All graphs for this bug:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?bug_id=633132

Original alerts at time of bug-filing:
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/group_report?keys=agxzfmNocm9tZXBlcmZyFAsSB0Fub21hbHkYgICgxonltwkM


Bot(s) for this bug's original alert(s):

chromium-rel-win7-gpu-intel

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9005541981810654016

===== BISECT JOB RESULTS =====
Status: failed


===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision         Mean     Std Dev  N  Good?
chromium@408860  7027.36  208.271  5  good
chromium@408865  6400.92  126.758  5  bad

Bisect job ran on: winx64intel_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 633132

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests startup.cold.blank_page
Test Metric: first_non_empty_paint_time/first_non_empty_paint_time
Relative Change: 8.91%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/winx64intel_perf_bisect/builds/1074
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9005541981810654016


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5858810602717184

| O O | Visit http://www.chromium.org/developers/speed-infra/perf-bug-faq
|  X  | for more information addressing perf regression bugs. For feedback,
| / \ | file a bug with component Tests>AutoBisect.  Thank you!

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9005310917263207808

===== BISECT JOB RESULTS =====
Status: failed


===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision         Mean     Std Dev  N  Good?
chromium@408860  7027.36  208.271  5  good
chromium@408865  6400.92  126.758  5  bad

Bisect job ran on: winx64intel_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 633132

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests startup.cold.blank_page
Test Metric: first_non_empty_paint_time/first_non_empty_paint_time
Relative Change: 8.91%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/winx64intel_perf_bisect/builds/1074
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9005541981810654016


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5858810602717184

| O O | Visit http://www.chromium.org/developers/speed-infra/perf-bug-faq
|  X  | for more information addressing perf regression bugs. For feedback,
| / \ | file a bug with component Tests>AutoBisect.  Thank you!

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9005219731735217488

===== BISECT JOB RESULTS =====
Status: completed


=== Bisection aborted ===
The bisect was aborted because The metric values for the initial "good" and "bad" revisions do not represent a clear regression.
Please contact the the team (see below) if you believe this is in error.

=== Warnings ===
The following warnings were raised by the bisect job:

 * Bisect failed to reproduce the regression with enough confidence.

===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision         Mean     Std Dev  N   Good?
chromium@408860  7036.83  192.206  12  good
chromium@408865  6949.75  227.663  8   bad

Bisect job ran on: winx64intel_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 633132

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --also-run-disabled-tests startup.cold.blank_page
Test Metric: first_non_empty_paint_time/first_non_empty_paint_time
Relative Change: 1.05%
Score: 0

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/winx64intel_perf_bisect/builds/1095
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/9005541981810654016


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5858810602717184

| O O | Visit http://www.chromium.org/developers/speed-infra/perf-bug-faq
|  X  | for more information addressing perf regression bugs. For feedback,
| / \ | file a bug with component Tests>AutoBisect.  Thank you!

Perf sheriff ping: reminder to follow up on possible performance issues

Perf sheriff fixit: unsetting owners where reporter==owner, to clarify the current member of the rotation is responsible for triage.

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8995788478502643936

Kicked off bisect with range 408822..408870

===== BISECT JOB RESULTS =====
Status: failed


=== Bisection aborted ===
The bisect was aborted because Bisect cannot identify a culprit: Bisect failed to reproduce the regression with enough confidence.
Please contact the the team (see below) if you believe this is in error.

===== TESTED REVISIONS =====
Revision         Mean     Std Dev  N   Good?
chromium@408822  6103.33  2427.36  27  good
chromium@408870  6072.85  1971.33  27  bad

Bisect job ran on: winx64intel_perf_bisect
Bug ID: 633132

Test Command: src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests startup.cold.blank_page
Test Metric: first_non_empty_paint_time/first_non_empty_paint_time
Relative Change: None

Buildbot stdio: http://build.chromium.org/p/tryserver.chromium.perf/builders/winx64intel_perf_bisect/builds/1231
Job details: https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8995788478502643936


Not what you expected? We'll investigate and get back to you!
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=6333305916489728

| O O | Visit http://www.chromium.org/developers/speed-infra/perf-bug-faq
|  X  | for more information addressing perf regression bugs. For feedback,
| / \ | file a bug with component Tests>AutoBisect.  Thank you!

Started bisect job https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8979227082963111520

=== Auto-CCing suspected CL author thestig@chromium.org ===

Hi thestig@chromium.org, the bisect results pointed to your CL, please take a look at the
results.


=== BISECT JOB RESULTS ===
Perf regression found with culprit

Suspected Commit
  Author : thestig
  Commit : fe802a9564a41015714ddd7c0ff37bb870991dad
  Date   : Sat Jul 30 05:04:07 2016
  Subject: Roll PDFium 6f10254..3e454bf

Bisect Details
  Configuration: winx64intel_perf_bisect
  Benchmark    : startup.cold.blank_page
  Metric       : first_non_empty_paint_time/first_non_empty_paint_time
  Change       : 6.54% | 5649.21428571 -> 5666.28571429

Revision             Result                  N
chromium@408860      5649.21 +- 961.295      14      good
chromium@408861      5249.33 +- 999.997      6       good
chromium@408862      5850.21 +- 472.879      14      bad       <--
chromium@408865      5666.29 +- 1709.03      14      bad

To Run This Test
  src/tools/perf/run_benchmark -v --browser=release_x64 --output-format=chartjson --upload-results --pageset-repeat=1 --also-run-disabled-tests startup.cold.blank_page

Debug Info
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/buildbucket_job_status/8979227082963111520

Is this bisect wrong?
  https://chromeperf.appspot.com/bad_bisect?try_job_id=5796895538020352


| O O | Visit http://www.chromium.org/developers/speed-infra/perf-bug-faq
|  X  | for more information addressing perf regression bugs. For feedback,
| / \ | file a bug with component Speed>Bisection.  Thank you!

I'm not convinced this is my CL. PDFium code doesn't even run during start up. Assuming this is not flaky, r408865 is a more likely culprit?

The ref build on the chart isn't showing by default for some reason. When I turn it on, it's clear that this is due to background noise on the machine. Sorry for the noise.