A new Chrome update saves 17 years of processing every day

[mongeese]

TL;DR: Google is now shipping Chrome 91, which includes a major upgrade to the browser’s JavaScript processing. According to Google, the V8 engine used to run about 78 years’ worth of JavaScript every day, but a 23% speedup has reduced that figure by 17 years.

These days, JavaScript is an integral part of website design, but it can be a bit of a bottleneck for browsers. Chrome’s V8 engine was one of its main advantages when it was released in 2008, and to this day it remains a major selling point of Chromium browsers like Chrome, Edge, Vivaldi, and Opera.

Three years ago, Google implemented two new compilers called Ignition and Turbofan to the V8 engine in a two-tiered fashion. Ignition is a speedy bytecode interpreter that gets started quickly. Turbofan is a machine code writer that optimizes the code it outputs with information gathered during the JavaScript’s execution, resulting in a slower start but faster code.

In Chrome 91, Google’s slotted a third compiler in the middle called Sparkplug. Like Turbofan, it generates machine code, but it doesn’t optimize its code based on new information so its output isn’t quite as good. But because it doesn’t have to wait around for that information, it can get started just after Ignition does and build up speed almost as quickly. It eases the pipeline’s transition from Ignition to Turbofan.

In Google’s testing, Sparkplug improved the V8 engine’s compute performance by 5 to 15%, depending on the hardware, website, and operating system.

The new V8 also includes a second optimization; the removal of embedded builtins, which Google recently realized were causing performance issues. In that sense, it’s more of a bug fix. It isn’t Google’s final solution to the problem because it uses too much memory (as all Chrome versions are destined to do, apparently) but it’s enough of an improvement to merit inclusion.

Put briefly, a builtin is a prewritten snippet of code that handles a common process, and they’re pulled from memory by the CPU as the code runs. The problem with them is that in some CPU architectures, if the builtin isn’t stored in the same memory space as the engine’s code, it can take the CPU quite a while to find it. Apple’s M1 chip is particularly susceptible to this problem.

V8’s new solution is to copy the library of builtins from wherever it happens to be to paste it next to the compiled code it’s creating. This duplication is cause for the increased memory usage, but it enables the CPU to consistently make correct branch predictions when it searches for the right builtin, thus allowing the CPU to use it for out-of-order execution.

Google found that the duplication fix could offer a fairly variable performance improvement of 3 to 15%. YouTube and Apple’s M1 benefited from it the most.

You’re probably using Chrome 91 right now (if not, you can download it here). Have you noticed the extra speed?

Image credit: Pawel Czerwinski

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/89867-new-chrome-update-saves-17-years-processing-every.html

 

[Beerfloat]

Nobody reveal the secret to those cicadas. 17 years processing is just fine.

 

[Lionvibez]

It is faster I noticed a nice increase in score using the https://browserbench.org/Speedometer2.0/

 

[Geralt]

No, the same speed here, apparently. But I have a Samsung 980 Pro boosting everything. Maybe this fast NVMe is making the speed increase negligible.

 

[Bulllee]

No, the same speed here, apparently. But I have a Samsung 980 Pro boosting everything. Maybe this fast NVMe is making the speed increase negligible.

You can only dream of the speed(of the drives) of which you speak of.
Getting slower!

 

[RudyBob]

HuH?

 

[Geralt]

No idea what Bulllee meant by all that.

 

[Geralt]

You can only dream of the speed(of the drives) of which you speak of.
Getting slower!

A 500 GB Samsung 980 Pro costs 150 dollars here. So, it is something anybody can purchase.

 

[captaincranky]

It is faster I noticed a nice increase in score using the https://browserbench.org/Speedometer2.0/

Which calls to question whether you actually noticed a speed increase, or you only noticed via the benchmark score.

Loading pages is one thing, actually using a page is quite another. Speaking for myself, I can't type as fast as an IDE drive can transfer information..

 

[Lionvibez]

Which calls to question whether you actually noticed a speed increase, or you only noticed via the benchmark score.

