![]() It’s still going to require some work.Īt least that’s the case when we’re talking about the library itself. If you were to try and build your entire site using AMP, you should be aware that while it’s not likely to end up too bloated, it’s also not going to end up blowing anyone’s mind for its speed straight of the box. As with pages built with any technology, it’s entirely possible to build an AMP document that is slow and heavy.Īny claim that AMP ensures a certain level of performance depends both on how forgiving you are of the extremes, and on what your definition of “performant” is. However, the numbers also showed that because a page is a valid AMP document, that is not a 100% guarantee that the site will be fast or lightweight. Most of the time, AMP’s performance is relatively predictable. There was, however, some deviance on both ends of the spectrum: the minimum values were pretty low and the maximum values frightening high. ![]() The bulk of the pages test landed within a reasonable range of each other. It does this job well, for the most part. The AMP library is supposed to help ensure a certain level of consistency with regards to performance. Since the foundation is HTML, CSS, and JS, you can absolutely build a document using the AMP library without using the Google AMP Cache. AMP JS is the library that is used to give you those custom elements as well as handles a variety of optimizations for AMP-based documents. AMP HTML is both a subset of HTML (there are restrictions on what you can and can’t use) and an augmentation of it (AMP HTML includes a number of custom AMP components and properties). When we talk about the AMP library, we’re talking about AMP JS and AMP HTML combined. Each page was built with AMP, but each page was also loaded from the origin server for this test. I ran these through WebPageTest over a simulated 3G connection using a Nexus 5. In the end, after that filtering, I came up with a list of 50 different AMP articles. The only filtering I did was to ensure that I tested no more than two URL’s from any one domain. It didn’t matter what the topic was or who the publisher was: if it was AMP, it got included. I don’t recommend this to anyone, but there was no way around it.Īnytime I found an AMP article, I dropped the URL in a spreadsheet. The first thing I did was browse the news. Those are fair concerns so let’s dig a little deeper. There’s a lot of variability and it’s possible Scientas is a one-off example. Now, you might be thinking, that’s just one single page. On a simulated 3G connection, the Scientas AMP article presents you with a blank white screen for 3.3 seconds. He discovered that without the preloading, it’s far from instant. In Ferdy’s post, he analyzed a page from Scientas. How well does the AMP library perform when used as a standalone framework? In other words, evaluating AMP’s performance based on how those pages load in search results tells us nothing about the effectiveness of AMP itself, but rather the effectiveness of preloading content. The only performance benefit AMP has in this context is the headstart that Google gives it. Then again, so would any page that was preloaded in the background before you navigated to it. In the context of Google search, then, AMP performs remarkably well. If you do end up clicking on that AMP page, it’s already been downloaded in the background and as a result, it displays right away. In the case of the search carousel, it’s literally an iframe that gets populated with the entirety of the AMP document. But what you don’t see is that Google gets that instantaneous loading by actively preloading AMP documents in the background. How well does AMP perform in the context of Google search?Īs Ferdy pointed out, when you click through to an AMP article from Google Search, it loads instantly-AMP’s little lightning bolt icon seems more than appropriate.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |