3 ms·

Did you read the article? Paragraph 3: > Chrome for Android now benefits from all the speed, security and other improvements that have been landing on Chrome’s

Did you read the article? Paragraph 3: > Chrome for Android now benefits from all the speed, security and other improvements that have been landing on Chrome’s other platforms. For example, in today’s Beta update we have improved the Octane performance benchmark on average by 25-30%.

mtgx 14y ago
I did. But I don't buy it yet. I'll be waiting for benchmarks, whenever this version is stable, and someone tests the latest devices with it. I've been outraged with Chrome for Android ever since it made Samsung's dual core 1.7 Ghz Cortex A15 look slower than Apple's dual core 1.4 Ghz Swift chip, even though it's significantly higher in both clock speed and IPC performance. But Chrome still managed to make it perform more poorly in the browser benchmarks, and a lot more poorly than the ARM Chromebook that is using the exact same chip as Nexus 10.
- teraflop 14y ago
  Fair enough. For what it's worth, that Octane benchmark went from 1217 to 1678 on my Nexus 4. (38% improvement, measured using a median of 3 runs for each browser version)
  - mtgx 14y ago
    It scored 3400 on the Chromebook a couple of months ago: http://gigaom.com/2012/10/22/intel-v-arm-the-chromebook-performance-battle/ http://gigaom.com/2012/10/22/intel-v-arm-the-chromebook-perf... The dual core 1.7 Ghz A15 may be faster than your quad core 1.5 Ghz Krait, but it still seems like a lot of it still depends on software, which I'd attribute in large part to Chrome itself, and perhaps in small part to the Nexus 4 drivers and Android itself. Also, is it me or does Octane seem pretty single-threaded? Quad cores don't seem to have much of an impact over dual cores.
- hayksaakian 14y ago
  If you follow the issue tracker the octane boost they've chosen is the exception rather than the rule. Other benchmarking tools indicate worse performance. Having just ran browsermark on both browsers, new chrome got ~100 pts better.
  - josteink 14y ago
    Looks like I'll stick to stock (AOSP) browser then. I'm not going to call the Galaxy Nexus a resource-constrained device but putting Chrome on it sure makes it feel like one, and I like my device as snappy as they come.
    - hayksaakian 14y ago
      I would use it, but I consider it depricated at this point. I don't want to get my hopes up using the AOSP browser to face the crushing reality that is chrome.
    - graue 14y ago
      Have you tried Firefox? It's pretty darn fast on my Galaxy Nexus.
      - josteink 14y ago
        Last time I tried it my main complaint was startup-time. The stock browser started instantly, while Firefox has a annoying 3-4 second delay before it started loading things. Has that improved significantly lately?
        graue 14y ago
        I don't remember that ever happening. How long ago did you try it? Comparing the two now, Firefox seems on par with Browser for app startup and slightly quicker to display pages.

mtgx 14y ago

I did. But I don't buy it yet. I'll be waiting for benchmarks, whenever this version is stable, and someone tests the latest devices with it. I've been outraged with Chrome for Android ever since it made Samsung's dual core 1.7 Ghz Cortex A15 look slower than Apple's dual core 1.4 Ghz Swift chip, even though it's significantly higher in both clock speed and IPC performance. But Chrome still managed to make it perform more poorly in the browser benchmarks, and a lot more poorly than the ARM Chromebook that is using the exact same chip as Nexus 10.

teraflop 14y ago
Fair enough. For what it's worth, that Octane benchmark went from 1217 to 1678 on my Nexus 4. (38% improvement, measured using a median of 3 runs for each browser version)
- mtgx 14y ago
  It scored 3400 on the Chromebook a couple of months ago: http://gigaom.com/2012/10/22/intel-v-arm-the-chromebook-performance-battle/ http://gigaom.com/2012/10/22/intel-v-arm-the-chromebook-perf... The dual core 1.7 Ghz A15 may be faster than your quad core 1.5 Ghz Krait, but it still seems like a lot of it still depends on software, which I'd attribute in large part to Chrome itself, and perhaps in small part to the Nexus 4 drivers and Android itself. Also, is it me or does Octane seem pretty single-threaded? Quad cores don't seem to have much of an impact over dual cores.
hayksaakian 14y ago
If you follow the issue tracker the octane boost they've chosen is the exception rather than the rule. Other benchmarking tools indicate worse performance. Having just ran browsermark on both browsers, new chrome got ~100 pts better.
- josteink 14y ago
  Looks like I'll stick to stock (AOSP) browser then. I'm not going to call the Galaxy Nexus a resource-constrained device but putting Chrome on it sure makes it feel like one, and I like my device as snappy as they come.
  - hayksaakian 14y ago
    I would use it, but I consider it depricated at this point. I don't want to get my hopes up using the AOSP browser to face the crushing reality that is chrome.
  - graue 14y ago
    Have you tried Firefox? It's pretty darn fast on my Galaxy Nexus.
    - josteink 14y ago
      Last time I tried it my main complaint was startup-time. The stock browser started instantly, while Firefox has a annoying 3-4 second delay before it started loading things. Has that improved significantly lately?
      - graue 14y ago
        I don't remember that ever happening. How long ago did you try it? Comparing the two now, Firefox seems on par with Browser for app startup and slightly quicker to display pages.