5 Way Browser Wars

Computer Help and Discussions The Lounge
1

6/9/2012 -> Downloaded newest Chrome/Internet Explorer/Firefox/Opera/Safari (& a few older ones) to test Hardware + HTML5 acceleration.

Tested all browsers on a clean 32 Bit 7 profile / P4 3.2 dualcore / 7,200 RPM 160 GB Sata HDD (114 GB free) / 3GB RAM / 1 GB ATI Radeon 3D

Used -> http://ie.microsoft....rmance/FishBowl

_____

250 Fish (Frames Per Second)

Chrome 19 = 30

Chrome 21 = 40

Internet Explorer 9 = 36

Firefox 13 = 60

Firefox 15 = 60

Opera 12 = 30

_____

500 Fish (Frames Per Second)

Chrome 19 = 15

Chrome 21 = 21

Internet Explorer 9 = 16

Firefox 13 = 33

Firefox 15 = 37

Opera 12 = 15

_____

1,000 Fish (Frames Per Second)

Chrome 19 = 8

Chrome 21 = 11

Internet Explorer 9 = 8

Firefox 13 = 15

Firefox 15 = 16

Opera 12 = 8

_____

1,500 Fish (Frames Per Second)

Chrome 19 = 5

Chrome 21 = 7

Internet Explorer 9 = 6

Firefox 13 = 10

Firefox 15 = 10

Opera 12 = 6

_____

2,000 Fish (Frames Per Second)

Chrome 19 = 5

Chrome 21 = 7

Internet Explorer 9 = 4

Firefox 13 = 7

Firefox 15 = 7

Opera 12 = 5

_____

250 + 500 + 1,000 + 1,500 + 2,000 Fish (Total Frames Per Second)

Chrome 19 = 63

Chrome 21 = 86

Internet Explorer 9 = 70

Firefox 13 = 125

Firefox 15 = 130

Opera 12 = 64

_____

Browsers listed below in order of speed:

# 1 Firefox 15 -> 130 points

# 2 Firefox 13 -> 125 points

# 3 Chrome 21 -> 86 points

# 4 Internet Explorer 9 -> 70 points

# 5 Opera 12 -> 64 points

# 6 Chrome 19 -> 63 points

_____

The slowest firefox is nearly 2X faster than Chrome/Internet Explorer/Opera.

The fastest non-firefox doesn't even break the double digits.

Firefox is the fastest according to my testing, & wastes the least time on the web. Why spend 2X longer on the web?

* There are some tests for only hardware acceleration, which will give all browsers higher scores. But that is pointless.The web is going towards HTML5, & the browsers that have the highest scores for HTML5 + Hardware acceleration will be that much more so higher than the rest on simple hardware acceleration tests.

_____

The following browsers failed & were eliminated:

Internet Explorer 8 / Firefox 1 / Firefox 2.0.20 -> Failed to load fish.

Firefox 3.6.28 250 fish / 2 FPS / Opera 11.64 - 250 fish / 2 FPS / Safari 5.1 - 250 fish / 1 FPS-> Failed acceleration.

Firefox 16a1 = 15a2 / Firefox 14b6 = 13 final -> Identical results for all numbers of fish.

_____

The things that really surprised me, are:

* Apple Safari 5.1 -> 1 FPS in 2012? :lol:

* Opera 12 -> Dusted by all modern browsers, but is (finally!) getting back into the game. <_<

* Chrome 19 -> Opera 12 just released, & it already (marginally) beats Chrome 19? :o

* Internet Explorer -> It's not last place! :wacko:

* Firefox -> How does it go 2x faster than the others? B)

EDIT: Thank you for catching the date, Nergal! I meant to post as 6/9/2012, but I must have typed 6/19/2012 instead. Date is now corrected!

Firefox 13 = 14b6 in terms of speed, but I am choosing it as my fav. FF14 improvements under 32 bit 7 include slightly smaller icons, (I love this! Finally, the forward & back buttons are the same size! And smaller means more area for the web page to display), corrects a flash container has crashed error that occurs now & then, & seems very smooth. 13 was smooth, but 14 is even more so.

For now, FF14 is my fav.

2

Neato testing, but probably varies greatly depending on your hardware.

3

Neato testing, but probably varies greatly depending on your hardware.

Agree, nice testing, but too many variables to make it a 'set in stone' set of results.

4

wait these tests either happened in the future, or in the fabled 19th month :D

yes all browser acid tests and what not depend greatly on, not only the brand/make/model of a device but also on the unique properties of your exact device(s)

also try ie10 in win8 if you can

5

SuperFast, you constantly mention having "hundreds" of tabs up on your browser. Can you please post a pic of that? Just for laughs? Thanks.

6

I'm curious too. I usually have tens of tabs open, but I can't say I've consistently had hundreds open.

7

The most tabs I've ever had open at once was about 12, can't even begin to imagine 100 of them.

8

Corona, but how would you see all the tabs?

Sure, they scroll off the screen, but how would you know if it was 50 or 2,000?

