JPEG2000 vs JPEG-LS Decode Performance in the Web Browser

In a previous post, I reported that JPEG2000 is a performance bottleneck in medical imaging systems.  To help provide some data to back this claim up, I ran some quick performance comparisons between the two codecs using cornerstone.  Here are the results:

Test Platform:
MacBook Pro (Retina, 15-inch Mid 2014)
Processor: 2.8 GHz Intel Core i7
OS: MacOS Sierra GM
Browser: Google Chrome 52.0.2743.116 (64-bit)

Test Harness:
http://rawgit.com/chafey/cornerstoneWADOImageLoader/dev/examples/dicomfile/index.html

Test Data:
ftp://medical.nema.org/MEDICAL/Dicom/DataSets/WG04 

Test Results:

CT2 Image 
JPEG2000: 133ms 
JPEG-LS: 14ms 

MG1 Image : 
JPEG2000: 6505 ms 
JPEG-LS: 752 ms 

In this test, JPEG-LS is about 10x faster at decoding than JPEG2000 in cornerstone.  JPEG2000 decode speed should improve in time as OpenJPEG performance improves and Web Assembly is implemented by web browsers.  Performance is likely to vary between web browsers and versions as well.

Update: For reference purposes, here are the compressed sizes of the images used in the above tests:

CT2_J2KR: 119,540 bytes
CT2_JLSL: 115,504 bytes (~4% better)

MG1_J2KR: 12,230,378 bytes
MG1_JLSL: 12,019,930 bytes (~2% better)