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

21–30 of 38 posts

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

#21

Post by magicalhippo »

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?

Not much FF can do directly AFAIK, since it has to do with the hardware decoding the drivers support.

I've used an addon for a while which fixed it by forcing YouTube to serve h264 rather than vp9 content, as hardware accelerated decoding of h264 worked but not vp9. But lately it hasn't worked well. Haven't investigated if it was due to newer content only being vp9 or if the addon stopped working.

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

#22

Post by d_tr »

emersion wrote: post #10

A little disappointed to not see Linux mentioned in any of the timelines.

Indeed. Chromium feels very fast on Windows with a Ryzen 2600 and an R9 280X GPU (4 TFLOPS). On Linux it feels sluggish and a single zoom step can take up to a full second on some pages, and nothing I tried (Wayland vs X11, amdgpu vs radeon, experimental chromium flags vs defaults) seems to make any difference...

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

#23

Post by azangru »

peakaboo wrote: post #4
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…

Look at the evolution of the web technologies. Lots of improvements. Now look at the web. It's unusable without an ad blocker. The tech mafia keeps tracking people and censoring the web, practicing right-speak and removing critical voices. Can a new Web technology solve that? If not, it doesnt matter.

I find this sentiment baffling.

> Now look at the web. It's unusable without an ad blocker.

Don't like ads? Don't visit sites that run ads. For instance, I can't read most of online newspapers because of the ads; so I just don't bother. I visit HN instead.

> The tech mafia keeps tracking people and censoring the web, practicing right-speak and removing critical voices.

I don't know what right-speak is (is it speaking correctly or speaking on right-wing political topics?), but:

- peer-to-peer technologies exist (Odysee, Bitchute, etc.; still relying on the browser to work)

- less censorious networks exist (e.g. locals)

- you can self-host your own platform where you set the rules (phpBB, mattermost, etc.)

- you can run your own blog ang right-speak there to your heart's content; and maybe if this right-speech in interesting, you can attract commenters to exchange ideas (if you find this valuable)

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

#24

Post by floatboth »

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…

> one needs to tinker with even more flags to get Firefox to acceptable performance

All you need is gfx.webrender.all, if you even failed the qualification (most modern setups shouldn't fail it).

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

#26

Post by GrayShade »

magicalhippo wrote: post #21
bufferoverflow wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Not much FF can do directly AFAIK, since it has to do with the hardware decoding the drivers support. I've used an addon for a while which fixed it by forcing YouTube to serve h264 rather than vp9 content, as hardware accelerated decoding of h264 worked but not vp9. But lately it hasn't worked well. Haven't investigated if it was due to newer content only being vp9 or if the addon stopped working.

I think it's a conflict with the sandbox, like it https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1698778.

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

#27

Post by GrayShade »

roca wrote: post #18
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.

Note that WebRender obsoletes Layers, so you shouldn't need to set that.

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

#28

Post by muizelaar »

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?

I'm pretty sure most users don't have this experience. Can you post a link to a pastebin of your about:support or file a bug?

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

#29

Post by Santosh83 »

azangru wrote: post #23
peakaboo wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look at the evolution of the web technologies. Lots of improvements. Now look at the web. It's unusable without an ad blocker. The tech mafia keeps tracking people and censoring the web, practicing right-speak and removing critical voices. Can a new Web technology solve that? If not, it doesnt matter.

I find this sentiment baffling. > Now look at the web. It's unusable without an ad blocker. Don't like ads? Don't visit sites that run ads. For instance, I can't read most of online newspapers because of the ads; so I just don't bother. I visit HN instead. > The tech mafia keeps tracking people and censoring the web, practicing right-speak and removing critical voices. I don't know what right-speak is (is it speaking…

> Don't like ads? Don't visit sites that run ads.

Lots of people, especially in the developing world, don't have that luxury, and they're also incidentally those with underpowered devices and less tech savvy to go get an ad blocker.

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

#30

Post by azangru »

Santosh83 wrote: post #29
azangru wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find this sentiment baffling. > Now look at the web. It's unusable without an ad blocker. Don't like ads? Don't visit sites that run ads. For instance, I can't read most of online newspapers because of the ads; so I just don't bother. I visit HN instead. > The tech mafia keeps tracking people and censoring the web, practicing right-speak and removing critical voices. I don't know what right-speak is (is it speaking…

> Don't like ads? Don't visit sites that run ads. Lots of people, especially in the developing world, don't have that luxury, and they're also incidentally those with underpowered devices and less tech savvy to go get an ad blocker.

I thought we were talking about our own individual choices. At least we can do something about them.

As the problem is described, I don't see any way how it can be approached.

- Don't want ads and tracking — Well, they exist and aren't going anywhere.

- Don't use sites that show ads — Nah, can't, don't have this luxury.

- Install ad blocker — Nah, don't know how or don't have a powerful enough device.

What else is there to do? Keep seeing ads, I suppose. Learn to endure them somehow.

Post reply on HN