PCWorld Forums

PCWorld Forums: Browser Speed Tests: Latest Firefox Is Faster, but Not as Fast as Google Chrome - PCWorld Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Browser Speed Tests: Latest Firefox Is Faster, but Not as Fast as Google Chrome

#1 User is offline   PCWorld 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: PCWorld BOT
  • Posts: 114,551
  • Joined: 01-August 07

Posted 19 July 2009 - 04:00 PM

Post your comments for Browser Speed Tests: Latest Firefox Is Faster, but Not as Fast as Google Chrome here
0

#2 User is offline   JOHN 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: 25-August 06

Posted 19 July 2009 - 07:33 PM

I agree.....I use GC and FF and GC is MUCH faster at loading.......only thing I don't like about GC, is I hafta resize my fonts at most web pages.....
bummer!!
0

#3 User is offline   BGG001 

  • Senior Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 879
  • Joined: 24-March 09
  • Location:Wisconsin

Posted 19 July 2009 - 07:41 PM

...Opera is not slower than IE8...sorry to inform you that you definitely screwed something up.
0

#4 User is online   PhotoPro 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6
  • Joined: 30-October 08

Posted 19 July 2009 - 08:47 PM

Unfortunately, you lost a few decimal places on the speed test difference. You said chrome was 1.699 sec and FF was 1.762 seconds. That isn't 2 tenths of a second difference, try 63 thousandths. I can't see that 63 thousandths is enough for me to worry about my FF being sluggish except id=f you are splitting hairs. I am mystified where you got the 2 tenths of a second from though; add 2 tenths to chrome's speed and you arrive at a minimum fo 1.899 second for Mozilla. No way, Jose! get a better calculator.
0

#5 User is offline   izzledizzle 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 156
  • Joined: 09-April 09

Posted 19 July 2009 - 10:50 PM

all you need is the firefox pre-loader and it launches in less than a second... chrome sucks IMO anyway, way too simplistic and has about zero add-ons like firefox, i'll stick to firefox...
0

#6 User is offline   yankeeDDL 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 364
  • Joined: 07-April 09

Posted 20 July 2009 - 01:32 AM

Poh, page load is hardly an indication of browser's speed, in my opinion.
The table shows that the differences between browsers are very limited.
I think where the real difference matters is the Java/Javascript execution.
Today most websites use Java and there are many websites that have relatively complex Java apps (see Google Docs for example).
This article seems, in my opinion, a whole lot more comprehensive:
http://www.pcgamesha...Final/Practice/
The results are clear:
Sunspider test
Chrome is ~2X faster than FF3.5 in Java
IE8 is ~4X slower than FF3.5 (and therefore about 8X slower than Chrome).
Peacekeeper test (complex graphics):
Firefox is ~30% slower than Chrome. IE8 cannot complete the test (does not support standard)

Peacekeeper test (Rendering):
Chrome is ~2X faster than FF.
IE8 is ~30% slower than FF
You can see all the details in the link above.
Personally, I use FireFox. I consider AddOns to be invaluable in the browsing experience. I do use Chrome if I know I need to use a few very java-intensive websites, but this happens rarely.
I also rarely use I8 but only for the websites built for the non-standard IE code which don't work on standard-compliant browsers.
0

#7 User is offline   BobbyPhoenix 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6
  • Joined: 20-July 09

Posted 20 July 2009 - 07:56 AM

Page loading is THE measuring stick. All the other tools like javascript and such only tell the underlying tale. When you enter a website you want to be able to use it as soon as possible right? Doesn't that mean you want it to load as quickly as possible? Sure javascript, java, all those that measure load times is great and all that, but it doesn't mean squat if the page doesn't fully load.
0

#8 User is offline   agrippa 

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 72
  • Joined: 20-July 09

Posted 20 July 2009 - 08:05 AM

I own four computers one is a new Mac the other 3 are an HP Lenovo and Gateway, all with firefox 3.5.1 installed maybe it's just me, but ever since I upgraded firefox its slower than dirt on all the machines. I have to close and restart firefox in the hopes it would load my homepage some time this week. am I the only one with this problem? I find it hard to think that 4 computer with 2 OS's have the same problem, or is there a problem??
0

#9 User is offline   yankeeDDL 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 364
  • Joined: 07-April 09

Posted 20 July 2009 - 08:21 AM

BobbyPhoenix,

my point is that since the load time is practically the same, you probably won't notice much difference using any of the browsers. I'm not sure if javascript kicks in only after the page is fully loaded: java is just one element of the page: as soon as that element is loaded it is executed even if the whole page is not. That is: you normally "see" the page while it's loading, you're not presented with the final, fully rendered page.

