Yes, I used only the fishbowl test.
Windows 7 Professional x64 Service Pack 1
Intel® Core i7 CPU 950 @ 3.07GHz
16GB DDR3 RAM
ATI Radeon HD 5770 (GPU)
Yes, I used only the fishbowl test.
Windows 7 Professional x64 Service Pack 1
Intel® Core™ i7 CPU 950 @ 3.07GHz
16GB DDR3 RAM
ATI Radeon HD 5770 (GPU)
That is very interesting.
Things that make a big difference on yours, are your processor is a quad core with 8 threads.
Also, your running 64 bits.
They have 64 & 32 bit IE9. I wonder which you are/were running, because 64 bit can make a difference.
Also, if your using Firefox, it would probably be better to test Waterfox & other 64 bit browsers vs each other.
Comparing 32 to 64 bit is simply not gonna work, because 64 bit on a high powered system will blow 32 bit away.
All this goes to show is that all results are relative to what hardware/software that you test with.
Very few people have exactly the same hardware and software installed.
@Hazel, I agree.
It would be awesome if he could/would post his results in a manner similar to as I have, that I can compare the differences.
I may update this system to a newer 64 Bit AMD machine later to test how it does with the browsers.
I still think Opera will beat Chrome, & Firefox will beat both of those, but I will have to test to verify.
I am thinking of an AMD machine, because AMD bought ATI, & ATI is known for superior graphics.
_____
NVidia (was) known for faster rendering, while ATI was higher quality rendering, but in latest reports I have seen, not only is ATI better graphics quality, but it also is around 22% faster (on average).
In addition, I was looking to see which was better, iCore7 Vs AMD newer multi-core chips, & from what I have read, iCore will win (slightly) on running single applications, or maybe 2 or 3 applications.
AMD, however, is supposed to be better with running multiple tasks, & still keeping it smoothly. AMD has built in 3D graphics acceleration on some of their newer chips, which means it gets a performance boost from that alone.
_____
I watched a video of comparing intel iCore 7 VS AMD newer chips, & what I saw amazed me. They both started out with processing video, then running another task, then doing real time filtering on the video to make them look better. They were similar at first, but the AMD blew the intel away after stacking more processes for it to run. After say, 5 decent load apps, AMD was still running very smoothly, & intel was stuttering badly.
My understanding is that the AMD has way better load balancing, & can run far more things simultaneously with no slowdown. And that is what I am looking for in a multi-tasking machine.
_____
Let's say, for example, I have over 50 youTube videos open (in background tabs). If AMD is lots smoother & handles lots more youTube/Video games/3D content than intel with no lagging, then that will greatly accelerate my browsing/gaming/tinkering.
Very, very interesting!
As I already said Super Fast, everyones system specs are different, therefore different results.
'Which is better' usually ends up being a pointless exercise with browsers. Most folk choose a browser because it has features they like... nothing else.
Also getting someone to test with 50 youtube videos open (as you say you do along side the other open 1550 tabs) is never going to happen.....ever.
I have had up to 100 or more utube videos open at once before. But it started lagging quite badly.
Noticed that when you first open a tab, any tab, but especially a video tab, it spikes CPU activity for a few seconds. If it is a background tab, seems it is left in an almost idle state, while the main processing time is left for the currently selected tab. Which is great when you think about it, because by focusing mostly on what your looking at now, it makes it take so much less CPU time.
I don't think I could imagine the strain of trying to open 1 or 2,000 video tabs. Probably too much for this PC to handle.
However, I am into so many video processing/compression apps with various levels (Ever tried PAQ compression on level 8 before? Intense!) etc, that I would never get done without a faster PC.
I agree with you that some people may be happy with slower systems, but I can't actually have a slow one because I would never get done with what I have to do!
also try ie10 in win8 if you can
I haven't had time to do every test on it just yet, but so far, I found the following:
_____
Chrome 18 2D canvas is already faster than IE9's. Firefox 12 has a faster 2D canvas than both IE9 & IE10 already!
This means even independent HTML5 game developers not using a WebGL-enabled engine like Construct 2 should see Chrome and Firefox performing better than IE9.
And of course using WebGL, both Firefox and Chrome demolish both IE9 and IE10. WebGL is really fast!
I can only imagine how much faster Chrome 21 & Firefox 14 are than IE9 & IE10.
IE is demolished & just left in the dust! At this point, I believe I consider IE to be dead.
_____
Listed below are object counts on 2D canvas @ 30 FPS (Higher is better, & numbers may be rounded to the nearest 1,000 for ease of comparison):
- IE9 -> Pretty close to 5,000 objects @ 30 FPS, so rounded to 5K
- IE10 -> Slightly less than 7,000 objects @ 30 FPS, but given benefit of doubt. 7K
- FF12 -> Just over 8,000 objects @ 30 FPS, so rounded to 8K
- FF12 with Web GL -> Just under 14,000 objects @ 30 FPS, so rounded to 14K
- Chrome 18 -> Just under 6,000 objects @ 30 FPS, so rounded to 6K
- Chrome 18 with Web GL -> Just under 14,000 objects @ 30 FPS, so rounded to 14K
* This is for 2D, & I haven't tested 3D with these browsers on this test yet, or used the latest Chrome 21 + Firefox 14. Firefox is on 14 Beta 8, so maybe they will release 14 final soon. I am sure that if Firefox 12 already surpasses IE9/IE10 & even manages to be slightly higher than Chrome in most results, that the later versions are faster still.
I just thought that it was interesting that IE10 final hasn't been released yet, but that while IE10 does beat Chrome 18, Firefox 12 trounces IE10. Guess IE10 is headed to the graveyard, LOL!
_____
Can't wait to do more browser testing in 3D in the upcoming months! So far, things aren't looking too good for newcomer IE10. It's already trounced by older versions of Firefox & hasn't even been fully released yet! For IE10 to even have a chance, it better beef up & go fast. REALLY fast. Because Firefox & Chrome are getting VERY fast. If IE10 can't keep up, it risks being dumped before it even get's adopted!
Try your browser with Particle Constructs demo & see an example of what this is useful for: -> http://www.scirra.co.../particlesdemo/
*except by Windows 8 RT users!
@Winapp, what does that mean? Except Windows 8 RT users?
Can you elaborate? I am trying to discern what you mean by that...
Windows 8 RT is on ARM devices.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2404229,00.asp
here's an article
Ah, I see! I originally thought there would be competition. But looks like they are banning Chrome/Firefox/Opera from use on these. Guess IE can't be last place if it's the only one up there, hey?
Nope