Safari enjoys an absolutely crushing advantage on this test, more than doubling even M1-native Chrome's performance. Chrome x86_64 under Rosetta2 takes a significant back seat to everything else here-though we want to again stress that it does not feel at all slow and would perform quite well compared to nearly any other system.įinally, MotionMark 1.1 measures complex graphic animation techniques in-browser and nothing else. This is the closest thing to a "traditional" outside-the-browser benchmark and is the most relevant for general Web applications of all kinds-particularly heavy office applications such as spreadsheets with tons of columns, rows, and formulae but also graphic editors with local rather than cloud processing.
Jetstream2 is the broadest of the three benchmarks and includes workloads for data sorting, regular expression parsing, graphic ray tracing, and more. Speedometer shows a massive advantage for M1 silicon running natively, whether Safari or Chrome Chrome x86_64 run through Rosetta2 is inconsequentially slower than Chrome running on a brand-new HP EliteBook with Ryzen U CPU. This is probably the most relevant benchmark of the three for "regular webpage," if such a thing exists. The first benchmark in our gallery above, Speedometer, is the most prosaic-the only thing it does is populate lists of menu items, over and over, using a different Web-application framework each time. dmg is available today, and-as expected-it's significantly faster if you're doing something complicated enough in your browser to notice.
That was and still is a true statement we find it difficult to believe anyone using the non-native binary for Chrome under an M1 machine would find it "slow." That said, Google's newer, ARM-native. Further Reading Hands-on with the Apple M1-a seriously fast x86 competitor In our earlier testing, we declared that the previous version of Google Chrome-which was available only as an x86_64 binary and needed to be run using Rosetta 2-was perfectly fine.
0 kommentar(er)