Also, the article says "Browser speed test": since page loading time are rather short, it's quite irrelevant for me when measuring speed. What I care about is how responsive the browser is while I use online application, while I interact with the web. And the answers are in teh article I linked.
0

#10 User is offline   BobbyPhoenix 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6
  • Joined: 20-July 09

Posted 20 July 2009 - 08:45 AM

That's true. I think that even the slowest browser today is more than enough for the average person. Only people like us who see the underlying foundation care, and talk about it. Kind of funny if you really think about it. Comparing browsers by speeds so close. I mean we are talking milliseconds. Milliseconds!!! Wow!!! All is good in the land of browsers.
0

#11 User is offline   Nuke61 

  • Expert
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2,495
  • Joined: 09-June 09
  • Location:San Diego

Posted 20 July 2009 - 10:57 AM

Whether or not the slowest browser is more than enough for the average person really seems to depend on the computer hardware that the particular average person has. On my computer, the difference between Chrome and Firefox 3.5 (what I use) is negligible. Yes, Chrome is faster, but the add-ons in Firefox make it worth it to me, because FF is fast enough. On a friends computer, which is old/slow, the difference between Chrome and IE8 is HUGE.
On a fast computer, the speed difference may be meaningless. On a slow computer, it's the difference between using one browser or another.
0

#12 User is offline   johnwalterman 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 104
  • Joined: 04-March 09

Posted 20 July 2009 - 01:01 PM

For me, IE8 is all I need. I don't need any cluttery addons or to be able to move tabs around or make them new windows. All that is junk. And I have decent internet, so a few milliseconds makes no difference to me.
On my mac, I won't TOUCH safari. It's a total memory hog, so I use the firefox variant called Camino. When Google releases Chrome for the Mac I may give it a try, but for now all I need is Internet Explorer 8 and Camino.
0

#13 User is offline   yankeeDDL 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 364
  • Joined: 07-April 09

Posted 20 July 2009 - 02:35 PM

@Johnwalterman

I'm glad you found your favorite browsers.
There are a few errors in your statement though, so allow me to correct them:
1) You say you don't need any cluttery so you pick IE instead of FF. Fair request.
Well Microsoft itself bragged about how IE8 incorporates "many of the customizations you'd want to download for Firefox are already a part of Internet Explorer 8" (source: http://www.microsoft...comparison.aspx)
2) Firefox comes with no add-on. Zero. Nada. If you want them, you get them. If you don't, nobody forces you to use add-ons.

Conclusion: it is IE8 that has "cluttery" built-in, not Firefox.Not only: IE8 is the ONLY browser that pretends to know better than you what you need. All other browsers, are "bare" when you install them.

3) Tab re-ordering has been supported by FF3.1beta (now 3.5) since last June 2008 (about 1 year). Before that, it has been available for a long time via add-ons. You may want to keep in mind that IE8 too supports tab re-ordering: it's one of the several features that Microsoft (and Mozilla) copied fromOpera.

Conclusion: being able or not to re-order tabs cannot be a differentiating feature between IE8 and Firefox since they both support it.

4) You are correct on the tab dragging to make a new window: Firefox has this feature but IE8 does not. The feature was first introduced by Google chrome, so, chances are you'll find it on your Mac if you give Chrome a shot.

5) I also like to stay away from memory hog. I don't have a Mac, and I could not find any benchmark run on Mac, so good luck with your choice there. May I ask why don't you consider applying the same criteria on your Window PC?
This test http://cybernetnews....era/#more-17035 shows that IE8 has the worse memory management in most scenarios (never the best), while Opera and FireFox are the best ones in at least one scenario. You can read the data yourself, but when I compare 136MB (FF) vs 402MB (IE8) I think it's pretty clear which browser wins the crown of memory hog.
0

#14 User is offline   pabloburgos 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 12-February 08

Posted 24 July 2009 - 07:59 AM

The fastest browser is none of the ones you tested. The fastest browser by far is K-meleon. It is shameful that you do not take the time to level the field when testing. Adding the "A garin of salt required" at the end of the article does not get you off the hook of responsibility of providing sound information.
0