Loading pages is one thing, actually using a page is quite another. Speaking for myself, I can't type as fast as an IDE drive can transfer information..

My computer is fast enough so no it doesn't feel any different in use.

Im on a fiber internet connection and storage is a pcie 4.0 drive

This benchmark is sensitive to cpu and single thread performance. I saw a huge increase in score going from Zen 2 to Zen 3.

 

[theruck]

Yes and I am a 1000 year bilionaire

 

[Puiu]

This is not about running code on a fast NVME or on a fast monster PC. The JS performance can tank hard in many situations once the code gets big enough or if the code is running while the website is still loading and you can't really avoid this.

 

[Avro Arrow]

Browser speed? Really? I sure as hell don't notice browser speed. Even my 10 year-old Llano-based craptop (that uses AMD Deneb/Thuban Architecture) is nice and fast when web-browsing.

The only browser that has ever noticeably slower than the rest on any of my computers in the last 20 years has been Internet Exploder. Firefox, Opera and Chromium (and its derivatives) have all been more or less equal to me. When I say "more or less", I mean that there probably is a speed difference between them but my mind doesn't register that milliseconds difference.

 

[Puiu]

Browser speed? Really? I sure as hell don't notice browser speed. Even my 10 year-old Llano-based craptop (that uses AMD Deneb/Thuban Architecture) is nice and fast when web-browsing.

The only browser that has ever noticeably slower than the rest on any of my computers in the last 20 years has been Internet Exploder. Firefox, Opera and Chromium (and its derivatives) have all been more or less equal to me. When I say "more or less", I mean that there probably is a speed difference between them but my mind doesn't register that milliseconds difference.

I seriously doubt that your 10yo laptop doesn't greatly benefit from a faster browser. If by "web browsing" you mean just reading the news and writing an email, then yeah, you don't need progress in terms of performance. Techspot doesn't need better JS performance to be readable.

FYI even a few milliseconds are visible and very perceivable when we are looking at how smooth an animation is and how well something loads.

 

[Avro Arrow]

I seriously doubt that your 10yo laptop doesn't greatly benefit from a faster browser. If by "web browsing" you mean just reading the news and writing an email, then yeah, you don't need progress in terms of performance. Techspot doesn't need better JS performance to be readable.

FYI even a few milliseconds are visible and very perceivable when we are looking at how smooth an animation is and how well something loads.

Doubt it all you want, I don't mind. People on here who know me know that I don't tell lies and don't make things up so it doesn't matter if you believe me.

My old craptop has 8GB of DDR3 and four Phenom II-type cores (which have an IPC that is superior to Bulldozer). It is MORE than powerful enough for web-browsing without issue. Web browsing has changed very little in the last ten years so why would the hardware requirements change?

 

[Puiu]

Doubt it all you want, I don't mind. People on here who know me know that I don't tell lies and don't make things up so it doesn't matter if you believe me.

My old craptop has 8GB of DDR3 and four Phenom II-type cores (which have an IPC that is superior to Bulldozer). It is MORE than powerful enough for web-browsing without issue. Web browsing has changed very little in the last ten years so why would the hardware requirements change?

Wanna bet it doesn't have enough? Try opening something that has WebGL running. Try running a 4K video. Try running any JS heavy website. How many websites that should run at 30-60FPS run like they crap?

You don't actually think that you don't need more performance, you just settled with a bad experience because it doesn't bother you that much. You think it's normal for things to run slow. You are just not a power user like others.

By the same logic a 30yo car that still works is just as good as new car from 2021. It gets you from point A to point B.

 

[Avro Arrow]

Wanna bet it doesn't have enough? Try opening something that has WebGL running. Try running a 4K video. Try running any JS heavy website. How many websites that should run at 30-60FPS run like they crap?

I'm unaware of any websites that require high FPS but it does handle online games like Star Trek Online just fine. As for 4K video, I'm not sure that its GPU even has that as an available resolution but that's irrelevant anyway because it doesn't have a 4K screen, it's a CRAPTOP (DERP)!

