8 ms·
Chrome 7 Will Get 60 Times Faster
- pbhogan 16y ago... at what? Page rendering? Javascript? Download speeds? What? I'm sure folks struggling with dial up modems will LOVE to hear web pages will now load 60x faster. </sarcasm>
- sushi 16y agoRTFA that new GPU acceleration advances in the upcoming version 7 are achieving speeds 60 times faster than in version 6
- mrduncan 16y agoThat still doesn't explain what is faster, only how it's faster. Based on the GPU acceleration bit, I'd assume it's page rendering though.
- pixelbath 16y ago"rapid advances in Chrome's 2D graphics performance" I'd assume it's the 2D graphics performance.
- _delirium 16y agoA very specific subset of 2d graphics performance it seems: 2d animation using certain kinds of transforms. Rendering large/complex SVGs isn't getting 60x faster.
- hackermom 16y agoAnd this is just one part of page rendering. This part may already be neglectable, representing fractions of a second, drowning in the parsing and structuring of the output done prior to actually rendering it. To me, all of this is just windbagging and vacuous marketing - just like the (almost entirely) pointless Javascript boasting.
- danpker 16y agoIt still doesn't say what exactly. I doubt they have a 60 times speed increase in everything
- js2 16y agoSee http://blog.chromium.org/2010/09/unleashing-gpu-acceleration-on-web.html http://blog.chromium.org/2010/09/unleashing-gpu-acceleration... The 60x increase is in two of the demos from the "IE9 Platform Preview Test Drive 2D canvas demos" found here - http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/ http://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/
- heinel 16y agoI think the point is that the article itself is not making sense, not the news it is trying to report. When I read the article I also thought about just normal browsing page load times. That is already so fast that a 60x increase is hardly noticeable. That just makes the news trivial and the chromium team look like freakish geeks with nothing better to do than crunching numbers that only a machine can read. That is until I looked at the demo video, which I missed on the article and only found about here. I can see that, particularly with that photo wall and the painter thing, snappiness is what would make them work.
- olegkikin 16y agoMost likely, not in JS execution. Probably rendering and 3D stuff. It would be cool if it naively supported GPU calculations. (Which is available for Firefox via jetpack: http://groups.google.com/group/jetpack-to-cuda/?pli=1 http://groups.google.com/group/jetpack-to-cuda/?pli=1)
- carlos 16y agoAs rendering will get much faster, I guess we can consider JS will much faster too, at least when using canvas with JS, which I believe it's the most important bottleneck right now.
- js2 16y agoThis is the source for the article http://blog.chromium.org/2010/09/unleashing-gpu-acceleration-on-web.html http://blog.chromium.org/2010/09/unleashing-gpu-acceleration... where you can see that the 60x increase is in two specific 2D canvas demos.
- ggruschow 16y agoFrom the blog post: These early numbers show up to 60x speed improvement over the current version of Google Chrome. Hm... I don't need my browser to be 60x faster if it can't figure out that (60/1) < (35/.5).
- Groxx 16y agoWorks for me in Chrome: javascript:alert(((60/1) < (35/.5)) ? "true" : "false"); // "true" Or am I missing something more meta?
- mbrubeck 16y agoI think the point is that "up to 60x" in the Chromium Blog post should have been "up to 70x" or "over 60x in some cases." (But actually this depends on how the 0.5 number was rounded...)
- moserware 16y agoIt's nice to see Browser Wars 3.0 having benefits for the whole community.
- meric 16y ago"Chrome has traditionally been considered the browser to beat when it comes to speed." Traditionally? It was first released on windows only 2 years ago...
- niyazpk 16y agoTraditional journalism.
- natmaster 16y agoWouldn't this still put chrome behind ie9 and Firefox 4? Chrome's rendering perf has been traditionally terrible. This article is very misleading - acting like Chrome's been ahead of rendering perf this entire time when it is in fact been in last place.
- snissn 16y ago...if you have a GPU in your netbook
- nkassis 16y agoThey have a mechanism to detect if it's present or not. For example, some cards don't have OpenGL drivers so they created ANGLE to fix that. They also have software rendering which can be reenabled if needed.
- snissn 16y agosorry, the unstated and unrealized premise of my reply was that this is good and great, but that there are also legacy issues of what technology people actually will use the web browser on. ChromeOS for example may mostly be on netbooks without GPUs. However, at the same token this might be a good catalyst for even cell phones and netbooks to have them, as the iPad seems to [quick google search] so ultimately GPU may be the killer stat on mobile, although it probably is already ,i'm just a rambling software dev
- jrockway 16y agoNetbooks have GPUs. The Intel GPU is probably most common and least performant, but it can still accelerate OpenGL to faster-than-software speeds. And, new netbooks are shipping with nVidia Ion, which is quite fast. (I can play 1080p h.264 on my nettop with an Ion GPU.)
- corysama 16y agoIt's true that this won't make Javascript or HTTP any faster, but it's still very exciting to me. This is about making Canvas faster. That's great because nearly all of the canvas games/demos have been spending around 90% of their cycles waiting on Canvas and only 10% in Javascript. As great as Canvas is, so far it has only been able to replicate games from the era of the 2Mhz SNES. With this change, we may be able to reach the 30Mhz PlayStation 1 era (only 15 years behind the curve!).
