Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Chrome For Windows To Get Battery Performance Boost (zdnet.com)

Posted by msmash on from the less-battery-extensive dept.

Earlier this year, Microsoft claimed that its Edge browser was much lighter on battery than Chrome. Google is now attempting to address that. It has announced that Chrome 53 will contain numerous CPU and GPU power consumption enhancements for video playback, along with other big performance and power improvements. ZDNet adds: Google hasn't as yet published any test results to back up these claims, and I'm not expecting that Chrome will have closed the gap with Edge in one leap, but it's good that Google is addressing these issues. Along with battery life improvements, Google has made what it calls "material design" changes to Chrome, in the form of tweaking the user interface.

34 comments

  1. This will be typical Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    As things are with Google, this will remain a half-finished work in progress, be incredibly clunky, and then be abruptly discontinued for no good reason. That's how Google operates with everything else other than their ad revenue, so I expect this to be half-assed as well.

    1. Re:This will be typical Google by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 4, Interesting

      As things are with Google, this will remain a half-finished work in progress, be incredibly clunky, and then be abruptly discontinued for no good reason. That's how Google operates with everything else other than their ad revenue, so I expect this to be half-assed as well.

      I could not disagree more. Google goes to great lengths to make something reliable and usable, sometimes spending years getting everything just right.
      Then they discontinue and bury it...

      --
      You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
    2. Re:This will be typical Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yeah, I've noticed this with Google too.

      Once there's no development on something left to be done it just ends up being considered 'dead' rather than 'finished'

      I've seen the same attitude applied by the public to other projects too however, with people often choosing more recent projects over older mature ones because there's some stigma surrounding a project that hasn't been updated in 5 years. The 'must be new, must be shiny' way of viewing things we've seen as of the last decade is an odd one, I blame smartphones.

    3. Re:This will be typical Google by thsths · · Score: 1

      I absolutely agree. They tend to be very good with great announcements, and often they do make a lot of sense. But following through is another matter - and it very rarely happens.

      Now at least I think Chrome is pretty safe, and will not be discontinued anytime soon. But it was always CPU heavy, and probably will always be.

  2. Nice try, Google... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Your spyware is still not going on my computer... #edge4life

    1. Re:Nice try, Google... by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 3, Informative

      I guess I probably should mention that Edge sends every search term and link you click to Microsoft for Bing analytics, and there is no way to avoid it, unlike in Chrome where you can switch to Chromium without losing anything. Microsoft also wanted to be in the ad business just like Google, and even spent some $7 billion towards that end, but ultimately failed. Though that failure wasn't as spectacular as the $20+ billion net loss they made on Windows Phone, which they hide on their financial statements by patent trolling Android OEMs and listing it as phone division revenue.

    2. Re:Nice try, Google... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Though that failure wasn't as spectacular as the $20+ billion net loss they made on Windows Phone, which they hide on their financial statements by patent trolling Android OEMs and listing it as phone division revenue.

      Of all places, slashdotters demonstrating they don't know what a "patent troll" is. A patent troll is a non-practicing entity which you either didn't know or were just engaging in hyperbole, there is a very big difference between asserting patent rights (even if you don't personally agree with them) and patent trolling. Referring to practicing entities as "patent trolls" just further legitimizes the business of NPEs.

      In any case what has this got to do with Chrome and Edge? Google are making technical changes to improve the power efficiency of their browser on Windows relative to Edge and you're off talking about how patent revenue is accounted for in their phone division.

    3. Re:Nice try, Google... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your spyware is still not going on my computer... #edge4life

      Ah! I see you have already had you dose of Microsoftituse. You poor bstrd.

    4. Re: Nice try, Google... by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 1

      It's called a side rant.

  3. So it was worse? by Carewolf · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Didn't Google claim Microsoft was wrong and Edge was not better than Chrome, and now they have closed the gap?

    Lovely mismatch of messages from PR and from actual engineers.

    1. Re:So it was worse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Didn't Google claim Microsoft was wrong and Edge was not better than Chrome,

      [Citation Needed] Because AFAIK it was Opera who said Microsoft was wrong, not Google. And in fact at the time, people on /. agreed that Edge was in fact better than Chrome on battery life, especially on video. That's precisely why MS chose video in a constant loop to prove its superiority*.

      and now they have closed the gap?

