Safari vs Chrome CPU Usage on Youtube

[Northiscold]

After 11.2 Big Sur update, I decided to make a little comparison between Safari and Chrome's CPU usage on YouTube. My Chrome version is M1 optimized 88.0.4324.96. My device is 8 256 MP Pro. I opened same 8k 60fps video on both browsers. I did same comparison plugged and unplugged, seemed nothing were different. Adguard Pro for Safari and Ublock Origins for Chrome were used. And I have a premium Youtube account. Download speed is stable 50Mbps, not much but were enough, both browsers could load videos.

Safari could not play that video normally, it froze constantly. CPU usage was 10-15%, temperatures were between 27-32 Celsius for all cores. Chrome could run it smoothly, but CPU usage spiked up to 90% and performance cores temperatures were between 70-80 Celsius.

I wonder how that difference can exist but I think for some reason Apple put some limits on the Safari. Any detailed experience and information about this situation will be highly appreciated.

 

[rui no onna]

Quick guess, Safari was only using hardware accelerated playback but the codec/resolution/profile is not fully supported.

Chrome likely went to software/brute-force when HW acceleration failed. I have to say I'm impressed the M1 was able to handle real-time software decode.

 

[Northiscold]

Quick guess, Safari was only using hardware accelerated playback but the codec/resolution/profile is not fully supported.

Chrome likely went to software/brute-force when HW acceleration failed. I have to say I'm impressed the M1 was able to handle real-time software decode.

You mean Safari does what it is capable of and not force itself. But Chrome decodes in real time and makes playback work. Does that mean m1 hardware is not capable? Because if it is a software compatibility issue, Chrome must run without brute force.

 

[rui no onna]

You mean Safari does what it is capable of and not force itself. But Chrome decodes in real time and makes playback work. Does that mean m1 hardware is not capable? Because if it is a software compatibility issue, Chrome must run without brute force.

I meant that:

1. Safari likely uses hardware acceleration only.

2. Chrome is likely using software decode.

Brute-force is a commonly used slang for software decoding when it comes to video playback.

Issue could be hardware or software. Iirc, YouTube uses VP9 for their 4K and 8K streams and support for that was only added recently to iOS devices. VP9 implementation on Apple SoC is probably still a work in progress.

Note, YouTube 4K VP9 is supported on iPhone/iPad so at least that should work with HW acceleration on M1 Macs as well.

 

[Northiscold]

I meant that:

1. Safari likely uses hardware acceleration only.

2. Chrome is likely using software decode.

Brute-force is a commonly used slang for software decoding when it comes to video playback.

Issue could be hardware or software. Iirc, YouTube uses VP9 for their 4K and 8K streams and support for that was only added recently to iOS devices. VP9 implementation on Apple SoC is probably still a work in progress.

Note, YouTube 4K VP9 is supported on iPhone/iPad so at least that should work with HW acceleration on M1 Macs as well.

So I can understand how M1 impressively handles Chrome’s software decoding now. By the way Safari can handle 4k well, but looks like still has to be improved for 8k.

Thank you for your good explanation.

 

[deeddawg]

Reminder:

I will consider Chrome a malware from now on.. | MacRumors Forums

 

[Northiscold]

Reminder:

I will consider Chrome a malware from now on.. | MacRumors Forums

I saw that post before. The thing is, new M1 optimized Chrome are different. No battery usage on sleep, almost as fast as Safari. I do not usually use Chrome anyway, but when I do, it is useful.

 

[velocityg4]

After 11.2 Big Sur update, I decided to make a little comparison between Safari and Chrome's CPU usage on YouTube. My Chrome version is M1 optimized 88.0.4324.96. My device is 8 256 MP Pro. I opened same 8k 60fps video on both browsers. I did same comparison plugged and unplugged, seemed nothing were different. Adguard Pro for Safari and Ublock Origins for Chrome were used. And I have a premium Youtube account. Download speed is stable 50Mbps, not much but were enough, both browsers could load videos.

Safari could not play that video normally, it froze constantly. CPU usage was 10-15%, temperatures were between 27-32 Celsius for all cores. Chrome could run it smoothly, but CPU usage spiked up to 90% and performance cores temperatures were between 70-80 Celsius.

I wonder how that difference can exist but I think for some reason Apple put some limits on the Safari. Any detailed experience and information about this situation will be highly appreciated.

Given that Safari couldn't play the video normally. Did you look at memory usage between the two? Could explain why CPU usage was low yet the video froze if you were running out of memory. Perhaps a hardware acceleration glitch where Safari was using hardware acceleration and Chrome using software acceleration.

I'd also suggest doing the test again without any ad-blockers or other add-ons for a browser to browser comparison.

 

[mi7chy]

Chrome for M1 works well for 8K 60fps VP9 hardware decode (look at stats for nerds) with CPU utilization relatively low in the tens so likely hardware accelerated. However, doesn't look like M1 supports AV1 hardware decoding since 8k 60fps stutters and drops frames with CPU utilization around 85%. 4K AV1 software decoding plays ok but CPU utilization is about 35% so probably not good if on battery.

 

[Northiscold]

Given that Safari couldn't play the video normally. Did you look at memory usage between the two? Could explain why CPU usage was low yet the video froze if you were running out of memory. Perhaps a hardware acceleration glitch where Safari was using hardware acceleration and Chrome using software acceleration.

I'd also suggest doing the test again without any ad-blockers or other add-ons for a browser to browser comparison.

I tried and results were interesting. With Safari, used memory was about 6.5 gb, with Chrome, it was about 5.7, with 0.2 plus minus range. And disabling add-ons did not make a significant change.