Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Some Additional Chrome vs. Firefox Benchmarks With WebRender, 67 Beta / 68 Alpha

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

  • Some Additional Chrome vs. Firefox Benchmarks With WebRender, 67 Beta / 68 Alpha

    Phoronix: Some Additional Chrome vs. Firefox Benchmarks With WebRender, 67 Beta / 68 Alpha

    A few days ago I posted some Chrome vs. Firefox benchmarks using the latest Linux builds. Some readers suggested Firefox could be more competitive if forcing WebRender usage and/or moving to the latest nightly builds, so here are some complementary data sets looking at such combinations...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...ebRender-67-68

  • birdie
    replied
    Originally posted by Ray_o View Post
    Because some people here asked about firefox with webrender in Windows, i made a test.
    first my setup :
    windows 10 1809
    Firefox 68 nightly
    CPU: intel i5-8250u
    integrated GPU: Intel UHD Graphics 620 (driver version 25,20,100,6373)
    discrete GPU: NVIDIA 940MX (driver version 419,35)
    power mode (plugged in) best performance
    i tested with MotionMark 1.0, first i tested with intel GPU then with nvidia, you can know which GPU Firefox is using by typing about:support in the url bar and scroll down until you get to GPU #1.
    so i ran the test twice for every option
    Intel active without webrender: 166.82 (±9.30%), 192.94 (±16.29%)
    Intel active with webrender: 351.46 (±4.61%), 372.80 (±5.36%)
    NVIDIA active without webrender: 245.72 (±8.31%), 257.31 (±10.90%)
    NVIDIA active with webrender: 349.26 (± 6.14%), 366.75 (±6.22%)
    No paragraphs, no [ code ] - have your written that post for yourself? It's impossible to comprehend.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ray_o
    replied
    Because some people here asked about firefox with webrender in Windows, i made a test.
    first my setup :
    windows 10 1809
    Firefox 68 nightly
    CPU: intel i5-8250u
    integrated GPU: Intel UHD Graphics 620 (driver version 25,20,100,6373)
    discrete GPU: NVIDIA 940MX (driver version 419,35)
    power mode (plugged in) best performance
    i tested with MotionMark 1.0, first i tested with intel GPU then with nvidia, you can know which GPU Firefox is using by typing about:support in the url bar and scroll down until you get to GPU #1.
    so i ran the test twice for every option
    Intel active without webrender: 166.82 (±9.30%), 192.94 (±16.29%)
    Intel active with webrender: 351.46 (±4.61%), 372.80 (±5.36%)
    NVIDIA active without webrender: 245.72 (±8.31%), 257.31 (±10.90%)
    NVIDIA active with webrender: 349.26 (± 6.14%), 366.75 (±6.22%)

    Leave a comment:


  • Weasel
    replied
    "lol Rust"

    Nothing more needs to be said.

    Leave a comment:


  • Weasel
    replied
    Originally posted by cb88 View Post
    LLVM is faster than gcc or VS
    Looks like we have a comedian in this thread.

    Leave a comment:


  • moltonel
    replied
    Food for thoughts: While Firefox's lower performance here can be mostly attributed to Javascript, you would only expect this to be noticable on JS-heavy website. The same websites you would expect to move from JS to WASM (a way to run "native" code on the browser, making js speed wars irrelevant) first, which Mozilla has been working hard to standardize and promote. And it turns out that today Rust is the best language to target WASM. So you'll have Mozilla to thank for the super-fast -even-when-complex websites of the future, even if you don't use a Mozilla browser. Just in case memory footprint, privacy, general ethics, common standards, or protection from monopoly were'nt good enough reasons.

    Leave a comment:


  • treba
    replied
    Originally posted by cb88 View Post

    Pretty sure it only actually works on Windows with Nvidia GPUs at the moment.. anywhere else is a crapshoot. Also it falls back to the old renderer by default in most cases.
    Eh? Michael tested it on AMD and the devs already landed a couple of patches with optimizations for integrated Intel and ARM. AFAIK they already list some Intel and AMD cards as qualified (at least on Win), enabling Webrender by default on Nightly (https://hardforum.com/threads/firefo...-gpus.1976679/)
    Secondly, it doesn't fall back. If you enable it in about:config, it's on. It just doesn't get enabled yet by default on most platforms.

    Leave a comment:


  • cb88
    replied
    Originally posted by treba View Post

    It is. If you were to run Webrender on software it would be terribly slow. The old 'hardware acceleration' via 'layers.acceleration.force-enabled' is replaced by Webrender, which is why you don't need to enable both to have Webrender running. Overall, we now have 'Basic', 'OpenGL' and 'Webrender' options.
    Pretty sure it only actually works on Windows with Nvidia GPUs at the moment.. anywhere else is a crapshoot. Also it falls back to the old renderer by default in most cases.

    Leave a comment:


  • tuxd3v
    replied
    Originally posted by Cape View Post

    From a technical standpoint, chrome is a wonderful piece of engineering. And it's got plenty room for improvement as well.

    ​​​​​​And you bet it does! It's the most used browser on the planet by far, developed from the most rich and successful company of the modern era, who has 98,000 - well payed employee in CA alone!

    I wouldn't expect nothing less from this gigantic pile of financial/political admixture!
    Google is a Big Company,
    But not so big, compared to others..
    There are out there companies that you probably never heard off, with 170k+ plus employees
    And with revenues tens or hundreds times bigger than google..I mean real money..

    Leave a comment:


  • bug77
    replied
    Originally posted by treba View Post

    It is. If you were to run Webrender on software it would be terribly slow. The old 'hardware acceleration' via 'layers.acceleration.force-enabled' is replaced by Webrender, which is why you don't need to enable both to have Webrender running. Overall, we now have 'Basic', 'OpenGL' and 'Webrender' options.
    Actually, I got worse results when I enabled WebRender and forced hw acceleration on. Firefox seems to be really weird about WebRender atm.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X