Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Firefox 68 Performance Is Looking Good With WebRender On Linux

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

  • #11
    I'm looking forward to FF68 since it will be the next ESR release.

    https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/
    Last edited by Nille_kungen; 05-23-2019, 02:17 PM.

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by wpupkin View Post
      They cutting your PC resources for performance improvements.
      Firefox 67 now using 5-6%% RAM for only one opened tab. While Firefox 66 - "only" 3-4%%.
      CPU usage also noticeably higher. https://www.khronos.org/registry/vul...ml/vkspec.html (huge page) is a good test.

      One day it would work as a lightning, and would replace ... systemd.
      ;-)
      That's the price of fast websites. That's always been Chrome's secret trick too. Thankfully RAM is cheap nowadays.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by rene View Post
        "looking good" is a bit of a stretch when it is only mostly one benchmark that is faster, hm? comparison with chromium anyone?
        Webrender is about GPU performance, and suprise suprise the GPU heavy benchmark is the one that shows the improvement

        The JavaScript benchmarks are irrelevant when speaking of webrender performance.

        Comment


        • #14
          Well I just hope they would stop with the "Sync" bullshit an d I don't want an all the time visible button for it like they just added.
          I'm tired of this "Give us all your data" crap.
          At this point I'm starting to see Firefox as Google's Chrome, except that it performs worse.

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by wpupkin View Post
            They cutting your PC resources for performance improvements.
            Firefox 67 now using 5-6%% RAM for only one opened tab. While Firefox 66 - "only" 3-4%%.
            CPU usage also noticeably higher. https://www.khronos.org/registry/vul...ml/vkspec.html (huge page) is a good test.

            One day it would work as a lightning, and would replace ... systemd.
            ;-)
            The RAM and CPU are there to be used. Software that takes only 1% of CPU time but performs noticeably worse thus doesn't make an effective use of the system's ressources. As for the compulsory systemd cliché, well if replacing systemd was the way and condition fot Firefox to be fast as lightning them hell yes, it would obviously be the correct thing to do.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by wpupkin View Post
              They cutting your PC resources for performance improvements.
              Firefox 67 now using 5-6%% RAM for only one opened tab. While Firefox 66 - "only" 3-4%%.
              CPU usage also noticeably higher. https://www.khronos.org/registry/vul...ml/vkspec.html (huge page) is a good test.

              One day it would work as a lightning, and would replace ... systemd.
              ;-)
              FireFox became a memory hog with Quantum, not to mention high CPU usage (and I think I ran into some regressions with video decoding performance where I'd get lots of dropped frames for no good reason). Even though Chromium seems to beat FF in both of these, it's still my go to browser for web browsing (as opposed to developer tools, which pale in comparison to Chromium, the only thing where they shine is viewing event listeners).

              Here are the reasons why it's still better than Google's browser:
              • It's not based on Webkit or Chromium, so it's the only major implementation that doesn't share layout engine with other major browsers.
              • It allows you to log into a Google account without logging the entire browser in (I need Gsuite for work, outside of that I actively boycott Google).
              • It's not made by an ad company, so it doesn't plan to break ad blockers, and Ad Nauseam is officially available and easy to install. (The whole experiments thing is awful, though, but still a less evil than Google.)
              • It seems to run better on underpowered hardware, even NetBurst CPUs (along with a GPU) can provide a smooth and responsive browsing experience, something I can't say about Chromium which needs a fairly beefy computer to run smooth).

              Comment


              • #17
                Originally posted by jacob View Post

                The RAM and CPU are there to be used. Software that takes only 1% of CPU time but performs noticeably worse thus doesn't make an effective use of the system's ressources. As for the compulsory systemd cliché, well if replacing systemd was the way and condition fot Firefox to be fast as lightning them hell yes, it would obviously be the correct thing to do.
                It depends, things like idle CPU usage matter a lot, and you might expect software to not try to use all resources so you can efficiently multitask.

                Comment


                • #18
                  good luck trying to compile it from source (hint needs newer Rust): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MdTu8dSorY

                  Comment


                  • #19
                    Originally posted by DoMiNeLa10 View Post

                    It depends, things like idle CPU usage matter a lot, and you might expect software to not try to use all resources so you can efficiently multitask.
                    And when you are on batteries in a laptop, every percentage counts.

                    Comment


                    • #20
                      Originally posted by [email protected] View Post

                      And when you are on batteries in a laptop, every percentage counts.
                      Depends, if you can get something done faster, it might end up using less energy. Power draw from display backlight is essentially constant, for example.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X