You don't actually think that you don't need more performance, you just settled with a bad experience because it doesn't bother you that much. You think it's normal for things to run slow. You are just not a power user like others.

Right, because I don't know any better, eh? Do you think that I DON'T have anything faster than my old Llano craptop? Do you have any idea what you sound like? Let me educate you son, because I have a veritable STABLE of computers:

DESKTOP PC #1:
CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 3600X
Motherboard: ASRock X570 Pro4
RAM: 16GB Team Dark DDR4-3200 (2x8GB)
GPU: XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT

DESKTOP PC #2:
CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 1700
Motherboard: ASRock X370 Killer SLI
RAM: 16GB Team Dark DDR4-2400 (2x8GB)
GPU: Sapphire Radeon R9 Fury

DESKTOP PC #3:
CPU: AMD FX-8350
Motherboard: Gigabyte 990FX Ultra-Durable
RAM: 16GB UMAX Cetus DDR3-1333 (4x4GB)
GPU: Sapphire Radeon R9 Fury

CRAPTOP PC #1:
APU: AMD Ryzen 5 3500U
RAM: 16GB OEM DDR4-2400 (2x8GB)
GPU: Vega 8 IGP, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile discrete
Model: ASUS Vivobook series

CRAPTOP PC #2: <- The one in question
APU: AMD A8-3500M
GPU: Radeon HD 6620G (IGP)
RAM: 8GB Kingston DDR3-1333 (2x4GB)
Model: Acer Aspire 5560 series

At 720p on medium settings, that old craptop can smoothly play SKYRIM. I know this because years ago, on a trip to Cuba, I brought it with me and a tropical storm hit which kept me in the hotel for two days. I had put Skyrim on it as a test and I hadn't removed it yet after discovering that it ran pretty well (not as good as my FX-8350 desktop, but perfectly playable regardless) and I was so glad that I did because it was a great cure for boredom. I was impressed as hell with that APU and the fact that it's still useful is amazing to me. You think that some crappy little online java script is going to bring it to its knees when it can play SKYRIM? Are you serious right now?

By the same logic a 30yo car that still works is just as good as new car from 2021. It gets you from point A to point B.

You call THAT logic? Let me show you why that's completely ILLOGICAL:

Reasons that cars get replaced:

1. 1.) Mechanical Wear from operation
2. 2.) Corrosion
3. 3.) Collision Damage
4. 4.) Freak accidents (tree falls on it, etc.)
5. 5.) Vandalism

Now, do these factors have any relevance to computers? No. The closest would be to say that a spinning drive, a fan or a water cooler's pump could wear out from mechanical wear. If those 5 factors didn't exist for cars, we wouldn't NEED to replace cars either. Getting from point A to point B in a 1969 AMC Javelin works just as well as a 2015 Ford Mustang. It might use more fuel, but it definitely gets the job done and just as quickly.

The big performance dividers of PCs when it comes to those of today to those of yesteryear do NOT include web browsing (or any kind of 2D office app). Any changes to browsing have NOT resulted in any significant performance loss and this is something that I do know first-hand because I do have so many computers with so many different levels of performance. Everyday tasks like browsing and office apps are COMPLETELY unaffected by which machine I'm using as far as I can tell.

File compression, video encoding, code compilation and gaming are noticeably affected by slower CPUs and GPUs and this can be compounded further by things like insufficient RAM and/or slow connectivity like older versions of USB and/or PCI-Express. However, for internet browsing, you'd have to have well over 100 tabs open at once to begin to notice things slowing down and that is more of a RAM limitation than anything else. It has been my experience that, even using the computer at my mother's house (something I threw together with an old Phenom II X4 940, A Radeon HD 6450 and 2x2GB of OCZ Reaper DDR2-800) is perfectly fine for browsing with no delays that I've been able to notice when it comes to the speed of page loading. It's pretty much instant, just like every other computer that I have.

Whether you believe me or not doesn't change that I can't tell a speed difference between any of my computers when just browsing the internet normally. Now, on my old TABLET, that's a different story because that thing lags like crazy but none of my x86-based rigs do.

