Google earlier this week released a version of Chrome designed specifically for Apple’s M1 Macs. If you have a new M1 MacBook Air, M1 MacBook Pro, or M1 Mac mini, you’ll want to download the M1-specific version of Chrome as it runs much faster than the x86 version working through Rosetta 2.
With the introduction of Rosetta 2, M1 and macOS Big Sur seamlessly run apps that haven’t yet transitioned to Universal versions. So without updating, you can keep working on Fusion360 projects or reach the next level in your favorite game. And thanks to Metal and M1, some of the most graphically demanding apps perform better under Rosetta 2 than they did running natively on previous Mac systems with integrated graphics.
Following the release of the M1 version of Chrome, Ars Technica did a series of benchmarks using Speedometer 2.0, JetStream2, and Motion Mark 1.1, and in all cases, the M1 Chrome was much faster than the x86 version.
Across all tests, the native M1 version of Chrome performed between 66 and 81 percent better than the version of Chrome running through Rosetta 2. Safari was the fastest browser of all, of course, having been designed by Apple, and it came out on top across all of the tests.
The M1 version of Chrome can be downloaded on M1 Macs on the Chrome website [here].
MacDailyNews Take: Run Safari if you can. It’s better and faster than Chrome.
Here we go again. MDN. Your headline states:
“Chrome for M1 Macs runs up to 80% faster under Rosetta 2”
And the Ars Technica article informs:
“Across all tests, the native M1 version of Chrome performed between 66 and 81 percent better than the version of Chrome running through Rosetta 2.”
Can you see the mistake?
Yeah, I see the mistake. It’s called Des Gustingaro think he can take my place as chief Grump at MDN.
I am so grumpy you can call me President Grump.
I am anti the M1 chip. Not because of M1nd control. But because the chip is too damn fast.
I am President Grump, and I want to Make Apple Wait Again.
My point is, that native apps DON’T use Rosetta 2? Can you honesty not see that either? Rosetta 2 is an emulator for X86 applications that haven’t yet been updated during this – perhaps two year period?
I applaud Apple, and am totally happy and extremely impressed with their unbeatable strides. How am I being grumpy? MDN do not understand that Rosetta 2 is an emulator for non-native apps, and neither do you. You think that Rosetta 2 is a technology used to run native M1 apps on M1? WOW.
Of course this is all easy for me to understand, because, fuck me – I can read (and spell 😉
I never said I was smart. Just cynical. You don’t need brains for that. I also never said YOU were grumpy.
I am the one who is grumpy. I am President Grump. I haitte Apple with the passion of a thousand burning suns, and to show the world that Apple does NOT rent space in my brain free, and does NOT trigger me to come here to open one’s mouth and remove all doubt, I make it a personal mission of mind to stalk MDN users and to show them how the anti-Apple world really works.
It’s because I am a quality person. The kind of person you want by your side when a kernel panic happens, because you just know I have a sledgehammer ready and waiting to give the kernel panic a panic that it’s gonna get puliverized.
This is how I deliver value to the world. I’m selfless, and only a little time consuming, but it’s worth it. Now you now
Wait, what..you experience kernel panics…sorry, which decade is it again?
(Today you may witness 20:20:20 2020, as a little clue)
And I think you might mean troll, not stalk. Good luck though! 😂
I am not the real @pplecyn!c but one bemused by his mania and endless negative drudgery.
I think we all see it and certainly MDN know the technology and it’s purpose So they have clearly if inexcusably had a brain fart with the heading for some strange reason… or let their friendly local Barista write it.
Notwithstanding your snark, Dez is correct—the headline says that Chrome runs 80% faster under Rosetta 2, while the article says Chrome runs 80% slower under Rosetta 2 than as a native app.
Reading comprehension is a wonderful thing!
Here is where this MDN article creates confusion. This MDN article has TWO distinct sections. The article’s first sentence is, “Google earlier this week released a version of Chrome designed specifically for Apple’s M1 Macs.” That statement references a universal coded Chrome app – but gives no other details such as the performance boost it will have on M1 Class macs.
The second section details how the present Intel coded Chrome app (the non M1 optimized app) performs on M1 macs with the Rosetta 2 translation enabled. THAT version of Chrome runs up to 80% faster on an M1 Mac than that version of Chrome does on an Intel CPU Mac.
Since you are an expert on reading comprehension, please explain how
“Across all tests, the native M1 version of Chrome performed between 66 and 81 percent better than the version of Chrome running through Rosetta 2.”
Provides no details such as the performance boost the universal app has on M1 Class macs.
Because the line you quoted came from the original article by Julia Clover for MacRumors. I mentioned that the confusion arose over the MDN article specifically or better stated, the MDN comments about Julia’s article as expressed the the MDN article title.
The MDN article is titled, “Chrome for M1 Macs runs up to 80% faster under Rosetta 2”. Note that both the beta Chrome that is a universal app (or native M1 app) … AND … the x86 coded Chrome app can BOTH be referred to as “Chrome for M1 Macs since both versions can run on M1 macs.
But that article title is somewhat ambiguous. Does that mean the universal coded Chrome runs up to 81 percent faster or does the x86 coded Chrome running with the aid of Rosetta 2 translation run 81percent faster on M1 Macs?
Of course, since a native Chrome app does NOT need Rosetta 2 translation, the MDN title logically refers to the x86 coded Chrome version. (Reading Comprehension abiltiy)
However, the section that you quoted came from Julia’s article and that section – as you correctly stated – specifically stated it was referring to the native or universal Chrome app – that runs up to 81 percent faster.
Hence the confusion: The MDN article title logically implies that the x86 Chrome app runs 80 percent faster on a M1 Mac while Julia’s article clearly states that the native Chrome app runs up to 81 percent faster on a M1 Mac.
If the native app “ONLY” runs 1 percent faster than the x86 Chrome app (81% vs 80%) then what is the “big deal”.
The obvious conclusion is that the MDN title is in conflict with the MacRumor section referenced.
Humans with some degree of Reading Comprehension ability would make the deduction that the native version of Chrome is the app that runs much faster on an M1 mac (up to 81 percent) and not the x86 coded Chrome app which the title of this MDN article implies.
I’m just going to forgo Rosetta 2 and wait for native app support. It shouldn’t be too long.
I really like it when people come together and share opinions. Great blog, I will read it often. Please update!
directions