- lukev 16y agoThe people who are complaining that this speedup only applies to 2D canvas are missing the point. HTML rendering itself is already "fast enough." All of the perceptible delay when loading a webpage is network latency, rendering is already pretty much instantaneous on all modern browsers. What browsers can't do right now is enable webapps with native speed and experience. And that is what Google is targeting squarely, with this in combination with Native Client. If HTML5 is ever going to be a real Flash replacement, it's advances like these that will make it happen.
- smackfu 16y agoIsn't the point that the headline is misleading?
- ars 16y agoWhat about the delay when loading a humongous table? I occasionally need to load a page with 10,000 (or more) table cells, and those are always slow, and no one seems to test browser speeds on those.
- Groxx 16y agoHow much of that time is spent loading? Have you tried saving & opening locally? Is the data being handled in any way by javascript, which could be inefficient (for instance: tons of table tools use JS hover effects, instead of CSS). Am actually interested, this is not to say it's not actually slow. Just trying to find out why / how slow it is.
- ars 16y agoIt was local, php generated output from a database. (And the php wasn't slow, saving to a file was almost instant.) I think it was just a totally barebones table, with tr and td of many rows from a table. I also had another one where it made an editable form from the data (the data had a bit more structure than the first, some css, but no onload javascript (just onclick)). It was handmade, so no hover effects or other things. Firefox was really slow and my customer eventually switched to using chrome for that page. But it's still slow, just not as slow. I remember having my browser freeze totally for about 10 minutes (yes I timed it).
- earcar 16y agoSince this is a rendering improvement, I hope this will be merged back or developed directly into the original WebKit, so everyone can benefit.
- ludwigvan 16y agoDo browsers have their own version of Moore's law? They seem to be the most accelerating pieces of software.
- alphabeat 16y agoCompetition is fantastic for consumers.
- bd 16y agoPlease ignore the bad reporting / marketing spin and focus on what actually Chrome team did. The change is significant and important. It doesn't really matter that your current web applications will have more or less the same speed. Removing a huge performance bottleneck [1] paves a way for completely new type of applications, so far unheard of on the web (way beyond what's possible with Flash [2]). And other browsers will follow, Firefox already has its own solution on the way. Trust me, this is big news, though the effects will be felt only in some time. Developers have to catch up. Even "oldfashioned" unaccelerated 2d canvas is still very far from reaching its full potential. ------- [1] This bottleneck was coming mainly from compositing of classical software rendered web content and new hardware accelerated content. New way is to do everything HW accelerated (that's BTW why fonts look bit off in new Chrome and Firefox). [2] Just wait till WebGL will be enabled by default in upcoming Firefox 4 and Chrome 7. There is a marked difference in capabilities, shaders are crazy powerful.
- tomjen3 16y agoIt is big news, but there is a gigantic caveat here - most people will still be running ancient browsers which can't do this. But flash is universal.
- xal 16y agoThis is right on the money. People will be blown away by what google maps will look like after enough browsers have WebGL capabilities and the maps team switches to that technology instead of the crude javascript tiling that they rely on right now.
- rbranson 16y agoUnfortunately the companies that they (Bing, Yahoo, Google, etc) buy the map data from would be very much against pushing their precious vector data out into the public. All of the licensing is setup and specifically deals with tiling maps. It will take years and years before the lawyers agree to it and figure out the licensing details. Perhaps Google can circumvent this in the US because they own their US data, but what about the rest of the world?
- 16y ago
- Groxx 16y agoWANT. This is a very happy day :) It's the single largest thing I've been waiting for for canvas.
- sandGorgon 16y agoMy question is - does GPU mean nvidia/ATI, or will the Intel Integrated graphics also be leveraged for these performance boosts ?
- jrockway 16y agoIt's OpenGL, right? On Linux, anyway, Intel GPUs do hardware acceleration.
- malkia 16y agoI have a simple question: How would this acceleration work with Windows Remote Desktop? It would work with VNC as it grabs the whole screen, but RDC replaces the video driver and it stops being accelerated.
- mullr 16y agoNewer versions of remote desktop know how to pass through some hardware accelerated things, if you have Vista+ on both ends. Or so I've read. I don't know at what layer that mechanism applies though. It may be direct3d calls, or it may be hooking into the application layer to work with WPF.
- malkia 16y agoWe are on Vista, and we have problems with D3D. Another problem, even without RDC is the security that IT put to log off the machine if it's not used for 15 minutes. That's okay, but certain D3D applications would lose the device, and would not restore it correctly. (That to be said, it's just way easier to write the said applications without thinking of recovering from D3D LOST DEVICE. It's real pain in the ass to get this working, especially if you have to put 1GB of vertex buffer/images data in memory, and expect to be there).
- keyle 16y agoThere still needs to be proper architecture for web based application. I mean for example, data binding that works would be a plus. Anyone know how to do this today, without being locked down into bad frameworks? That's when we will start seeing some real improvements in web app development.
- stretchwithme 16y agosounds great. Now I can continue to get away with 700 open tabs at once.