Download Google Chrome 4.0 Beta - 400% More Performance over v1.0


Recommended Posts

A new release of Google Chrome 4.0 is now available for download, full build string 4.0.223.16. Loyal to a Cloud-tailored mantra of simplicity and performance, Google has kicked up a notch its open source browser, revealing the first Beta development milestone of version 4.0. Ahead of the November 2nd launch of Google Chrome 4.0 Beta, version 4.0 was offered exclusively through the Mountain View search giant's developer channel. This is no longer the case. With the unveiling of the Beta Build 4.0.223.16, Google is now offering Chrome 4.0 to the public.

However, not all users will be able to install the release. Version 4.0.223.16 is Windows only, Google informed, giving no indications as to any future plans to offer Chrome 4.0 for users of Linux and Mac OS X platforms as well. In this regard, early adopters looking to start test driving Google Chrome 4.0 Beta will need to do it on Windows XP SP2, and SP3, Vista RTM/SP1/SP2 and Windows 7.

"The Beta Channel is being updated to 4.0.223.16 which is our first Beta release for 4.0. This release includes many bug fixes and for the first time Bookmark Sync is enabled. Extensions are disabled until the final API changes arrive. Please use the dev channel for the latest extension API," revealed Jonathan Conradt, Engineering Program Manager.

One aspect of Google Chrome's evolution that is also characteristic of version 4.0 Beta, is the added horsepower introduced by the Mountain View search giant. Google's Idan Avraham and Anton Muhin, Software Engineers, explained that Google Chrome 4.0 Beta delivers 400% more performance compared to Chrome 1.0, and 30% more over Chrome 3.0 Stable (according to Mozilla's Dromeao DOM Core Tests).

Google Chrome bookmark sync is a new feature introduced with version 4.0 Beta, with a self-explanatory moniker. Google Chrome 4.0 Beta allows users to synchronize bookmarks across multiple devices that are running v4.0 of the open source browser. The synchronization is done in the Google Cloud, more specifically, the XMPP-based servers for Google Talk.

source

All browser vendors seem to shout on how much faster their browsers are getting these days, but for me its all filler and no killer. Although Chrome has definitely came a long way since its initial release, it does amaze me to see what Google consider enough changes to merit a 1.0 jump in version number

Is it just me or does google release new versions of Chrome twice a week?

It's a little complicated...

Google Chrome 2.x - still considered the stable, "official" builds. Updates are usually limited to security fixes, etc.

Google Chrome 3.x - considered the "beta" channel. Releases are more frequent but less stable. This is most equivalent to running Mozilla's Minefield builds.

Google Chrome 4.x - the "developer" channel, and is bleeding-edge. Releases are usually nightly and often contain features as soon as they're written but not really well-tested. Stuff released here eventually moves down into 3.x and 2.x builds.

There is also Chromium, which seems to basically be a permanent 4.x branch that auto-updates every 24 hours or so and has a different icon.

It's a little complicated...

Google Chrome 2.x - still considered the stable, "official" builds. Updates are usually limited to security fixes, etc.

Google Chrome 3.x - considered the "beta" channel. Releases are more frequent but less stable. This is most equivalent to running Mozilla's Minefield builds.

Google Chrome 4.x - the "developer" channel, and is bleeding-edge. Releases are usually nightly and often contain features as soon as they're written but not really well-tested. Stuff released here eventually moves down into 3.x and 2.x builds.

There is also Chromium, which seems to basically be a permanent 4.x branch that auto-updates every 24 hours or so and has a different icon.

and i thought Google Chrome 3 was released a like 2 months ago ?

and also

and i thought Google Chrome 3 was released a like 2 months ago ?

and also

Yea, Google Chrome 3 was released a while back. Google Chrome 4 has been primarily dev channel for a while, and only just went Beta for Windows apparently.

All browser vendors seem to shout on how much faster their browsers are getting these days

I know it's pathetic...

OOOh our browser starts in 10 seconds compared to your pedestrian 12. So what.

OOOh our browser renders pages in 200ms compared to your rather lathargic 250ms - again so what.

Speed is nice but today all the browsers are faster than webpages can download so rendering speed is irrelevant... features is where it's at.

Which ever browser has the features I want/need - Firefox at the moment - is the browser I will use even if over the course of a evenings surfing I may have taken 5 minutes longer.

When Google Chrome, nice as it is to look at, gets extensions or built in functionality of the possible extensions, then I may take a look. However I am lazy and as long as Firefox doesn't start crashing or corrupting my stuff, then I am loathe to change. I only changed from IE to Firefox because of the functionality.

