Has anyone else noticed the difference between Chrome and Safari?

Discussion in 'OS X Mountain Lion (10.8)' started by SilentLoner, May 24, 2013.

  1. SilentLoner macrumors 65816


    Dec 29, 2007
    My workplace's wifi is hit and miss but I have found that chrome seems to handle this alot better than safari if the wifi drops for a few seconds.

    Is it because chrome loads web pages differently?
  2. old-wiz macrumors G3

    Mar 26, 2008
    West Suburban Boston Ma
    Good question. I wonder if Chrome is more flexible at short loss of connection? Maybe Safari just depends too much on the TCP/IP stack performing perfectly.
  3. nbnbxdnb macrumors regular

    Sep 1, 2010
    up up. I'd also like to know the answer. Somebody?
  4. PJM82 macrumors member


    Apr 28, 2013
    United Kingdom
    Chrome was developed with speed in mind and I have noticed the same thing on the PC, ipad and iphone. I expect it is entirely down to the way it renders web pages.

    As Chrome was designed to be multi platform and available on mobile platforms it seems to be able to handle time outs far better. Safari will often refuse to load the page within a very short period of time, where as Chrome is also far more patient.

    Either way, in my opinion Safari is junk compared to Chrome so stick with Chrome. Google isn't all evil, just mostly... ;)

    Edit - Google safari timeout and you'll see loads of people complaining about just this!
  5. MLinneer macrumors regular


    Mar 18, 2013
    Sherman, TX
    I believe it stems from Chrome's multi-process method. It schedules HTTP requests differently than Safari or Firefox, and also uses multiple streams to pull web site elements. I've noticed that Safari will hang on certain pages that pull ad graphics from off-site ad servers, like it suspends rendering until the graphic is loaded so it knows how to render the rest of the page without having to move elements around. I resolved most of these issues by changing my backup DNS server to as my ISP's DNS will timeout from time to time.

    While Chrome's multi-process method may be more secure, it gobbles resources. Just running the Macrumors front page, Chrome has 3 processes (Chrome, Chrome Worker, and Chrome Renderer) running 54 threads. Firefox has 1 process with 28 threads, Safari has 2 processes and 30 threads.

    Every tab in Chrome runs it's own process and I've seen it eat over 1Gb of RAM just for 3 or 4 tabs, especially if you're streaming Flash. I usually run the audio feed from a local radio station in background... all day :) Just running Chrome with an empty page will drive my CPU temp up 20 degrees over what Safari or Firefox. Streaming video (like CNN Live Feed) and my MB Air will get up to 215F and the fans running full blast. The same feed with Safari will max at 175F, no fans.

Share This Page