      They didn't make that claim either. So, nice strawman you're making if it turns out their actual claims made by Google are 'numerous CPU and GPU power consumption enhancements for video playback, along with other "big" performance and power improvements'. Whether that's enough to close the gap or not, time will tell.

      Lovely mismatch of messages from PR and from actual engineers.

      Or people on /. reciting from memory and extrapolating from what was actually said instead of looking up stuff.

      *Just to be clear, it's pretty clear that most the CPU/GPU work in Chrome work has been done on improving performance, not on considerations of power efficiency. IIRC, the actual tests on a per component basis showed that Edge beat Chrome on near everything if not everything as far as power efficiency goes. At the time, the joke here was "of course it's easy to be more efficient if you don't do anything" but for whatever the reason, there was and still is reason to use Edge over Chrome if power consumption is your primary driver. Whatever floats your boat. And good to see Google working on the issue.

    2. Re: So it was worse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Opera has a power saving feature, actually.

    3. Re:So it was worse? by donaldm · · Score: 1

      Didn't Google claim Microsoft was wrong and Edge was not better than Chrome, and now they have closed the gap?

      Lovely mismatch of messages from PR and from actual engineers.

      You can do the HTML5test and Chrome should get 499 (this is for Fedora 24) out of 555 compared to 485 for Microsoft's Edge browser.

      Numbers don't really mean anything unless you look at the fine print and by that take a look at what each browser supports since you can do a side by side comparison of different web browsers. As an example, I am also going to use "QupZilla" (score: 480/555) which comes standard along with "Firefox" if you install Fedora 24 KDE spin.

      If you do an intercomparison on what each browser supports then you will see that Chrome, Firefox and QupZilla (you can add others if you wish) all support open codex standards while Microsoft's Edge browser supports proprietary codecs and almost completely ignores open codecs. So much for Microsoft supporting open standards.

      BTW. Look at what is supported for Video and Audio for all Browsers of interest and you will see exactly what each one supports.

      --
      There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
  4. Tic toc boom by sanf780 · · Score: 1

    I still remember that earlier versions of Chrome had this feature (some may call it a bug) that modified a tic count in Windows such that Chrome became faster and more responsive by trading off consumed power. Whether the application was being shown or not was not part of the equation. Chrome devs are having a change of heart now that Microsoft, none the less, has beaten them in at least one metric.

  5. Edge IS/WAS better by adjustinthings · · Score: 2

    I'm the last person who would recommend microsoft anything but on our work tablets Chrome has the CPU fan running not stop in ANY situation. Edge stays nice and cool and the battery lasts forever.

    1. Re:Edge IS/WAS better by SilentTristero · · Score: 2

      Ditto. The new Chrome fixes this totally. Fans stop running just because Chrome is open.

    2. Re: Edge IS/WAS better by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2

      I just got a notification on my 10 surface last night Chrome used 30% of the battery usage. The second closest was only 22%

      --
      http://saveie6.com/
    3. Re:Edge IS/WAS better by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      The only reason edge is more efficient than chrome on windows and only chrome on windows is because elements of edge are embedded in the operating system and still run, sucking up power when chrome runs. Typical M$ marketing scam, not done for any reasons of efficiency and those elements do not need to run unless you need to use the browser but it ensures any competing browsers use more power because of those unused modules running in the background, likely spying into network connections and transferring it back M$ servers. Want a true comparison on which is the more energy efficient browser, strip away the corrupt operating system first and then compare them. No different to M$'s bullshit with faster booting OS, with delayed start elements, so you got to your desktop faster but could still do fuck all because until those now delayed start services start you application will not start and those delayed start services now take even longer to start because the desktop is up and running, doing nothing fucking useful, so just a marketing tool to claim faster starting OS. Tiny Limpers can be real marketing douche bags.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    4. Re:Edge IS/WAS better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have just pulled shit right out of your arse and made claims up that are completely untrue. Hate Microsoft for the real evils they do not for shit you make up because you can't stand them being better at something.

    5. Re:Edge IS/WAS better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only reason edge is more efficient than chrome on windows and only chrome on windows is because elements of edge are embedded in the operating system and still run, sucking up power when chrome runs.