 

[Avro Arrow]

Which calls to question whether you actually noticed a speed increase, or you only noticed via the benchmark score.

Loading pages is one thing, actually using a page is quite another. Speaking for myself, I can't type as fast as an IDE drive can transfer information..

That's awesome!

To be even more exacting, I'm a very fast typist but I can't even type as fast as an IDE CD-RW drive's write speed at 1X.

 

[Crinkles]

You call THAT logic? Let me show you why that's completely ILLOGICAL:

Reasons that cars get replaced:

1. 1.) Mechanical Wear from operation
2. 2.) Corrosion
3. 3.) Collision Damage
4. 4.) Freak accidents (tree falls on it, etc.)
5. 5.) Vandalism

Income tax returns, new technologies, colors, materials, new stuff is better-ism, performance
economy, birthdays. The list of reasons to replace. upgrade, exchange cars, PC's, and everything else we own, is long.

Now, do these factors have any relevance to computers? No.

Minus the wheel bearings and other mechanicals normally not used in computers, it's the exact same broad set of reasons. PC's are consumable devices, they age fast. Cars are supposedly 'durable' and indeed, some are, but by 20-30 years they're not suitable as daily drivers for most of us.

Everyday tasks like browsing and office apps is COMPLETELY unaffected by which machine I'm using as far as I can tell.

Neither would Nero Burning Rom, there just aren't that many using Nero on a daily basis anymore, compared to "oh lets say" FACEBOOK and Twitter, either of those sites will bring a list of well-appointed computers, screaming to their knees.

Using the computer at my mother's house (something I threw together with an old Phenom II X4 940, A Radeon HD 6450 and 2x2GB of OCZ Reaper DDR2-800) is perfectly fine for browsing with no delays that I've been able to notice when it comes to the speed of page loading. It's pretty much instant, just like every other computer that I have.

Whether you believe me or not doesn't change that I can't tell a speed different between any of my computers when just browsing the internet normally. Now, on my old TABLET, that's a different story because that thing lags like crazy but none of my x86-based rigs do.

The usable lifetime for a high-performance computer is measured in hours for demanding users, that's the way it always was, and remains the way it is. I would rather catch a fastball in the eye than use a slow-poke five year old PC.

 

[Puiu]

I'm unaware of any websites that require high FPS but it does handle online games like Star Trek Online just fine. As for 4K video, I'm not sure that its GPU even has that as an available resolution but that's irrelevant anyway because it doesn't have a 4K screen, it's a CRAPTOP (DERP)!

Right, because I don't know any better, eh? Do you think that I DON'T have anything faster than my old Llano craptop? Do you have any idea what you sound like? Let me educate you son, because I have a veritable STABLE of computers:

DESKTOP PC #1:
CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 3600X
Motherboard: ASRock X570 Pro4
RAM: 16GB Team Dark DDR4-3200 (2x8GB)
GPU: XFX Radeon RX 5700 XT

DESKTOP PC #2:
CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 1700
Motherboard: ASRock X370 Killer SLI
RAM: 16GB Team Dark DDR4-2400 (2x8GB)
GPU: Sapphire Radeon R9 Fury

DESKTOP PC #3:
CPU: AMD FX-8350
Motherboard: Gigabyte 990FX Ultra-Durable
RAM: 16GB UMAX Cetus DDR3-1333 (4x4GB)
GPU: Sapphire Radeon R9 Fury

CRAPTOP PC #1:
APU: AMD Ryzen 5 3500U
RAM: 16GB OEM DDR4-2400 (2x8GB)
GPU: Vega 8 IGP, GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile discrete
Model: ASUS Vivobook series

CRAPTOP PC #2: <- The one in question
APU: AMD A8-3500M
GPU: Radeon HD 6620G (IGP)
RAM: 8GB Kingston DDR3-1333 (2x4GB)
Model: Acer Aspire 5560 series

At 720p on medium settings, that old craptop can smoothly play SKYRIM. I know this because years ago, on a trip to Cuba, I brought it with me and a tropical storm him which kept me in the hotel for two days. I had put Skyrim on it as a test and I hadn't removed it yet after discovering that it ran pretty well (not as good as my FX-8350 desktop, but perfectly playable regardless) and I was so glad that I did because it was a great cure for boredom. I was impressed as hell with that APU and the fact that its still useful is amazing to me. You think that some crappy little online java script is going to bring it to its knees when it can play SKYRIM? Are you serious right now?

