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

A new speed milestone for Chrome

blog.chromium.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 161 posts

Re: A new speed milestone for Chrome

#51

Post by whizzter »

jart wrote: post #40
greggman3 wrote: post #17

There are certainly lots of situations where one browser beats another For example in this microbenchmark, Chrome is 10x slower than both FF and Safari at one method. https://jsbenchit.org/?src=cfcb916dd03df45952183e6484a14344 Here's another where in one case Firefox is 54x faster than Chrome https://jsbenchit.org/?src=beb26575ad78caa99a2a8c45ce2b780f

Here's a conundrum. Fabrice Bellard's QuickJS engine takes 3 minutes to run the test262 ECMAScript conformance suite. d8 takes 37 minutes to run test262 according to https://medium.com/compilers/testing-the-v8-javascript-engin... and it crashes for me in Chrome https://v8.github.io/test262/website/default.html Has anyone else observed this performance disparity? Could it really be possible that a JavaScript engine wr…

test262 is a conformance test and as such mostly runs small test-snippets once to verify, what counts here is setup, parsing and first-run execution.

While V8 has added a fast first-stage interpreter there are probably a ton of other overheads when starting a V8 context as well as "inefficiencies" related to preparing code for later JIT optimizations.

So for more CPU intensive code written in JS where the JIT activates the tables shifts radically, compare QuickJS with V8 (JIT-less) and V8 (JIT) on benchmarks, particularly Raytrace, Crypto and NavierStokes that should be pushing the computation performance. https://bellard.org/quickjs/bench.html

Re: A new speed milestone for Chrome

#52

Post by dt2m »

throw_m239339 wrote: post #50
aaronbrethorst wrote: post #35

Cool to hear that Chrome is faster than Safari, but that's not why I'm going to stick with Safari. I use Safari because of Chrome's memory bloat, Safari's text message MFA auto-fill features, and Safari's cross-platform (iOS/macOS) password manager.

> I use Safari because of Chrome's memory bloat, Safari's text message MFA auto-fill features, and Safari's cross-platform (iOS/macOS) password manager. What do you think of Firefox? :)

Not OP but I have exclusively used Safari since the first version and recently switched to Firefox, and the password manager not being able to use iCloud Keychain is really a major bummer.

For such a long time Firefox didn't take being a native Mac OS citizen seriously, with scrolling not being natively implemented, form fields feeling "off" and in general just feeling like a Windows app in a Cocoa window.

Luckily those days are long gone now, and Firefox now feels much more like a native app, save for a couple of dialog boxes here and there. But having used iCloud Keychain for such a long time, and there being no option to import my 500+ passwords, it really has been a pain in the ass to switch browsers.

Re: A new speed milestone for Chrome

#53

Post by spullara »

The Chromium blog shouldn't refer to Chrome. There are many browsers based on Chromium and all would have the benefit from any changes to the core. If this is really just Chrome only then what is it doing on this blog in the first place?

Re: A new speed milestone for Chrome

#54

Post by [deleted] »

underyx wrote: post #2

My Speedometer results on an M1 Mac are: - Chrome v99: 204 - Safari: 266 How come I fall so far short of the post's advertised fastest-of-any-browser 300? Edit: Running in incognito got me a 251, so some of the slowdown must be from extensions. Edit 2: Seems like 1password and uBlock Origin decrease the score by around 30 each, I got a 276 with both disabled.

[deleted]

Re: A new speed milestone for Chrome

#56

Post by Teknoman117 »

jart wrote: post #48
vasco wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's more chuck norris jokes about Fabrice than chuck norris. And in this case they are not jokes.

Fabrice Bellard’s tears solve P vs. NP. Too bad he's never cried. Fabrice Bellard once failed a Turing test when he correctly identified the 203rd digit of pi in less than a second. Fabrice Bellard once shifted a bit so hard, it ended up on another computer.

> Fabrice Bellard once shifted a bit so hard, it ended up on another computer.

And that, my friends, is essentially what networking is :)

Re: A new speed milestone for Chrome

#57

Post by maattdd »

dotancohen wrote: post #41
encryptluks2 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, doesn't really matter what browser you use. The JS APIs to harvest data are part of all major browsers now.

To which API are you referring? Mozilla, so far as I know, tries to protect the user.

Almost all web APIs can be used to fingerprint user (but Mozilla is reluctant to add new ones indeed when the ratio benefit/risk is too low). https://amiunique.org/

Re: A new speed milestone for Chrome

#58

Post by hkt »

ihateolives wrote: post #42
thatwasunusual wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On my i9 2.4GHz 8-core, 64GB RAM, 2019 Mac, and with no extensions: - Chrome v99: 168 - Firefox v97: 132 - Safari v15: 139 Of course I forgot to benchmark Chrome _before_ I updated it. :(

Not directly comparable, but on my Ryzen 2600X 32GB desktop that I built in early 2019 update didn't do anything. - Chrome 98: 157 - Chrome 99: 157 - Firefox 97: 104 - Edge 99: 146 Oh well.

Call me immature but the version numbers are making me wonder if there's going to be a Firefox ME or Chrome 2000 released soon..

Re: A new speed milestone for Chrome

#59

Post by Traster »

I'm a little confused as to what the actual milestone is here? "We got 13% faster vs our last build" is just... well.. every day. I thought there was going to be some specific metric that they beat. It's good that browsers get faster at specific benchmarks, but what we basically always see is that the web gets more complex whilst browsers get faster (this is just an extension of the effect where software gets more complex as hardware gets faster and therefore the software you're using at any given time basically stays the same speed).

However, and I think this is important to bring up, browsers are basically the same speed and the reason to use one over the other is largely down to ergonomics and larger concerns. On the "larger concerns" side, Chrome is a failure. Chrome exists so the advertising company Google can track you and sell you targetted ads. It can do this in reasonable ways and it can do this in unreasonable ways, and with attacks on privacy like FLoC. Chrome is doing exactly what Internet Explorer was doing for microsoft in the 2000s and I think it's appropriate to call out that fact.

Re: A new speed milestone for Chrome

#60

Post by austincheney »

greggman3 wrote: post #17

There are certainly lots of situations where one browser beats another For example in this microbenchmark, Chrome is 10x slower than both FF and Safari at one method. https://jsbenchit.org/?src=cfcb916dd03df45952183e6484a14344 Here's another where in one case Firefox is 54x faster than Chrome https://jsbenchit.org/?src=beb26575ad78caa99a2a8c45ce2b780f

https://jsbench.github.io/#b39045cacae8d8c4a3ec044e538533dc

Look at DOM performance. Chrome has a ceiling of about 45m ops/s where FF max speed is dependent upon your ram and bus speed reaching beyond 4-5b ops/s. In both though querySelectors perform at about the same speeds as slow as 25000 ops/s.

I have written an OS GUI that executes in the browser. It loads, including full state restoration in about 120ms. I was recently interviewing with a search engine company, one of the big ones, where I could demonstrate that JavaScript tool can execute file system search much faster than the OS and produce better results. They seemed really impressed.

Despite all of this my biggest learning about performance is that mentioning performance during job interviews shows that you are incompatible with other JavaScript developers and will not be hired.

Post reply on HN