Given the lack of evidence to support actual cheating you should probably just apply occam's razor here and assume it's actually faster. Or you could use the dark, hidden secrets of 'view source' to read the JS yourself. It has comments!
Given the lack of evidence to support actual cheating you should probably just apply occam's razor here and assume it's actually faster. Or you could use the dark, hidden secrets of 'view source' to read the JS yourself. It has comments!
From everything I've read IE10 apparently is fast, and the numbers are believable from my experience doing similar things (web workers drawing fractal-like images on a canvas) but given that it's the only "pretty" benchmark in the lot, it just seems a little strange.
You might note that they make for bad science, but benchmarks tend not to get used in anything resembling a scientific comparison. Benchmarks get used for comparative testing (did we make thing X faster than it was before?) and to try and prove that your product is better than the competition (in which case much larger lies are going to get trotted out either way).