You call THAT logic? Let me show you why that's completely ILLOGICAL:

Reasons that cars get replaced:

1. 1.) Mechanical Wear from operation
2. 2.) Corrosion
3. 3.) Collision Damage
4. 4.) Freak accidents (tree falls on it, etc.)
5. 5.) Vandalism

Now, do these factors have any relevance to computers? No. The closest would be to say that a spinning drive, a fan or a water cooler's pump could wear out from mechanical wear. If those 5 factors didn't exist for cars, we wouldn't NEED to replace cars either. Getting from point A to point B in a 1969 AMC Javelin works just as well as a 2015 Ford Mustang. It might use more fuel, but it definitely gets the job done and just as quickly.

The big performance dividers of PCs when it comes to those of today to those of yesteryear do NOT include web browsing (or any kind of 2D office app). Any changes to browsing have NOT resulted in any significant performance and this is something that I do know first-hand because I do have so many computers with so many different levels of performance. Everyday tasks like browsing and office apps is COMPLETELY unaffected by which machine I'm using as far as I can tell.

File compression, video encoding, code compilation and gaming are noticeably affected by slower CPUs and GPUs and this can be compounded further by things like insufficient RAM and/or slow connectivity like older versions of USB and/or PCI-Express. However, for internet browsing, you'd have to have well over 100 tabs open at once to begin to notice things slowing down and that is more of a RAM limitation than anything else. It has been my experience that, even using the computer at my mother's house (something I threw together with an old Phenom II X4 940, A Radeon HD 6450 and 2x2GB of OCZ Reaper DDR2-800) is perfectly fine for browsing with no delays that I've been able to notice when it comes to the speed of page loading. It's pretty much instant, just like every other computer that I have.

Whether you believe me or not doesn't change that I can't tell a speed different between any of my computers when just browsing the internet normally. Now, on my old TABLET, that's a different story because that thing lags like crazy but none of my x86-based rigs do.

Do I look like I care about your other systems? It was obvious that you have more than just that (something more modern) otherwise you wouldn't actually be here on this website. I just told the truth about the system you mentioned, nothing more, nothing less. Writing novels about it won't change that fact.

I regularly have tens of tabs open since my job requires it. I know for a fact that you don't keep "100 tabs" open on that crappy PC and don't feel it slow down to a crawl. Like I said before, you are not a power user so you don't care if performance suffers or don't use it for anything beyond basic stuff.

I seriously don't understand why you are making such a big case about this. A performance improvement should be something to be happy about, and yet you treat it like it's something bad going on a rant about how a potato still loads the internet just "fine" for you.

Let me give you a piece of simple information: in the past decade the websites you visit have become more and more advanced and power hungry with more and more dynamic elements, animations, JS etc. The reason your potato PC is even able to load such things is because browsers have been improving performance. Fact of the day: Chrome devs said in 2018 in their 10 year anniversary blog post that since launch the performance of their JS engine (V8) improved by around 20x.

PS: you have no idea just much time I spend optimising even simple CSS animations and JS code on websites for clients. every update like this allows me to deliver better more complex things (I still curse Safari for their lack of meaningful updates)

 

[Cycloid Torus]

I, for one, am grateful for every little improvement as it prolongs the useful life of what I have. My 11 year old Dell T3500 with 12GB RAM and an Intel Xeon x5680 CPU just lasts a bit longer - running DOSEE, DOS2, Fallout4 and Skyrim without any perceptible issue after a 2018 $125 GPU upgrade - works for me. It is rather like my 1992 Volvo 245 which runs every day I need it at the speeds which I desire - a miracle of modern industry (even if it doesn't have an Infotainment Center).

