People still using Google products at this point are likely minions of Satan. With Google’s deceiving “don’t be evil” motto which they’ve clearly abandoned by spying on users and syphoning their data, and with a Chrome logo/icon that is clearly three superimposed and rotated 6s (some of you probably though it was a crazy Pokemon ball), if you’re still using products from Google, you’re consenting to be abused.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Google Highlights Recent Speed Improvements Made to Chrome on Mac
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
can't even get Arc without giving them my email address? And people complain about Google?
Are you serious?
You may not care about privacy and free speech, but, surely, you have to accept that lots of people do. Google doesn’t respect some very fundamental rights and it makes a lot sense for people to stop using Google products and services that attempt to take away those fundamental rights.
Last edited:
@dmylrea i can send you an invite for Arc if you wish. Its cool, interesting, and very well designed. That been said, it is not an UI design breakthrough everyone has been claiming it is. Does it have the best sidebar and shortcut experience out of any browser? Absolutely. Is it superior to normal browsers? eeeh... Not for me.
Maybe Google hired some programmers, or just turned off tracking. Still slower than Safari and Safari Technology Preview, but a good deal faster than Firefox.
Here are my results on my M1 13 MBP running latest beta of Ventura:
Bowser Benchmark
https://browserbench.org
All are latest builds, tests run with plenty of RAM and only the tested browser loaded. No idea why Brave Motionmark is so low, I thought it was an anomaly, but ran it several times. Brave Browser Beta won't even load, crashes on Chromium, so might have something to do with older software from Brave
Here are my results on my M1 13 MBP running latest beta of Ventura:
Bowser Benchmark
| Version | Speedometer | JetStream | Motionmark | |
| Safari | 16.5 (18615.2.5.11.2) | 362 | 281.189 | 3304.46 |
| STP | 167 | 370 | 334 | 3265.95 |
| Brave | 1.50.114 Chromium: 112.0.5615.49 | 354 | 274.730 | 1121.82 |
| Firefox | 112.0 (64-bit) | 288 | 136 | 1551.92 |
| Chrome | 112.0.5615.49 | 334 | 276.179 | 3126.60 |
https://browserbench.org
All are latest builds, tests run with plenty of RAM and only the tested browser loaded. No idea why Brave Motionmark is so low, I thought it was an anomaly, but ran it several times. Brave Browser Beta won't even load, crashes on Chromium, so might have something to do with older software from Brave
Firefox is slow. that is not me just saying "oh seems slow", like some posters, I ran benchmarks, yep it is slow. But, certainly it is fast enough and obviously you enjoy its other features. and seriously, it is fast enoughI don't care what optimizations Google makes, I am not switching from FireFox.
The number of security issues that come from the fact that browsers have out of bounds issues is maddening.
Why isn’t there a browser engine that’s actually written in a secure (AKA, modern) language? IE, if a browser engine were fully written in Rust, 99% of the security issues that we see from Chromium and WebKit would vanish, no?
Gecko (Firefox)’s CSS engine is fully written in Rust, but the JS and HTML is still written in C++.
There’s Servo but… it lacks adequate funding, it lacks an Apple Silicon, and I don’t think it even passes ACID 2 yet.
The focus on speed/performance seems… premature. Let’s focus on making the security rock solid first, no?
Why isn’t there a browser engine that’s actually written in a secure (AKA, modern) language? IE, if a browser engine were fully written in Rust, 99% of the security issues that we see from Chromium and WebKit would vanish, no?
Gecko (Firefox)’s CSS engine is fully written in Rust, but the JS and HTML is still written in C++.
There’s Servo but… it lacks adequate funding, it lacks an Apple Silicon, and I don’t think it even passes ACID 2 yet.
The focus on speed/performance seems… premature. Let’s focus on making the security rock solid first, no?
Apple Studio Mac / Ventura 13.3.1And Safari Version 16.5 (18615.2.5.11.2) still feels snappier. Had to say it.
