Server Load VB > XF & Joomla - Proof Is Everything

Too bad the results are not exactly what I would call benchmark quality. However, I would add that these are the best completely subjective results XenForo could hope for.
 
I have no doubt that xF will perform better on any given machine.
But to be fair ... comparing a heavily hacked vB running thousand addon with a plain vanilla xF will absolutely give those graphs :)
 
Blandt said:
I have no doubt that xF will perform better on any given machine.
But to be fair ... comparing a heavily hacked vB running thousand addon with a plain vanilla xF will absolutely give those graphs :)
Click to expand...
At some point I hope to compare a basic vb3.8 vs xf install.
 
Nope... that was a quite standard VB4 suite install actually. I have VBSEO, but it wasn't installed as I outlined on VB long ago... uninstalled it, gave it another shot down the track... uninstalled it again as it killed the server load. The site had but a handful of minor cosmetic additions to it.
 
Digital Doctor said:
Wow. Joomla is no lightweight CMS either.
This is a very interesting test.
I think the "perfect test" would be a XF + Joomla site with login integration and user synching. This could be accomplished with jfusion.
Click to expand...

I didn't think Joomla was 200-query heavy. That's more queries than my weight in pounds.
 
Anthony, would you mind if I copied your first post to my site to show my users? And I looked into WiredTree (which you'd mentioned)...holy shamoley! I'm paying WAY too much! I'm going to be able to cut my monthly fees in HALF!
 
While I really have no doubt that xF plays much more nice with hardware and whatnot, how modded were your vB forums prior?

I'm sure your results would still be really good, but I can't help but wonder how much the mods would make a difference. I know on my vB I use a lot of mods, some of them are pretty heavy.
 
Trekkan said:
While I really have no doubt that xF plays much more nice with hardware and whatnot, how modded were your vB forums prior?

I'm sure your results would still be really good, but I can't help but wonder how much the mods would make a difference. I know on my vB I use a lot of mods, some of them are pretty heavy.
Click to expand...

All i can say is I know if I visit the vB support forums. It takes about 20 secs to load. With vB3 it took 10 or less. So almost double the load time.
 
Dave Stephenson said:
how close to default was the vB install?
Click to expand...
Anthony Parsons said:
Nope... that was a quite standard VB4 suite install actually. I have VBSEO, but it wasn't installed as I outlined on VB long ago... uninstalled it, gave it another shot down the track... uninstalled it again as it killed the server load. The site had but a handful of minor cosmetic additions to it.
Click to expand...
I other words pretty much identical.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SatGuyScott
Xenforo and Ezoic
Replies
5
Views
1K
kontrabass
kontrabass
benFF
vB 3.8 > xF 2.2 migration : 8 months later
2
Replies
28
Views
3K
benFF
benFF
Vercingetorix
Activity Summary emails are the digital equivalent of junk mail.
Replies
3
Views
1K
Vercingetorix
Vercingetorix
sbj
  • Locked
Current state of XF and the participation of the XF Team
6 7 8
Replies
150
Views
15K
Kier
Kier
Mouth
My migration of hosting and server to halve costs and easily expand storage
Replies
17
Views
2K
m1ne
m1ne
Top Bottom