
Introducing power saving mode in Opera for computers - hochmartinez
https://www.opera.com/blogs/desktop/2016/05/introducing-power-saving-mode/
======
masklinn
> We are the first major browser to include a dedicated power saving mode

Isn't that because the one prime power-saving browser (Safari) is simply
power-saving by default? AFAIK it's the same story on Windows (with Edge).

Chrome is well known for being an all-power-consuming monster, having better
power consumption than Chrome is hardly an achievement.

~~~
maccard
There's also Firefox (I don't know much about Firefox power consumption. )

~~~
robin_reala
On Windows at least it looks like it’s considerably better than Chrome but
less good than Edge / IE: [http://www.digitalcitizen.life/test-comparison-
which-browser...](http://www.digitalcitizen.life/test-comparison-which-
browser-will-make-your-laptop-battery-last-longer)

~~~
jakub_g
> All the web browsers used their default configuration, without any add-ons
> or toolbars installed.

My raw, untested guess is that using Firefox with some strict
adblocking/flashblocking etc. tools might reduce its power usage due to less
HTTP requests, less CPU/GPU time wasted (though OTOH the add-ons may increase
the CPU load to do their job, so it's non-obvious).

------
LoSboccacc
> first

explorer 9 disagrees.

[http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/159269-internet-
explore...](http://www.sevenforums.com/tutorials/159269-internet-explorer-
javascript-timer-frequency-power-plan-settings.html)

Safari says hi as well

[http://www.imore.com/os-x-mavericks-preview-safari-power-
sav...](http://www.imore.com/os-x-mavericks-preview-safari-power-saver-cuts-
flash-knees)

------
awinter-py
G chrome has a 'power multiplier' that you can turn on by clicking the red
multiplication sign next to each open tab

------
joosters
They aren't comparing apples with apples. Ad blocking is only enabled in the
power saving mode. This alone would save a lot of CPU. IMO they should show a
comparison with ad blocking enabled in both situations.

------
hawski
Does anyone know how different is power management of Chrome on ChromeOS from
Chrome on other OSes? Chromebooks are known for long battery life is that
because of power management or is there more in this?

~~~
creshal
Minimal hardware + even more minimal software stack means that there's little
_except_ Chrome that can drain power. That already helps a lot.

------
chenzhekl
Chrome should add such a mode, too. Power consumption is a big concern for
laptop users.

~~~
madeofpalk
Why don't you just make low power consumption a permanent feature?

~~~
superkuh
It's really frustrating how much the web, software, and computers in general
are being gimped for everyone just to support the "mobile" segment of the
market.

~~~
masklinn
Nothing is being "gimped" for the benefit of laptops, and paying attention to
power consumption (direct or indirect) benefits pretty much everything.

------
hendersoon
This smells fishy to me.

Why did they test in High Performance power mode? The default is Balanced.

High Performance mode doesn't allow the CPU to downclock, keeping it at the
maximum frequency at all times, even with zero load. It also maintains a
higher screen brightness, and stops wifi and disks from entering power-saving
modes too. This is NOT a negligible difference.

The _concept_ behind optimizing for energy savings in a browser is absolutely
brilliant. Why pollute it by using such blatantly fake numbers?

~~~
SapphireSun
Using HPM eliminates confounding factors. You won't get real world numbers
because some of the benefit is provided by the OS/hardware, but you'll know if
your changes are actually making a difference during the times that they are
active.

~~~
hendersoon
It's simply not an appropriate test. You don't use high performance mode when
you care about battery life.

~~~
throwanem
I don't get your objection here. Not only does high-performance mode eliminate
OS-level confounders that would otherwise render consumption deltas highly
questionable, it does so in a way that produces _worst-case_ results.

What exactly are you complaining about?

~~~
hendersoon
All that other stuff impacts battery life in a huge way. Those variables
matter. You can't just remove them, call it a "worst case scenario", and walk
away. That is not valid.

When a reputable site like Anandtech reviews a laptop, they don't force it to
maximum performance mode, because nobody that cares about battery life would
ever do that. It's testing a scenario that _doesn't matter_.

In fact, not only is it not the default, but maximum performance mode doesn't
even _show_ by default-- you need to expand a "show additional plans" dropdown
in the power control panel to see it. Opera went to the trouble to do that,
and it was not by accident.

~~~
SapphireSun
I think you're looking for a followup study that complements these results,
but that study would be not as valuable as with these to inform their
interpretation.

------
cm3
If you want to see a hard to justify CPU hog, take a look at the amount of CPU
Chrome or Firefox use for downloading a file. Then compare it to wget.

------
iamcreasy
Reminds me of Intellij IDEA's power saving mode.

------
samfisher83
This is my very unscientific method, but it really seems to work. On my
i7-4510 with FF I was using 7500mW. With opera I am using 5500mW. That is a
pretty good savings. The only issue I am having is three finger swiping to go
back and forth doesn't seem to work.

------
agumonkey
How does it fare compared to dillo ? That's right.

------
drone3
Opera trying hard to survive these days. I would use it if they open their
source code

~~~
neurobuddha
Opera is staging and making some last minute "value adds" before selling to a
Chinese Tech company:
[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-02-10/opera-
soft...](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-02-10/opera-software-
gets-agreed-takeover-offer-valued-at-1-2-billion)

It has nothing to do with surviving. They just want to cash out.

------
jkot
Power consumption improves a lot with malware filters.

------
sleepychu
Decided to install opera, discovered there's no way to disable speed dial and
I was out of there. Why would I want a browser I can't control?

~~~
ben_pr
Hmm, kinda odd. Not sure if you are comparing this to Chrome, Safari or Edge
but with those you have a lot less control over the start/speed-dial page. Use
the gear icon in the upper right to edit nearly everything on the speed dial
page including turning speed dial off.

One of the main reasons I switched to Opera was the ability to have more
control over the start page.

The biggest reason to switch to Opera now is the ad blocker is much faster
than ABP/Ghost/etc and web pages load significantly faster now.

~~~
bwat48
With chrome you have more control over the start page, in that you can change
it from the default one to a totally different one, but when comparing opera's
speed dial to chrome's default start page Opera's is definitely far superior
(and more customizable). The speed dial is the main reason I use opera as well
(I like it much better than any speed dial addons for chrome/firefox, and even
vivaldi's speed dial)

edit: apparently there are opera addons that allow you to load a custom page
instead of the speed dial so that may also be a moot point anyway