Speedometer2 scores
Safari Version 16.5 with M1 24" iMac using MacOS 13.4 beta 2 = 368
Firefox 112 same platform/OS = 276
- Safari 16.4 = 343
- Safari Tech Preview 167 = 356
- Firefox 112 = 296
- Brave 1.50.114 = 329
- Edge 112.1 = 296
- Opera 95.0 = 318
- Waterfox G5.1.5 = 226
- TorBrowser 12.0.4 = 105
I just got a 352 on my MacBook Pro M1 over Wifi, Then ran it again, with Wifi turned off, and no other network connected (Test ran fine), and got 357. Speedbench2 is only a javascript test, testing how fast the browser javascript engine, DOM manipulation, and CSS rendering are. It doesn't even need a network connection to work.Alright here are some comments found online.
Just bought a MacBook Air M1 and did the Speedometer2.0 benchmark, got around 220. Then did the same benchmark on my desktop with RTX 3090 / 5900 X / 64 GB Ram and got a score of 170.
Which shows Apple silicon is 30% faster than one of the fastest desktop CPU's when it comes to browsing the internet. How is this even possible?
Just feels weird, got a huge case and huge CPU cooling block. M1 Air doesn't even have a FAN! And was not connected to a power supply....
So I am talking about what I observe getting way higher score I see repeat with still higher results reported by forum users using the latest M2 Max MBP then my M1 Max MBP. Obviously there is something related to the use of AS platform and how high the Speedometer2 score goes on both y examples.
another observation same link
I checked it a bit. Speedbench is all about responsiveness of web pages so there are a lot of factor in between. You are dependant of the efficiency of the web browser, and also of the tweaking of the OS. For example, Apple favorites the responsiveness above all (which means that visual applications are favorised by the ressources attributions) whereas for windows I don't know. In my opinions, speedbench would be more useful to compare browsers on the same PC than accross different PC, different OS and different browser
So a very fast low latency ISP connection does affect the scoring slightly, also the Ventura OS more optimized over time has now has increased the score to be higher more so. So less of a hardware scoring stat as you commented on.
i've been using firefox for a loooong time.
still like it better than the alternatives.
my question though... do these speed improvements also apply to the 'un-googled' chromium browser as well?
Firefox UI is ugly. Pinch to zoom doesn’t work. Scrolling physics doesn’t feel natural.
Opinions vary.
Or perhaps more to do with people not only using macOS so need a browser that is cross-compatible. Not everyone who uses a Mac has an iPhone, not everyone who owns an iPhone uses Safari. Lots of reasons. Habit is a lazy answer.
I mean if Safari was really the best why would people have a habit of installing something they wouldn't use..
On my personal M1 Max 14" MBP, I see 327 unplugged at very low battery. Plugged in I see 373. I'll be getting a 14" MBP M2 Pro for work to replace the old intel soon, curious to see how it does.
Yeah, I have other computers and it sucks I can't use Safari on them. But that's not a good enough reason to not use Safari on my Mac and other Apple devices.
They don't. They install something else and use it instead of Safari, out of habit. Safari wasn't always a great browser.
I mostly use Safari because it automatically autofills 2FA security codes from my phone to my Mac. Any other browser currently allow this?
I still can't get Google Updater off my Mac. It pops up every time I reboot, I don't even have Chrome or any Google app on my Mac. Screw Google.
Just search (or Google to unGoogle yourself
) for how to uninstall Google Updater manually off of the Mac version you are running. That is what I did a long time ago and it will never return unless you install another Google app. But it has to be done manually to get every trace of it off. Otherwise, it feels like you are in a loop that you can't stop. Been there, done that.Chrome's (and Brave's and Edge's) bfcache still sucks compared to Safari's, and for me, that is a big determinant of navigation speed.
Really? AdGuard for Safari slows the browser down to a crawl, even with minimal filter lists selected. It's a bulky, bloated piece of software. Wipr is my preferred ad blocker on Safari, though I wish it allowed custom rules.