Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Works On Ozone-GBM For Full-Screen Chromium w/ Hardware Acceleration

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Intel Works On Ozone-GBM For Full-Screen Chromium w/ Hardware Acceleration

    Phoronix: Intel Works On Ozone-GBM For Full-Screen Chromium w/ Hardware Acceleration

    It's been a while since last hearing anything from Tiago Vignatti out of Intel's Open-Source Technology Center in Brazil but the Wayland-focused developer has recently been working on Ozone-GBM, a new target for this abstraction layer used by Google's Chrome/Chromium web-browser...

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

  • #2
    Bloated

    Chrome is pretty bloated, and it is getting more and more bloated...

    Comment


    • #3
      I recently tried out Chromium to see if it is better than the firefox-nightly that I use, and I have two main grievances with it:
      a) When I set it to restore the previous session on startup (this is the first setting that I activate on each new firefox profile), it loads them all at once, instead of on demand. For someone like me who uses tabs as bookmarks, this is highly inconvenient.
      b) If anything anywhere is animated a GIF for instance (even if it is not visible) or the "tab is loading" animation, it uses a lot of CPU (>5% on my sandybridge-i7) which is unacceptable for battery consumption.

      Comment


      • #4
        It seems like reinventing the wheel. Why don't they use a fullscreen Wayland compositor, and add support for the wl_fullscreen_shell protocol? AFAIK, Weston already implements it.

        Comment


        • #5
          Chromium runs better then firefox on my pc (i3/4Gb)
          But still missing VAAPI

          Comment


          • #6
            The only difference between ff and chromium i noticed is a) chromium has worse plugins b) chromium scrolling performance is slightly better. For me no reason to leave ff behind ...

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by CrystalGamma View Post
              For someone like me who uses tabs as bookmarks, this is highly inconvenient.
              Why would you do that? There's, you know, bookmarks for that... :P

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by curaga View Post
                Why would you do that? There's, you know, bookmarks for that... :P
                I do same just with, currently, about 130 tabs. Because with bookmarks, you see, you need to open bookmark manager (+tab), spend time searching for one, and then open. So thats still an open tab + time spent opening it.
                However the only thing I dont like is non configurable tab bar: with that many tabs even with minimal tab width it hides some tabs, so I have to open another window for some ~temporal~ browsing and keep an extension for quick access to opened tabs.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I would think that with 20+ tabs, searching for a tab is slower than searching for a bookmark?

                  As searching for a tab, you have to eye a big list, even if it was arranged in an expose-like way. But when searching bookmarks, all I do is type in the url bar, it's really fast. I don't even need to open a new tab to do so, I just press shift-enter to open it in a new tab once found.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by souenzzo View Post
                    Chromium runs better then firefox on my pc (i3/4Gb)
                    But still missing VAAPI
                    It does have VAAPI but it's disabled in a non-ChromeOS build because they don't want to officially support it across lots of kernel versions / hardware.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X