Google eyes Chrome on Windows laptop battery drain

Jul 19, 2014 by Nancy Owano weblog
Google Chrome

Google Chrome on Microsoft Windows has been said to have a problem for some time but this week comes news that Google will give it the attention others think the problem quite deserves. Namely, Google is to pay attention to a Chrome bug that saps the laptop batteries of Windows users.

That has been around for years. Just because the browser is not being used at any time does not mean the browser is returning to an idle state. Windows laptops lose battery life faster. The problem was first reported in 2010 but a writer in Forbes earlier this week ignited keen interest in the problem. Ian Morris called attention to the way in which Google Chrome on Microsoft Windows was using considerably more power than other browsers. Morris, like so many other people, really likes Chrome and has made it his browser of choice.

(Here is the way Tom Warren in The Verge described the problem. He said that "laptop processors are waking up far more often than they should when Chrome is open on Windows and a webpage is idle. Internet Explorer and Firefox don't exhibit the same battery drain problem.")

Morris had explained how the problem was down to something called the "system clock tick rate." He said, "What Chrome does, as soon as it is opened, is set the rate to 1.000ms. The idle, under Windows, should be 15.625ms."

To save power, he said, the processor sleeps when nothing needs attention, and wakes at predefined intervals. This interval is what Chrome adjusts in Windows, so reducing it to 1.000ms means that the system is waking far more often than at 15.625ms

He also said, "Microsoft itself says that tick rates of 1.000ms might increase power consumption by 'as much as 25 per cent'"

Morris suggested Chrome users "star" the issue on the bug tracker. "This adds a vote for the issue to be looked at" and he said that "Perhaps if enough people do this, Google will actually take note and look into fixing the problem."

By Thursday, a much-quoted article in PCWorld revealed that Google is paying attention. Jared Newman reported,"In a statement to PCWorld, the company noted that the bug has been assigned internally, and that the Chrome team is working to fix it."

Likewise, according to The Register, "'I can confirm that this bug has been assigned internally and our team is working to resolve it,' a Google spokeswoman told The Reg via email on Friday."

Explore further: Madison, Wis., becoming a force in video game industry

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Chrome 4.0 beta web browser launched

Nov 04, 2009

(PhysOrg.com) -- Google has released its latest beta version of its Chrome browser for Windows, which promises faster browsing, bookmark synchronization and more.

Bringing Chrome to Android more than wishful thinking

Oct 05, 2011

(PhysOrg.com) -- The first version of Chrome for Android should be just around the corner, according to ConceivablyTech. “Google is heading toward the finish line for the first release of Chrome for Android,” ...

Recommended for you

Taxi app Uber defies ban in Spain

13 hours ago

Smartphone car-ride service Uber vowed Friday to keep operating in Spain despite a ban following a lawsuit by taxi drivers and said it would fight the case in court.

Sony film mess reflects gadgets-entertainment gap

21 hours ago

Sony's iconic gadgetry and the star appeal of Hollywood may have appeared to be a perfect match when the electronics giant bought Columbia Pictures in 1989. A quarter century later, it's apparent that Sony ...

Streaming release of 'Interview' test for industry

Dec 25, 2014

Sony's "The Interview" has been a hacking target, a punchline and a political lightning rod. Now, with its release online at the same time it debuts in theaters, it has a new role: a test for a new kind of ...

User comments : 6

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Dr_toad
Jul 19, 2014
This comment has been removed by a moderator.
PhyOrgSux
2.6 / 5 (5) Jul 19, 2014
"Why do people pay for a broken product?" probably because

1) most people are not technical enough, and
2) the Google religion blurs the thinking

Anything from that advertising company should be avoided like the plague...ok I am "just kidding"...ha ha...
DoieaS
1.8 / 5 (5) Jul 19, 2014
What Chrome does, as soon as it is opened, is set the rate to 1.000ms. The idle, under Windows, should be 15.625ms
Google apparently does it intentionally for to detract the users of mobile computers from usage of Windows. "Don't be evil" doesn't apply to this company long time ago (and I doubt it ever applied in past). Google marketing is just a bit more smarter, but not less merciful just because of it.
DoieaS
3.4 / 5 (5) Jul 19, 2014
If you're a bit technical user of Windows, you can download the command-line ClockRes utility to check it yourself.
gwrede
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 19, 2014
I find it good that some attention is given to this.

What I have, is a wattage meter, coupled to my laptop. I have learned that my dual processor laptop consumes about 30W when I'm not surfing. But having some half a dozen tabs open to Facebook, increases it to 50W.

This alone, without further proof, tells me that Facebook has my browser execute several concurrent poll-loops, where it actually could have simple interrupt handlers. Having the latter would result in no more wattage from several windows than from one.

Now, consider this 20W difference. Suppose 20% of the 1 billion plus FB-users have five tabs open to FB, and suppose a nuclear reactor gives you 1000 megawatts of power. That would need 4 (four) nuclear reactor's output, just because Mar Zuckerberg doesn't care about your personal utility bill.

I know that most of you don't get this, but ask a friend.
gwrede
5 / 5 (1) Jul 19, 2014
I find it good that some attention is given to this.

What I have, is a wattage meter, coupled to my laptop. I have learned that my dual processor laptop consumes about 30W when I'm not surfing. But having some half a dozen tabs open to Facebook, increases it to 50W.

This alone, without further proof, tells me that Facebook has my browser execute several concurrent poll-loops, where it actually could have simple interrupt handlers. Having the latter would result in no more wattage from several windows than from one.

Now, consider this 20W difference. Suppose 20% of the 1 billion plus FB-users have five tabs open to FB, and suppose a nuclear reactor gives you 1000 megawatts of power. That would need 4 (four) nuclear reactor's output, just because Mar Zuckerberg doesn't give a crap about your personal utility bill.

I know that most of you don't get this, but ask a friend.

DoieaS
5 / 5 (1) Jul 19, 2014
t Facebook has my browser execute several concurrent poll-loops
Whereas in reality what the Facebook does during it is, it tracks your keyboard and mouse activity (between others) for to get a personalized information about every user on the web. So what you're actually doing is the helping the Facebook to collect the information about you for your own money (through electricity bill). This is the hidden cost of "free services" and browsers like the Facebook or Chrome.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.