Yeah, but where do you really see that in your day-to-day use of a browser? Probably nowhere (except the new google maps). There are still some pretty good reasons for going with Firefox despite awesome (but basically moot) hardware acceleration. Try using Chrome in portrait mode on a Tegra 2 (or slower) android device and then try it on Firefox; the difference is butter smoothness (Firefox) to horrid choppiness (Chrome). And since I like using one browser across all my devices (given bookmark/history syncing), I'll be sticking to Firefox.
Originally Posted by bwat47
I find IE10 to be slower than firefox (which has had access to hardware acceleration in its UI since 2009) on my i7-3720qm (Ivybridge HD4000).
Originally Posted by doom_Oo7
Chromium currently blacklists a lot of GPU acceleration on Linux at the moment, mainly due to many shipped distro drivers being buggy. Unfortunately it's not very fine grained, and even if you have recent or git snapshots with the bugs fixed you don't get to go full-speed unless you completely disable the GPU blacklist in "chrome://flags", but then it might enable a feature that really is broken on your set up...
(... I patch my chromium build to un-blacklist the features I know works on my systems, works well here :-) )
What I've found, as a Mesa 9.2/Linux 3.11 user, is that Chrome simply tries to detect which card do I have, and then applies workarounds without caring about what driver do I have. That means: if I don't mess with chrome://flags, I get bogus workarounds designed for Catalyst and half of the possible hardware acceleration gets blocked.
Originally Posted by s_j_newbury
Last edited by Alejandro Nova; 10-17-2013 at 08:18 AM.
While I understand what you're getting at, you can't really compare Chrome and Firefox on mobile and the desktop. Besides, while Firefox might be smoother on Tegra 2 it is a little slower on my Galaxy Nexus than Chrome and much slower on my LG G2.
Originally Posted by molecule-eye
Someone asked why people use Firefox while Chrome is clearly superior in some aspects.
While it's true (no doubt) that Chrome is faster, more secure, robust, much more modern...
It lacks features.
Addons... is just one thing. Mozilla itself is killing the ecosystem of addons there, so it's not any better.
I wonder when will the newsletter arrive that Mozilla will abandon every former addon.
But, that's just ONE thing.
Other things I miss from Chrome:
- A proper URL bar. I know Mozilla made something new (not sure about that, Opera/IE is like this as well) with awesome bar, but damn. If I been somewhere, I can find it. Anytime. With Chrome, that's not gonna work.
It tries to guess, tries to search the web, does everything but finds me the page I look for.
- The UI. Why the hell did they dumb down the password, cookie and bookmark manager so damn much?
They are not even managers, just "viewers" if you can call them even that.
You can't sort your bookmarks for example, tidy up your stuff... it's a terrible, really overly dumb UI. (Gnome feel, lol.)
If they could fix those two...
(There was an awesome bar addon for chrome, but it was far from good. The dev did everything he could but it just felt way out of place.)
nah it's not gecko
Originally Posted by uid313
Most tests in the last two years shows Firefox to be faster than Chrome. Fancy that
Back in the days when Firefox lost all benchmarks, people cried out "but muh features...".
Now Firefox managed to hack together tools to win benchmarks, but it's still utterly slow: "but it won, right?".
In real world, Firefox sucks. Try Maps, or any 3D/GL/modern site. Heck, even simple sites.
It does not take a rocket scientist to clearly see the difference. Kinda like using a netbook and getting a powerful PC after that.
One more thing. If you have LOW amount of memory, use Firefox. Chrome truly eats up every bit of memory available.
I have no idea where you are coming from. And accusing Firefox of programming to win benchmarks? Lame
Originally Posted by Ruse