Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Firefox 68 Performance Is Looking Good With WebRender On Linux
Collapse
X
-
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?
The JavaScript benchmarks are irrelevant when speaking of webrender performance.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
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.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by wpupkin View PostThey 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.
;-)
- Likes 4
Comment
-
Originally posted by wpupkin View PostThey 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.
;-)
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
-
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.
- Likes 1
Comment
-
good luck trying to compile it from source (hint needs newer Rust): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MdTu8dSorY
- Likes 1
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Scellow View PostChrome is still #1, another fail for rust
The programming language isn't everything, Firefox was performing worse than Chrome even before rust.
How the program is written, The compiler and compiler optimizations all of these things affect performance, so it not just the language though rust in some benchmarks performed better than C++ (https://benchmarksgame-team.pages.de.../rust-gpp.html).
Comment
Comment