Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Firefox 68 Performance Is Looking Good With WebRender On Linux

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

  • Firefox 68 Performance Is Looking Good With WebRender On Linux

    Phoronix: Firefox 68 Performance Is Looking Good With WebRender On Linux

    With Firefox 67 having released this week, Firefox 68 is in beta and its performance from our tests thus far on Ubuntu Linux are looking real good. In particular, if enabling the WebRender option that remains off by default on Linux, there are some nice performance gains especially.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=27894

  • flashmozzg
    replied
    Originally posted by zoomblab View Post
    Chrome always had and still has the fastest and most responsive engine. AFAIK it it written in C/C++. So there is no excuse for Firefox being slow. A different programming language won't change the fact that they need to write better code.
    Chrome also has a few orders of magnitude more resources behind it (both, in terms of devs, and "monetary").

    Leave a comment:


  • zoomblab
    replied
    Chrome always had and still has the fastest and most responsive engine. AFAIK it it written in C/C++. So there is no excuse for Firefox being slow. A different programming language won't change the fact that they need to write better code.

    Leave a comment:


  • oleid
    replied
    Originally posted by Weasel View Post
    But facts are on my side bish. Firefox's C++ code is/was way worse than other browsers, precisely because they have rusted brains to even design Rust. They've always had it, but now they felt like making a language for their rusted brains...

    That's an oxymoron. Any advanced developer wouldn't use Rust after all.
    You seem quite helpless.

    Leave a comment:


  • Weasel
    replied
    Originally posted by oleid View Post
    Haha, our favorite C troll again. Who doesn't know what it's talking about.
    But facts are on my side bish. Firefox's C++ code is/was way worse than other browsers, precisely because they have rusted brains to even design Rust. They've always had it, but now they felt like making a language for their rusted brains...

    Originally posted by oleid View Post
    An advanced rust developer
    That's an oxymoron. Any advanced developer wouldn't use Rust after all.

    Leave a comment:


  • oleid
    replied
    Originally posted by Weasel View Post
    Yeah, but people who use Rust have differently-wired brain. Only such brain would use Rust. And they tend to write this kind of inefficient code. And well... forced bounds checking and fat pointers...
    Haha, our favorite C troll again. Who doesn't know what it's talking about.

    An advanced rust developer knows how to avoid safely avoid bound checks. And hey, bound checks are good, by the way. At least when doing safety critical stuff. Ada uses them as well, and that's what used to drive the space shuttle and other things which may not fail.

    And fat pointers? Nobody forces you to use Rc or Arc. Simply use references. Or plain C pointers, if you have to.

    But the fat pointers, like they are implemented in rust make more sense than their c++ counterparts. As the refcount is on the same cache line.

    Leave a comment:


  • Marc.2377
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael_S View Post

    Firefox was 20% the speed of Rust or worse a few years ago, well before Rust was implemented. The problem isn't the language, it's just less efficient code.
    and the language.

    Leave a comment:


  • wpupkin
    replied
    First message was a dumb joke, but ... look, already reserved:
    Code:
    PID     VSZ     COMMAND
    6835    1.53G   /opt/firefox/firefox-bin
    14156   2.52G   /opt/firefox/firefox
    14218   1.53G   /opt/firefox/firefox-bin
    14265   20.44G  /opt/firefox/firefox-bin
    26884   1.37G   /opt/firefox/firefox-bin
    << dumb joke #2 END

    For migrated default profile, not reproducible on new profile.

    Leave a comment:


  • Weasel
    replied
    Originally posted by Michael_S View Post
    Firefox was 20% the speed of Rust or worse a few years ago, well before Rust was implemented. The problem isn't the language, it's just less efficient code.
    Yeah, but people who use Rust have differently-wired brain. Only such brain would use Rust. And they tend to write this kind of inefficient code. And well... forced bounds checking and fat pointers...

    Leave a comment:


  • gedgon
    replied
    Originally posted by re:fi.64 View Post
    Curious to see how it now compares to Chrome.
    MotionMark, i5 2500, RX 460, 4k, (firefox 68 on the left, chromium 74 on the right)

    Last edited by gedgon; 05-24-2019, 09:16 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X