4 ms·

Brave claims to be 2-8 times faster than Chrome & Firefox on popular news sites. If Brave is based on Chromium, no ways it can be twice faster than Chrome. If i

Brave claims to be 2-8 times faster than Chrome & Firefox on popular news sites. If Brave is based on Chromium, no ways it can be twice faster than Chrome. If it based on a new developed browser kit, it’s too fantastic to be true. It’s already a respectable performance if a new browser kit can come close to the unicorn browsers like Chrome & Firefox (Quantum). The whole thing is too fishy for my taste.

sleavey 8y ago
I guess they're comparing stock Brave (which blocks ads and trackers by default) to stock Chrome / Firefox (which don't - well, Firefox does block some trackers now). Blocking ads categorically improves page load time.
- johntash 8y ago
  I agree. I'd like to see a comparison of stock Brave vs Chrome/Firefox with UBO or some other adblocking extensions configured. Otherwise, I could say links is a superior browser because it loads pages even faster than Brave.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
nostrademons 8y ago
It's faster because it neither loads nor displays the ads, which are a huge portion of the page weight. In my subjective experience using Brave, I'd say 3-4x is about right. BTW, the rampant inefficiency and bugginess of ads is what prompted me to install first AdBlock and then Brave in the first place. I have no problem with viewing ads or supporting content publishers; I do have a problem when the sheer weight of all the ads and trackers they include on their page means I'm waiting 10+ seconds for the page to load and there's a good chance of it locking up entirely. If the damn ad networks would just follow best practices regarding efficient & robust JS serving I wouldn't block them, but they don't, so I do.
jonathansampson 8y ago
As others have pointed out, Brave is much faster largely due to us blocking third party ads and trackers. These can account for more than 50% of your data at times. As a result, blocking them will result in better performance. See https://medium.com/@robleathern/carriers-are-making-more-from-mobile-ads-than-publishers-are-d5d3c0827b39 https://medium.com/@robleathern/carriers-are-making-more-fro... and https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/01/business/cost-of-mobile-ads.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/01/business/cost... for more information.

sleavey 8y ago

I guess they're comparing stock Brave (which blocks ads and trackers by default) to stock Chrome / Firefox (which don't - well, Firefox does block some trackers now). Blocking ads categorically improves page load time.

johntash 8y ago
I agree. I'd like to see a comparison of stock Brave vs Chrome/Firefox with UBO or some other adblocking extensions configured. Otherwise, I could say links is a superior browser because it loads pages even faster than Brave.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

nostrademons 8y ago

It's faster because it neither loads nor displays the ads, which are a huge portion of the page weight. In my subjective experience using Brave, I'd say 3-4x is about right. BTW, the rampant inefficiency and bugginess of ads is what prompted me to install first AdBlock and then Brave in the first place. I have no problem with viewing ads or supporting content publishers; I do have a problem when the sheer weight of all the ads and trackers they include on their page means I'm waiting 10+ seconds for the page to load and there's a good chance of it locking up entirely. If the damn ad networks would just follow best practices regarding efficient & robust JS serving I wouldn't block them, but they don't, so I do.

jonathansampson 8y ago

As others have pointed out, Brave is much faster largely due to us blocking third party ads and trackers. These can account for more than 50% of your data at times. As a result, blocking them will result in better performance. See https://medium.com/@robleathern/carriers-are-making-more-from-mobile-ads-than-publishers-are-d5d3c0827b39 https://medium.com/@robleathern/carriers-are-making-more-fro... and https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/01/business/cost-of-mobile-ads.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/01/business/cost... for more information.