      False. The primary reason is because Edge uses Microsoft's Play Ready system where Chrome uses Google's less efficient Widevine. That's why video performance is what is being used as the benchmark.

      It isn't a "marketing scam", it is simply that Widevine is inferior to Play Ready and as a result of that being pointed out Google are working to improve it, why are you getting all bent out of shape and upset about it? It's a software program, don't take it personally and get all emotional about it.

    6. Re:Edge IS/WAS better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only reason edge is more efficient than chrome on windows and only chrome on windows is because elements of edge are embedded in the operating system and still run, sucking up power when chrome runs.

      Citation required. What "modules" are you referring to? The ones in question here are play ready (for edge) and widevine (for chrome), when you are running chrome there is no play ready "module" running and "sucking up power when chrome runs".

      Typical M$ marketing scam, not done for any reasons of efficiency and those elements do not need to run unless you need to use the browser but it ensures any competing browsers use more power because of those unused modules running in the background

      That is just wrong and complete unsubstantiated garbage.

      Want a true comparison on which is the more energy efficient browser, strip away the corrupt operating system first and then compare them.

      And how would one do that when Edge is Windows-only and Chrome for Windows only runs on Windows? We are talking about a comparison of Windows software and you are suggesting comparing on a platform other than Windows which obviously would not work.

      No different to M$'s bullshit with faster booting OS

      Actually it is completely different to that, but obviously if you don't understand what we're talking about here then you're likely to make meaningless comparisons to completely different things.

      with delayed start elements, so you got to your desktop faster but could still do fuck all because until those now delayed start services start you application will not start and those delayed start services now take even longer to start because the desktop is up and running

      Again, do you have any citation or is this yet another thing you have just made up?

    7. Re:Edge IS/WAS better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope they port this fix to other OSes. It's ridiculous that Chrome on a static webpage makes my MacBook fans jump to 4krpm

  6. In related news... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    ... Chrome now comes with a battery to boost performance.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  7. Best way to improve browser performance by JoeyRox · · Score: 0

    Install an ad blocker.

    1. Re:Best way to improve browser performance by SilentTristero · · Score: 1

      That's not the issue. I use uBlock (and have tried others) but prior to v53 Chrome would spin the fans all the time, just sitting there doing nothing. Now with v53 my laptop and my Surface 4 both sit quietly.

  8. We need a fourth browser organization. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One that focuses on makng a browser for grown ups, wthout user interface dumbing down, uncessary addons and is not based on the three engines Gecko/Webkit/Trident, otherwide the browsers lack of competition will keep having things like battery drainers and privacy invading addons.

  9. Port it to Android by Billly+Gates · · Score: 1

    Chrome is a battery and CPU hog on mobile too.

    --
    http://saveie6.com/
    1. Re: Port it to Android by corychristison · · Score: 1

      I use Firefox Beta for Android, and despite the odd crash here (it /is/ beta) and there it doesn't seem to use much power.

      Wifi, Display and Cell Standby are the biggest battery suckers (in that order).

  10. Edge not winning anyone over by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Glad to see Google addressing the problems with Chrome and power consumption. But is it driving users to Edge I think not. I am not a huge fan of Chrome, but I use it because it's popular and I know most web developers will at least make sure Chrome works. I have found a number of sites where Edge was never even verified let alone supported. Firefox is junk anymore couldn't use it if I wanted too, and I guess IE 11 is an option since I find it better than Edge. You look at the MSDN forums and plenty complain about Edge and Microsoft's response is always to use IE 11. If Google can get Chrome better for Windows it has no worries about losing market share.

  11. Edge browser much lighter on battery? by khz6955 · · Score: 1

    Windows detects when Edge is running and only then switches on battery saver mode. It wouldn't be the first time Microsoft was caught tweaking the OS to make using another browser a jolting experience. In the case of Opera they included browser detection code that shifted fonts 2 pixels to the left.

  12. Of course Edge is better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Of course Edge is better, it doesn't fucking work.

    1. Re:Of course Edge is better by donaldm · · Score: 1

      Of course Edge is better, it doesn't fucking work.

      Well to be fair it does but it completely ignores the MS Windows host file.

      --
      There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.