4 ms·

I see this browser as a skin on top of Chrome, much like Opera or (now) Edge. Hearing that it's 22% faster tells me it had a 22% overhead over the Chromium rend

I see this browser as a skin on top of Chrome, much like Opera or (now) Edge. Hearing that it's 22% faster tells me it had a 22% overhead over the Chromium rendering engine. What am I missing? I'm struggling to see serious innovation on display here - and I read TFA. The article is 99.9% a discussion on testing methodology, and not an analysis of the changes to Brave's core which may have resulted in the performance improvements. As far as I'm concerned, Chromium released a more performant rendering engine and Brave merged it into their branch.

r_singh 8y ago
I think it's more of a progress report than a display of innovation targeted towards people who are looking to switch over from Google Chrome due to privacy issues.
eivarv 8y ago
What am I missing? They replaced Muon (their Electron-fork) with straight Chromium. Brave is now 22% faster than it used to be, if I read TFA correctly.
- aiCeivi9 8y ago
  OP asks why should he care, that Brave is no longer slower than Chromium it is based on. It doesn't sound like something impressive.
- jug 8y ago
  Oh. I wonder if this post had gained as much attention if the header was "Brave is now about as fast as Chrome".
  - Derek_MK 8y ago
    I mean, if you consider the adblocking, tracker blocking, etc, then it's faster than Chrome, and may have been even before the switch (citation needed on that though). That stuff takes a long time to load, even on Chromium. So the idea is that they've always been loading fewer things (so it's faster in that aspect), but now the speed of loading the same content is better.
zakk 8y ago
From the linked article: > Note that we are comparing released versions; Brave 0.24.0 is based on Chromium build 69.0.3497.100, while Brave Core 0.55.12 uses a newer Chromium build 70.0.3538.45. We do not expect the move to a later underlying Chromium version to be responsible for significant performance variations. We don’t observe a statistically significant difference for unthrottled measurements—in fact, Chrome 70 is sightly slower for the sites we considered.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

r_singh 8y ago

I think it's more of a progress report than a display of innovation targeted towards people who are looking to switch over from Google Chrome due to privacy issues.

eivarv 8y ago

What am I missing? They replaced Muon (their Electron-fork) with straight Chromium. Brave is now 22% faster than it used to be, if I read TFA correctly.

aiCeivi9 8y ago
OP asks why should he care, that Brave is no longer slower than Chromium it is based on. It doesn't sound like something impressive.
jug 8y ago
Oh. I wonder if this post had gained as much attention if the header was "Brave is now about as fast as Chrome".
- Derek_MK 8y ago
  I mean, if you consider the adblocking, tracker blocking, etc, then it's faster than Chrome, and may have been even before the switch (citation needed on that though). That stuff takes a long time to load, even on Chromium. So the idea is that they've always been loading fewer things (so it's faster in that aspect), but now the speed of loading the same content is better.

zakk 8y ago

From the linked article: > Note that we are comparing released versions; Brave 0.24.0 is based on Chromium build 69.0.3497.100, while Brave Core 0.55.12 uses a newer Chromium build 70.0.3538.45. We do not expect the move to a later underlying Chromium version to be responsible for significant performance variations. We don’t observe a statistically significant difference for unthrottled measurements—in fact, Chrome 70 is sightly slower for the sites we considered.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]