3 ms·

To add to the TLDR, its not Chrome's fault, but rather, a badly coded page that is using too much CPU.

by S_A_P 11y ago

Houshalter 11y ago
I would say it is somewhat Chrome's fault, since tabs in the background should use less CPU. They also don't give users any control over resource usage, or notify them which tabs are using resources (except in that task manager thing which is hidden away, and not very reliable in my experience.) Actually Chrome does slow down tabs in the background. On my computer whenever I put a CPU heavy tab in the background, it crawls to a snail's pace. And if you don't touch it in a long time, it is suspended and saved to the hard drive. Which is why this story is weird. This shouldn't even be an issue.
- Mithaldu 11y ago
  > tabs in the background should use less CPU That is a naive view on it. Javascript can be doing a LOT of things. It could be rotating a product carousel; or it could be running a browser game. In both cases that's something that can use a LOT of CPU, but in the latter case the user might want it to continue processing in the background. How is the browser supposed to differentiate this on its own?
  - Houshalter 11y ago
    Well that's how it works on my computer currently. If you put a browser game in the background it will slow down massively. If you want it to keep working, you need to move it to it's own window. Tabs that are in their own window keep running at full speed.
    - Mithaldu 11y ago
      Yep, it doesn't stop though. And it doesn't handle things differently for different use patterns. Since that would be hard to implement automatically.
  - tluyben2 11y ago
    But why can you not choose to either keep tabs you are not currently in focus with (so you are looking at another tab than the 50 others you have open) fully running, running at some max % or freeze completely? The latter just freezing the process which will require unfreeze but as it is a user choice it depends on their browser behavior.
    - Mithaldu 11y ago
      I was commenting on doing such automatically. (Hard to implement.) Doing it manually would be great, but then you run into Chrome's obsession with remaining simple and "slim", regardless of whether this happens to the detriment of users.

To add to the TLDR, its not Chrome's fault, but rather, a badly coded page that is using too much CPU.

by S_A_P 11y ago

To add to the TLDR, its not Chrome's fault, but rather, a badly coded page that is using too much CPU.

I would say it is somewhat Chrome's fault, since tabs in the background should use less CPU. They also don't give users any control over resource usage, or notify them which tabs are using resources (except in that task manager thing which is hidden away, and not very reliable in my experience.) Actually Chrome does slow down tabs in the background. On my computer whenever I put a CPU heavy tab in the background, it crawls to a snail's pace. And if you don't touch it in a long time, it is suspended and saved to the hard drive. Which is why this story is weird. This shouldn't even be an issue.

Mithaldu 11y ago
> tabs in the background should use less CPU That is a naive view on it. Javascript can be doing a LOT of things. It could be rotating a product carousel; or it could be running a browser game. In both cases that's something that can use a LOT of CPU, but in the latter case the user might want it to continue processing in the background. How is the browser supposed to differentiate this on its own?
- Houshalter 11y ago
  Well that's how it works on my computer currently. If you put a browser game in the background it will slow down massively. If you want it to keep working, you need to move it to it's own window. Tabs that are in their own window keep running at full speed.
  - Mithaldu 11y ago
    Yep, it doesn't stop though. And it doesn't handle things differently for different use patterns. Since that would be hard to implement automatically.
- tluyben2 11y ago
  But why can you not choose to either keep tabs you are not currently in focus with (so you are looking at another tab than the 50 others you have open) fully running, running at some max % or freeze completely? The latter just freezing the process which will require unfreeze but as it is a user choice it depends on their browser behavior.
  - Mithaldu 11y ago
    I was commenting on doing such automatically. (Hard to implement.) Doing it manually would be great, but then you run into Chrome's obsession with remaining simple and "slim", regardless of whether this happens to the detriment of users.