All browser vendors seem to shout on how much faster their browsers are getting these days, but for me its all filler and no killer. Although Chrome has definitely came a long way since its initial release, it does amaze me to see what Google consider enough changes to merit a 1.0 jump in version number

I've noticed the whole "faster browser" statement is being thrown around a lot too. I use Firefox and Chrome, both of which have boasted improvements in rendering speeds over the past couple of years. Honestly, I can't tell a difference in browser speeds from 3 years ago to today.

I switched from Fx to Chrome this week because of how sluggish browsing with Fx was becoming. I'm currently using a Dev build of Chrome which has extensions enabled and so far I've adjusted to the change, and am much happier with the browser speed.

I used to use Google chrome until I learned about how Google rapes the persons privacy. Now I use firefox and scroogle.com for my searches

nice

I used to use Google chrome until I learned about how Google rapes the persons privacy. Now I use firefox and scroogle.com for my searches

a warning that scroogle is not work safe would have been nice.

However, not all users will be able to install the release. Version 4.0.223.16 is Windows only, Google informed...

How does Google plan to keep Chrome updated on their ChromeOS, which is Linux based, if they can't get out dev versions for it?

I've noticed the whole "faster browser" statement is being thrown around a lot too. I use Firefox and Chrome, both of which have boasted improvements in rendering speeds over the past couple of years. Honestly, I can't tell a difference in browser speeds from 3 years ago to today.

Yep. Despite how Safari performs in tests, I tried it for a couple of weeks on Windows, and in real world usage it never seemed faster than Opera. Personally I think a lot of vendors tailor their browsers to tests just to make their numbers look more impressive than they actually are in normal usage.

How does Google plan to keep Chrome updated on their ChromeOS, which is Linux based, if they can't get out dev versions for it?

Not sure what's the issue with Chrome on Linux and OSX, but there's Chromium which is like.. exactly the same but without branding? :huh: (and apparently faster than it's Windows/OSX counterparts).

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Valve finally confirms Steam Machine prices, starts at $1049 for 512GB option by Pulasthi Ariyasinghe The $1,428 option The Steam Hardware lineup that Valve announced last year is slowly starting to roll out. Following the recent Steam Controller launch, Valve has now confirmed the price of the Steam Machine, its all-in-one console-like solution for PC gaming in the living room. There are currently four variants being presented, with only the storage and the included controller being the biggest differences. All of the Steam Machines have the same internals consisting of a semi-custom AMD Zen 4 CPU with six cores and 12 threads, an RDNA 3 28CU GPU, 16GB of DDR5 memory, and 8GB of GDDR6 VRAM, all inside the familiar box Valve has been showing off for months now. The Steam Machine base model starts at $1,049. This has a 512GB NVMe SSD but does not come with a Steam Controller. Keep in mind that storage can be expanded with the microSD card slot too. Next, the $1,128 model has the exact same storage as the previous one but it does come with the new Steam Controller. If you need the Steam Machine to have more storage for games and apps than that, then the 2TB tiers are also available. The $1,349 Steam Machine has no controller once again, but it does ship with two extra faceplates (red fabric and solid walnut) to replace the standard black one. The final option costs $1,428, and it adds the controller back into the bundle. The Steam Machine ships with the Linux-based SteamOS. The box has a 1 Gigabit Ethernet port, DisplayPort 1.4, and HDMI 2.0, as well as one USB-C and four USB-A ports. Keep in mind that when purchasing standalone, the Steam Controller has a $100 price tag. With the above bundles, that drops to $80. It's a rather expensive machine for the internals it is touting, though the design and small form factor do help it somewhat. However, at the same time, the lack of upgradability hurts it. Valve says the ongoing parts shortages and massive price hikes for memory were the leading causes for this price. "The overall effect is that our original goal for the price of Steam Machine is no longer viable," added the company. "So the prices we're sharing today reflect the state of the world for manufacturing; or, more accurately, it reflects the price of the components as we've secured them over the past 6 months." Valve wants interested gamers to reserve it now to get the chance to pre-order a Steam Machine starting June 25, with shipping starting on June 29. Head here to sign up. The invites to buy it will be sent in a randomized order.
    • What the press release doesn’t mention, however, is how much water the natural gas plant itself will consume, Natural gas plants use about 2,803 gallons of water per megawatt-hour produced, which is significantly less than coal-fired plants that use around 19,185 gallons per megawatt-hour. Overall, natural gas plants are more water-efficient, using 584% less water than traditional power plants on average. AI generated
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      tuben earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Week One Done
      mnsgroup earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Conversation Starter
      sumytbe earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Year In
      B4dM1k3 earned a badge
      One Year In
    • One Year In
      DarkWun earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      516
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      203
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      97
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      82
    5. 5
      neufuse
      67
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!