DarkCat09/sb-vs-xray
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

docs: add "in a nutshell" section

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
DarkCat09 2024-11-18 23:17:35 +04:00
parent 909d9d0a9c
commit 3066c64058
Signed by: DarkCat09
GPG key ID: BD3CE9B65916CD82
1 changed files with 12 additions and 1 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

13
README.md
View file

@ -6,7 +6,18 @@ client commands are shown in `bench_*.txt` files.
All you need is iperf3 on client and server, hyperfine on client,
xray and sing-box binaries (take from "Releases" or compile by yourself) placed on client and server.
Results in a nutshell: (TODO)
## In a nutshell
Results are inaccurate, they look like a statistical error, made by,
for example, different ISP's network load, that's why I said "an attempt on benchmarking".
Both proxies are almost the same speed. *Xray was sometimes a bit faster.*
But in iperf3 benchmark it often behaved weird: from 2nd packet speed was dropping to zero.
So, use what you want / to what you already get used / what works better in your case.
As for me, I found sing-box' JSON config more convenient than Xray's.
On the other hand, Xray provides more features to hide a proxy,
that is important, I guess (?), in China and Iran.
## hyperfine, curl, direct outbound