5s. While my XP box has a slight edge, it is virtually imperceptible to me as a user.

My Zonbu has 512MB of RAM and a 1.2 GHz processor whereas my desktop has 2GB of DDR400 RAM and an AMD Athlon 3800+ 2.4GHz processor. Given this, The Zonbu’s comparitive performance is excellent.

Extra! Extra! News site load times

Next up I wanted to compare page load and render times between the boxes. I spend the bulk of my day with multiple tabs open in Firefox, and the Zonbu is really meant as an Internet terminal/appliance, so this is a key metric.

To ensure consistent performance, I pre-loaded all the pages in Firefox, which caused the key components to populate our ISP cache at the cable TV office. Doing so ensures a consistent load and render comparison on both platforms, and also ensures consistent DNS performance/caching.

I then flushed the locale Firefox cache (CTRL-SHIFT-INSERT) and shut down Firefox, before re-launching it to the blank start page.

The results are formatted as Site/Zonbu/XP. Times in seconds.



ww.news.com /9.5/8.5

news.google.com 3.7/2.2

As you can see, the XP machine has a slight edge, usually besting the Zonbu by anywhere from .3s up to 1.5s with Google. The larger discrepency on the Google site is due to compression we utilize, see the note below. Being text heavy the Google sit is disproportionately affected by it. It looks like the normal delta between the two machines is around .6s at most.

We make aggressive use of GZip compression in our web caching architecture, and as such the browsers have to dynamically un-zip the text portion of web pages, which uses processing power and adds a bit of delay but generally makes plain text content move extremely fast on the network.


I did not expect the Zonbu and the XP desktop to be quite so close on page load/render times. I think the difference will probably not even be noticeable to most end users.

The boot process does require some futher scrutiny and optimzation to get it closer to the XP start-up time. Almost 2 minutes from power on to usable desktop is not ideal but not horrific either.

One thing the Zonbu team can immediately investigate is shortening the start-up audio file that is played when the desktop launches. For some reason playing this file back sucks up 100% of the CPU, stopping you from launching any applications until the sound finishes playing.

Going to a lower bit rate for the clip and shortening the length (which is about 40% too long, time wise) would buy you a few seconds immediately. Just a thought.

The Zonbu is still happily sipping just 9W of power as I write this, running in complete silence; I can honestly say I’m happy to give up .5s to 1s of page load/render time for the savings in power and noise.

Most importantly, I don’t feel like I’m really sacrificing material performance to get those economic and environmental benefits.

Advantage: Zonbu

-Mr. Zonbu

6 Responses to Zonbu boot time & Firefox performance timing

  1. Dave says:

    Now, with ‘near future’ in mind, try comparing the Zonbu boot up time to Vista. Zonbu probably wins by, what, 10 minutes?


  2. mrzonbu says:

    Hi Dave,

    Will do. I brought my Vista laptop home for just that purpose. Later today I’ll let you know the results. I’m not sure you’ll be happy, Vista boots to the login prompt fairly quick, but we’ll see what the actual numbers say.

    -Mr. Z

  3. wjl says:

    Hm – I don’t know if it is really fair to count/measure the time until the boot prompt appears. Modern boot loaders like the one of Vista are by far *not* ready booted when showing this login screen (the Linux camp is discussing & planning similar things to “speed up” (read: fake) the boot process).

    IMHO, for a device which consumes next to nothing, boot time can be ignored anyway – like you wrote later as well.

    Kind regards,

  4. Pelle says:

    It shouldn’t be slow and it’s god to se that it isn’t. My old 25 mhz computer worked lovely with Windows 3.1 and if it only would have had a network card I could had browsed the web with it to. It’s horrible that computers doesn’t deliver more performance than they do with double 2 000 mhz cores compared to the single 25 mhz core. Are we really getting over an experience that’s over a hundred times better?

    It’s very nice that machines like this one proves that we don’t get that and shows that there are other qualities in a computer than photo quality 3d-games…

  5. […] Vista boot times for comparison I recently looked at the Zonbu boot times compared with my Windows XP desktop. […]

  6. Jason says:

    XP can be up and running in as little as 28 seconds, But I don’t know how far Zonbu can be optimized to get additional speed.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: