I configured a custom connection of 300Kbit down, 150Kbit up, and 300ms latency. That is worse than 3G, but far better than the GPRS/EDGE connection that many people still get in remote areas. I also checked the “mobile useragent / resolution” checkbox to render the sites in small resolutions.
I picked five sites:
- filamentgroup.com as a reference, I assume they do it all right.
- boosterconf.no I know this site loads quite a bit of JS early in the page.
- dn.no a norwegian financial newspaper that recently launched a new responsive site. I noticed they havd 500KB of fonts, and a bit of early JS.
- gjensidige.no. Launched their responsive site a couple of years ago. A UI without much heavy graphics, should/could load fast.
- kreftforeningen.no. Launched their responsive site 1.5 years ago with great success.
Edit: I also tested two norwegian sites that load really fast.
And did three tests:
- Regular Chrome
- Chrome Canary
- Chrome canary and blocking all requests containing “.js, .woff, .ttf”.
You can see the results in the animated GIF below (0.5x speed). I know, the irony of using a 20MB GIF in a blogpost about performance…
- Filamentgroup.com is readable in under 3 seconds in all cases.
- dn.no is readable after 9 seconds with no fonts/js, vs 33 seconds with fonts/js. Chrome Canary helps by show the default-font in stead of nothing.
- gjensidige.no is readable after 12 seconds vs 26 seconds. Note that this site uses https which adds a couple of seconds in webpagetest.
- kreftforeningen.no has a 400KB css file that for some reason is not gzipped, so it is pretty slow no matter what. Too bad. Still, disabling JS/fonts cuts 5 seconds of the loading time.