PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 27, 20260 citationsOpen Access

CWV × AI: The First Systematic Measurement of Client-Side Neural Network Inference Impact on Core Web Vitals

View Full Paper
MKMarti Srikar Phani Kumar

Key Points

  • This research aims to systematically benchmark the impact of client-side neural network inference on Core Web Vitals, particularly Interaction to Next Paint.
  • Benchmarked four quantized models: DistilBERT, BERT-base, Whisper Tiny, and MobileViT-S.
  • Conducted tests on two devices (Apple MacBook Pro M1 Max and Samsung Galaxy Z Tri Fold) and simulated mobile profiles (4X and 6X CPU throttle).
  • Measured INP-equivalent responsiveness, memory pressure, and bundle cost across 10 iterations for each configuration.
  • DistilBERT maintained 'Good' INP-equivalent classification across all profiles on the M1 Max, while Whisper Tiny reached 6,535 ms under simulated 6X CPU slowdown.
  • In a high-performance desktop, INP-equivalent ranged from 27.2 ms (DistilBERT) to 500.3 ms (Whisper Tiny).
  • On a premium Android device, models produced 57.1 ms to 947.4 ms, demonstrating consistent 2X degradation.

Abstract

This paper presents the first systematic benchmark of client-side neural network inference impact on Core Web Vitals (CWV) proxies, specifically Interaction to Next Paint (INP), a Core Web Vital included in Google’s page experience signals. The proliferation of browser-native machine learning libraries such as Transformers.js has enabled inference without server round-trips, but its cost to user-perceived performance has never been systematically measured. We benchmark four quantized models—DistilBERT, BERT-base, Whisper Tiny, and MobileViT-S—across two real devices (Apple MacBook Pro M1 Max and Samsung Galaxy Z Tri Fold) and two simulated mobile profiles (4X and 6X CPU throttle), measuring a lab-based INP-equivalent responsiveness proxy, memory pressure, and bundle cost across 10 iterations per configuration. On a high-performance desktop, the measured INP-equivalent ranges from 27.2 ms (DistilBERT, “Good”) to 500.3 ms (Whisper Tiny, “Poor”). On a premium Android device without throttling, the same models produce 57.1 ms to 947.4ms—a consistent 2X degradation. On the Galaxy Z Tri Fold with simulated 6X CPU slowdown, Whisper Tiny reaches 6,535 ms. Critically, DistilBERT is the only model that maintains “Good” INP-equivalent classification across all device profiles tested on the M1 Max. These findings establish that model architecture—not parameter count—is the primary predictor of browser inference cost, and provide the first empirical basis for model selection decisions in interaction-critical web applications.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Marti Srikar Phani Kumar (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a168b160c924ddd1bd59f72https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20381364
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Anatomizing Deep Learning Inference in Web Browsers2024 · 10 citations
  2. 2Anatomizing Deep Learning Inference in Web Browsers2024 · 2 citations
  3. 3The Latency Floor Model: Predictive Performance Diagnostics for Real-Time AI Inference on Edge Accelerators2026
  4. 4Performance Analysis of a Modular Framework for Edge-Based Generative Conversational AI2026
  5. 5Real-Time Performance Benchmarking of TinyML Models in Embedded Systems (PICO: Performance of Inference, CPU, and Operations)2025