Firefox does, however, tabulate the # open tabs when you close it, so I suppose I could do that for you one day when I get time.

The most I ever had open in a single session is 1,611.

It took a lot of RAM & my machine started slowing...

9

The most I ever had open in a single session is 1,611.

It took a lot of RAM & my machine started slowing...

1611? :lol:

That's allot of them wouldn't you say. If I did that on this old PC of mine the mobo might jump out of the case and smoulder on the floor.

10

Googled for "wide screen desktop monitors", found a few ranging in price from a mere $6,000 to a sort of pricey $49,999. They range in size from big to "build an addition on your house". :)

The good thing is that you could see most of your tabs.

11

It's worth it, invest in it for our amusement.

12

Googled for "wide screen desktop monitors", found a few ranging in price from a mere $6,000 to a sort of pricey $49,999. They range in size from big to "build an addition on your house". :)

The good thing is that you could see most of your tabs.

Best laugh I had all day! I wonder what 1,611 tabs would look like? -> Each tab = 1 inch. 12 inches = 1 ft. 1,611 divided by 12 = 134.25 feet of tabs!

I could see all my tabs on a 135 ft wide monitor! :o Whew! That's almost 2x longer than my trailer!

Never took time to think of it this way before, but you got me thinking with your comment... :lol:

13

Rent out one of those really big football stadium monitors for a day B)

14

Using a test created by Microsoft will inevitably have a bias towards IE's capabilities. It's interesting, because if I do the exact same test you did, IE9 wins every single time - on every test.

15

Using a test created by Microsoft will inevitably have a bias towards IE's capabilities. It's interesting, because if I do the exact same test you did, IE9 wins every single time - on every test.

Cool. Can you provide the following information?

_____

1. OS Name / 32 or 64 Bits / RAM amount / CPU (also, single/dual/quad core?) / GPU 3D? / Programs running / AV used / HDD (7,200/5,400 RPM?) or SSD?

2. VM, or running it natively?

3. Browsers used, & version # for each.

_____

I am very interested, as each of the factors may have a part in your results.

Also, what link did you use for the testing? Please be sure you ONLY use: -> http://ie.microsoft....mance/FishBowl/

_____

That link will test HTML5 + Hardware acceleration. There is ANOTHER fishtank test that doesn't test HTML5 acceleration on the link below:

http://ie.microsoft....nk/Default.html

_____

Please specify which you use. Also, most browsers tend to stabilize after around 10 to 15 seconds, & may display an initial high burst.

You want the stable test results.

_____

EDIT: There are a few other important things to know. Running multiple open tabs? Many web browsers will slow CPU time to background tabs, & give more to the active one. Some people test with all browsers open at once. This is never a good way to test, because some web browsers may request/get more CPU or GPU time to run.

I ran all my tests with ONLY the HTML5 window open, & ONLY that particular browser open until testing was complete. In addition, I waited 10 to 15 seconds for the browser to stabilize & settle down on the final # of fish. Some browsers will start high, then drop massively after around 10 seconds or so. Chrome seemed especially guilty of this.

I am very interested, so I will check back later to see your reply. Great to have others interested in testing!

@Nergal -> I thought about testing IE10 under Windows 8, but I am not too sure yet. I heard Win 8 might not even come with a DVD player, unless you buy that separately!

I might end up testing it still, when Win 8 finalizes, so I can get a true score for it. As of now, the betas have a lot that could be changed before release.

I believe I will wait for Win 8 Final to test, so the results show the true Win 8 score.

16

I believe the test you ought to be running (as was incenuated above with the ofcourse MS passes MS test) is the industry standard html5 test such as http://html5test.com/

17

my firefox waterfox 13 gets 345 + 9 points.

My chrome 20 gets 414 + 13 points.

The biggest difference seems to be in "forms" (56v81)

Edit:

Nightly (fx16) 363 + 9

IE9 (64bit) 138 + 5

IE9 138+5

Aurora (fx15) 346 + 9

Firefox beta (fx14) 345 + 9

I have an installer for Chrome 21 (apparently, mine is out of date in terms of the dev channel) but it just installs Chrome 20. Weird, else I'd test that for you folks as well. I just went with what I have installed.

18

I believe the test you ought to be running (as was incenuated above with the ofcourse MS passes MS test) is the industry standard html5 test such as http://html5test.com/

I tried that test, & I passed, however, the reason I used the HTML5 fish bowl test, is because the test you listed only shows whether your browser supports this or that.

The fishbowl test actually is a comparison, of sorts, of the hardware acceleration. And it gives you some idea which browser handles hardware acceleration the best for multimedia web browsing.

Hopefully, the future will give us even better browsers, but we must wait till it gets here...

19

my firefox waterfox 13 gets 345 + 9 points. Etc.

I got different results than you (Just slightly). What is your OS? And are you on 32 or 64 Bit? What kind of CPU/GPU do you have?

20

Windows 7 Professional x64 Service Pack 1

AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition (CPU)

ATI Radeon HD 5770 (GPU)

12GB DDR3-1600 RAM