4 ms·
Firefox manages to be both significantly slower for CPU benchmark and significantly faster for GPU, compared to Chrome. The former gets me wondering what is go
by Twirrim 8y ago
Firefox manages to be both significantly slower for CPU benchmark and significantly faster for GPU, compared to Chrome.
The former gets me wondering what is going on with the javascript. Sure, v8 is usually faster than Firefox, but not 8x faster.
Chrome GPU does it in 0.053s, where Firefox is hitting 0.005s, a tenth of the time.
This is on a 2015 Mac Pro.
- taf2 8y agoIsn’t this due to security and process isolation differences? As in chrome does more to be secure than Firefox as far as how system resources are accessed via sandboxing?
- travisoneill1 8y agoThis is anecdotal, but when I built a JS image segmentation tool I found that FF was significantly faster than Chrome when working with the lower level stuff like ArrayBuffer, etc. I assume they are using a lot of this here since they are probably dealing with the WebGL API which needs to receive data as a buffer.
- blotter_paper 8y agoMaybe because FF started optimizing for asm.js earlier? Just an ignorant guess.
- masswerk 8y agoChrome was always significantly slower with typed arrays. I remember early benchmarks, where array buffers were actually slower than plain arrays (which also aligned with my own tests).
- kevingadd 8y agoChrome's GPU sandboxing is more aggressive, so it's probably performing extra copies. GPU round-trips (think synchronous operations like 'copy the result from the GPU back to CPU memory) also end up being slower due to the delays introduced by bouncing things between the page and the GPU sandbox.