Volume Shader
Back to learning center
Benchmarking
8 min read

Compare Volume Shader BM Results: FPS and Frame Time Guide

Learn how to compare Volume Shader BM results. Covers FPS, frame time, 1% low, browser settings, power mode, thermal notes, and fair repeatable test runs.

Published 2026-05-07/Updated 2026-05-09

What you'll learn

  • Which conditions must match before two Volume Shader BM results are comparable.
  • How FPS, 1% low, P95 frame time, and stutter describe different parts of performance.
  • Why warmed and sustained runs can matter more than a cold burst score.
  • What device and browser notes to record before sharing a result.
  • How to avoid mixing reference estimates with real browser submissions.

Quick definition

To compare Volume Shader BM results, keep the shader workload and test environment fixed, then read FPS together with frame-time stability. The most useful comparison records preset, complexity, browser, render size, power mode, device state, average FPS, 1% low, and sustained behavior.

How do you compare Volume Shader BM results fairly?

Volume Shader BM results are only comparable when the workload and environment stay fixed. That means the same preset, same browser family, same window size or render scale, same power mode, and similar thermal state.

Treat FPS as the quick throughput signal and frame time as the stability signal. A higher average FPS with uneven frame times can be less useful than a slightly lower result that stays consistent through the run.

What should you record with each benchmark result?

Write down the GPU or SoC name reported by the browser, the browser version, OS, preset, complexity level, window size, display refresh rate, power profile, and whether the device was plugged in.

For laptops and phones, add thermal context. A cold first run, a warmed second run, and a long sustained run can produce different results even when the shader is identical.

How do FPS and frame time explain the result?

Average FPS summarizes recent throughput. 1% low and P95 frame time describe the slower tail of the run. Stutter frequency is useful when the average looks fine but the visual motion feels uneven.

Use reference device pages for orientation, not as official truth. Real browser submissions and reference estimates answer different questions and should stay labelled separately.

Repeatable workflow

01Warm up the device

Run the selected preset for 30-60 seconds before recording so boost clocks, shader compilation, and initial browser work settle.

02Lock the workload

Keep preset, complexity level, window size, render scale, and browser fixed before comparing two devices.

03Record average and stability

Capture FPS, frame time, 1% low, and any obvious stutter or thermal drift instead of relying on one headline number.

04Repeat once

Run the same test again after a short pause. If the second run drops sharply, the useful result is the sustained number.

Comparison notes

QuestionVolume Shader BMOther approach
Primary metricFPS plus frame-time stability for a focused WebGL shader workload.Full native suites usually report a composite score across broader graphics features.
Best comparison scopeSame browser, same preset, same render size, same power mode.Same native benchmark version, driver, API path, and graphics settings.
Main limitationIt does not represent every game engine or native graphics API.A single native score can hide browser-specific shader behavior.

Key takeaways

  1. 01 The same preset, render size, browser, and power mode are the minimum comparison baseline.
  2. 02 Average FPS is not enough; frame-time stability explains whether the run feels smooth.
  3. 03 A lower sustained score can be more useful than a short cold-run peak.
  4. 04 Good result notes make later comparisons much more trustworthy.

FAQ

Can I compare results from different browsers?

You can, but treat that as a browser plus GPU comparison. For a GPU-only comparison, use the same browser and browser version where possible.

Should I use average FPS or 1% low?

Use both. Average FPS shows general throughput, while 1% low helps reveal uneven frame delivery and throttling.

Why did my second run score lower?

The device may have warmed up, changed power state, or hit browser scheduling differences. Sustained results are often more useful than a cold burst result.

Related guides

Benchmarking

Volume Shader BM GitHub and cznull Source Guide

Find the original cznull Volume Shader BM demo, the GitHub Pages source, and how this browser GPU benchmark guide relates to the public vsbm code.
Benchmarking

Volume Shader BM vs 3DMark: Browser GPU Testing Guide

Compare Volume Shader BM vs 3DMark for GPU testing. Learn what browser shader results show, what native suites measure, and when to use each benchmark.
Methodology

Thermal Throttling: How Browser GPU Benchmarks Drift

Learn how thermal throttling affects browser GPU benchmarks. Covers heat, boost clocks, power profiles, sustained WebGL workloads, and clear result labels.
Mobile

Volume Shader BM Phone Test: Mobile WebGL Benchmark Guide

Learn how to run Volume Shader BM on phones and tablets. Covers safe presets, thermal throttling, browser settings, battery mode, and mobile WebGL limits.
WebGL

WebGL Volume Rendering: How Browser GPU Shaders Work

Learn WebGL volume rendering in the browser. Covers GLSL setup, full-screen passes, uniforms, frame cadence, GPU timing signals, and benchmark limits.

External references

MotionMark benchmark methodologyBasemark Web 3.03DMark benchmark overview