Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

RenderingNG: Ready for the next generation of web content

developer.chrome.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 38 posts

Re: RenderingNG: Ready for the next generation of web content

#11

Post by contravariant »

lionkor wrote: post #2

I'm probably just being cynical, but those graphs and diagrams scream of a lack of "meat" to what they're saying. Except for the first graphic, they are all just products of a marketing brain, as far as I can tell. Showing the old engine as a graph that plummets, and the new one as one that doesnt, or the one that plots "frustration" against "features & complexity", is just utterly meaningless to me. Maybe this appea…

Clearly in the old version the scrolling performance becomes negative at some point, which would be interesting to see.

Re: RenderingNG: Ready for the next generation of web content

#12

Post by [deleted] »

Ristovski wrote: post #6

Rendering performance is one of the few things left that Chrome has up its sleeve as an edge over their competitors (mainly Firefox), at least on Linux. Out of the box, Firefox has terrible rendering performance, not to mention hw-accelerated video decoding. Now, Chrome is not a whole lot better out of the box, since it still applies old "Driver bug workarounds" that have long been fixed in mesa/GPU drivers, but this…

[deleted]

Re: RenderingNG: Ready for the next generation of web content

#13

Post by egnehots »

lionkor wrote: post #2

I'm probably just being cynical, but those graphs and diagrams scream of a lack of "meat" to what they're saying. Except for the first graphic, they are all just products of a marketing brain, as far as I can tell. Showing the old engine as a graph that plummets, and the new one as one that doesnt, or the one that plots "frustration" against "features & complexity", is just utterly meaningless to me. Maybe this appea…

Yeah, but don't forget that's just the first post in a serie.

Let's hope that the next post will have more meaningful technical content..

Re: RenderingNG: Ready for the next generation of web content

#14

Post by roca »

lionkor wrote: post #2

I'm probably just being cynical, but those graphs and diagrams scream of a lack of "meat" to what they're saying. Except for the first graphic, they are all just products of a marketing brain, as far as I can tell. Showing the old engine as a graph that plummets, and the new one as one that doesnt, or the one that plots "frustration" against "features & complexity", is just utterly meaningless to me. Maybe this appea…

I think the Chrome team has done a lot of good work here, but you're right about the graphs. What units does the "frustration" axis use, anyway?

Re: RenderingNG: Ready for the next generation of web content

#15

Post by AHTERIX5000 »

Ristovski wrote: post #6

Rendering performance is one of the few things left that Chrome has up its sleeve as an edge over their competitors (mainly Firefox), at least on Linux. Out of the box, Firefox has terrible rendering performance, not to mention hw-accelerated video decoding. Now, Chrome is not a whole lot better out of the box, since it still applies old "Driver bug workarounds" that have long been fixed in mesa/GPU drivers, but this…

Yeah it's not great on Mac either. I have pretty much standard Firefox installation with only Ublock Origin added and it's extremely easy to get 16" Macbook Pro hot when Safari handles the same load without too much heat.

Re: RenderingNG: Ready for the next generation of web content

#16

Post by roca »

tormeh wrote: post #5

Is this Chrome catching up to Firefox's Quantum projects? I.e. Stylo and WebRender? It puzzles me a bit that Firefox, Chrome, etc. don't reuse each others components. Obviously Chrome can't just plop in WebRender, but is it really more effort to integrate it than to write your own? Same for Firefox and V8. I'm not saying all browsers should be the same, but (and this is a big assumption) if reuse is possible, then wo…

Using external components is pretty hard. The interfaces between them are pretty complicated and abstraction layers are expensive. There are also different policies in different browsers, e.g. Firefox is much more into using Rust than Chrome is, for obvious reasons.

Firefox does use Skia though.

Re: RenderingNG: Ready for the next generation of web content

#17

Post by roca »

bufferoverflow wrote: post #7
Ristovski wrote: post #6

Rendering performance is one of the few things left that Chrome has up its sleeve as an edge over their competitors (mainly Firefox), at least on Linux. Out of the box, Firefox has terrible rendering performance, not to mention hw-accelerated video decoding. Now, Chrome is not a whole lot better out of the box, since it still applies old "Driver bug workarounds" that have long been fixed in mesa/GPU drivers, but this…

Seriously, FF on Ubuntu causes 100% CPU usage when watching YouTube in 1080p. Meanwhile Chrome on Windows eats maybe 6-10%. How is this not #1 priority to fix?

Comparing across platforms is not a good idea. Different drivers, APIs and platform OS issues dramatically affect these results.

Re: RenderingNG: Ready for the next generation of web content

#18

Post by roca »

Ristovski wrote: post #6

Rendering performance is one of the few things left that Chrome has up its sleeve as an edge over their competitors (mainly Firefox), at least on Linux. Out of the box, Firefox has terrible rendering performance, not to mention hw-accelerated video decoding. Now, Chrome is not a whole lot better out of the box, since it still applies old "Driver bug workarounds" that have long been fixed in mesa/GPU drivers, but this…

Personally I just have layers.acceleration.force-enabled: true and that's enough to get me fast 4K WebGL. WebRender and Wayland dmabuf seem to turn on automatically. Intel 915, Fedora 34, dual 4K monitors, distro Firefox 89.

Re: RenderingNG: Ready for the next generation of web content

#19

Post by krylon »

roca wrote: post #14
lionkor wrote: post #2

I'm probably just being cynical, but those graphs and diagrams scream of a lack of "meat" to what they're saying. Except for the first graphic, they are all just products of a marketing brain, as far as I can tell. Showing the old engine as a graph that plummets, and the new one as one that doesnt, or the one that plots "frustration" against "features & complexity", is just utterly meaningless to me. Maybe this appea…

I think the Chrome team has done a lot of good work here, but you're right about the graphs. What units does the "frustration" axis use, anyway?

Decibel, as in the volume at which users yell at their display. ;-)

Re: RenderingNG: Ready for the next generation of web content

#20

Post by pverghese »

readflaggedcomm wrote: post #3

>Gecko and Webkit have also implemented most of the same architectural features described in these blog posts, and in some cases even added them before Chromium. That's why all this threaded rendering stuff sounded familiar. Mozilla putting massively-parallel Servo features into Firefox is already a few years old: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gecko_(software)#Components

Yet for some reason. Firefox is still slow compared to chrome
Post reply on HN