This leads to the generic advice... "Buy Used, Spend Less" and the Swiss truism which is like unto it.. "Buy It Once".

 

[Avro Arrow]

Income tax returns, new technologies, colors, materials, new stuff is better-ism, performance
economy, birthdays. The list of reasons to replace. upgrade, exchange cars, PC's, and everything else we own, is long.



Minus the wheel bearings and other mechanicals normally not used in computers, it's the exact same broad set of reasons. PC's are consumable devices, they age fast. Cars are supposedly 'durable' and indeed, some are, but by 20-30 years they're not suitable as daily drivers for most of us.




Neither would Nero Burning Rom, there just aren't that many using Nero on a daily basis anymore, compared to "oh lets say" FACEBOOK and Twitter, either of those sites will bring a list of well-appointed computers, screaming to their knees.



The usable lifetime for a high-performance computer is measured in hours for demanding users, that's the way it always was, and remains the way it is. I would rather catch a fastball in the eye than use a slow-poke five year old PC.

That was semantics. The fact is that I have all of these PCs in operation from an R5-3600X to an A8-3500M (and a few in between) and any difference between them when it comes to web browsing is indistinguishable to me. Maybe if I sat them side by side, I MIGHT notice something but it'd be splitting hairs, certainly not enough to make a difference to me.

Now, of course I normally use my R5-3600X desktop but whenever I'm using another one of my machines and just browsing the web, I don't suddenly feel like I'm using a sluggish computer. The only thing that I've noticed is that the older PCs are easier to overload but for browsing under normal circumstances, it feels no different.

 

[Avro Arrow]

Do I look like I care about your other systems? It was obvious that you have more than just that (something more modern) otherwise you wouldn't actually be here on this website. I just told the truth about the system you mentioned, nothing nothing less. Writing novels about it won't change that fact.

I regularly have tens of tabs open since my job requires it. I know for a fact that you don't keep "100 tabs" open on that crappy PC and don't feel it slow down to a crawl. Like I said before, you are not a power user so you don't care if performance suffers or don't use it for anything beyond basic stuff.

I seriously don't understand why you are making such a big case about this. A performance improvement should be something to be happy about, and yet you treat it like it's something bad going on a rant about how a potato still loads the internet just "fine" for you.

Let me give you a piece of simple information: in the past decade the websites you visit have become more and more advanced and power hungry with more and more dynamic elements, animations, JS etc. The reason your potato PC is even able to load such things is because browsers have been improving performance. Fact of the day: Chrome devs said in 2018 in their 10 year anniversary blog post that since launch the performance of their JS engine (V8) improved by around 20x.

PS: you have no idea just much time I spend optimising even simple CSS animations and JS code on websites for clients. every update like this allows me to deliver better more complex things (I still curse Safari for their lack of meaningful updates)

No, you argued against the truth that I mentioned. The truth is that for web browsing, the speed difference between them is indistinguishable by me. I'm not telling myself ANYTHING. I'm not SETTLING for an inferior experience. Those were your claims, specifically quoted in my response and now you're trying to backtrack and change your story. Forget it, I don't talk to people who discuss in bad faith, and that's what you're doing.

 

[Avro Arrow]

I, for one, am grateful for every little improvement as it prolongs the useful life of what I have. My 11 year old Dell T3500 with 12GB RAM and an Intel Xeon x5680 CPU just lasts a bit longer - running DOSEE, DOS2, Fallout4 and Skyrim without any perceptible issue after a 2018 $125 GPU upgrade - works for me. It is rather like my 1992 Volvo 245 which runs every day I need it at the speeds which I desire - a miracle of modern industry (even if it doesn't have an Infotainment Center).

This leads to the generic advice... "Buy Used, Spend Less" and the Swiss truism which is like unto it.. "Buy It Once".

I couldn't agree more. I only just replaced my 2013 Motorola Moto-G LTE after eight years of use. I don't understand people who are spending a king's ransom on phones every two years.

 

[Cycloid Torus]

My Moto 6 agrees.