#15 User is offline   fastbullet 

  • Full Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 61
  • Joined: 09-June 07

Posted 25 July 2009 - 02:34 AM

Oh, wow, I'm really impressed with that huge speed advantage of Goofle chrome (No, that isn't a typo).
Think of the possibilities- now you can use an unsecure browser even faster than IE.
But why is it that no one else has mentioned Goofle Chrome's inherent security flaws? That it is, after all, another Goofle project might be a clue, eh? They don't, like, have a reputation for invading or exploiting user privacy or anything.
Or maybe that the Iron Browser was created to address exactly those security issues? Nah, that probably isn't a clue, either.
I think I can stand holding my breath for a few milliseconds longer while I await my secure browser to load a page.
0

#16 User is online   shle896 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 4
  • Joined: 03-May 08

Posted 27 July 2009 - 07:18 AM

I don't understand why anybody would use Firefox over Chrome. Mozilla's browser is as bloated and sedentary as Windows Media Player or iTunes.
Chrome is light and streamlined and fast as lightning, the way a browser should be.
Less is more.
0

#17 User is offline   Davinator 

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 13-October 08

Posted 27 July 2009 - 07:46 AM

Kudos and dittos. I installed it as an add-on to Real Player, which apparently has itw own issues, but don't use it (Chrome) much, save for when I'm accessing multiple email inboxes from a single email provider.
As a staunch Firefox fan, my main and strident beef is this:
WHERE'S THE OPTION FOR INSTALLING AN ADBLOCKER?!!
Chrome doesn't appear to support it; neither does Safari. So until that blissful day that these other wannabes catch up with Firefox, I'll dabble lightly in their offerings
d
0

#18 User is online   sheawerner 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 27-July 09

Posted 27 July 2009 - 08:24 AM

Chrome freezes itself and all apps very often. I don't know if this only happening to me. But nothing else freezes when I'm not running chrome.
So speed is great when there's stability but not in the place of stability.
0

#19 User is offline   blottobot 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 241
  • Joined: 19-March 07

Posted 27 July 2009 - 11:12 AM

How are these guys still employed? If I ran PCWorld, the first thing I'd do is fire all the geeks running these useless tests. How is this even relevant anymore? "A single second passed, and I realized my life was meaningless..." If only he had used a different browser, that second would not have occurred, and he'd still believe there was meaning to his life. How sad. The real issue is which browser has the most useful features. If you download Firefox, it seems pretty blah. Then, if you go to the add-ons pages, you find a plethora of goodies to cram into your Firefox that can really make it a super browser of sorts. None of the others compete in this regard. NONE. So ask yourself, "Where is the article about full feature lists of all browsers?" If they did one, Firefox would easily crush all other browsers, which is probably why they avoid it. Don't get me wrong: Firefox takes several seconds longer to start with all the extra add-ons. On my system at least, Firefox tends to stop loading a page when I switch to another app. But then, I'm able to fully load a large page in Firefox (IE times out after 5 minutes, still). I can bookmark tabs by right-clicking on the tab itself. Do that in IE. With add-ons, I can control how new pages load (like each bookmark I click loading in its own tab by default). I can make the tabs have different colors. I can eliminate the bookmark history function in the address bar. I can access my IE Favorites through Firefox menu (without importing or syncing). I can block ads and flash (or allow in certain instances). I can customize the menu and right-click menu. I can track and block web bugs and other scripts. I can view previews in google search results pages, and show "cloudlets." I can make cryptic links show their real URL and remove redirects. The bookmarks Toolbar can be customized to show only icons except on rollover. I can add a link in the menu for unsorted bookmarks. I can use a proxy at will. I can even open IE in a Firefox tab. Do that with ANY other browser. This is the real issue and the real article that PCWorld should do.
0

#20 User is offline   blottobot 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 241
  • Joined: 19-March 07

Posted 27 July 2009 - 11:25 AM

BTW, I forgot a few important points. IE basicly freezes while loading 80% (guestimating) of all pages. If I'm loading 2 or more tabs, that transfers to ALL tabs being inaccessible until IE unfreezes. This is never an issue in Firefox. Also, in Firefox (with an addon), I can close all tabs and then clear history without closing Firefox. In IE, there is always one tab left open, so when I clear history, it can leave some stuff behind (usually a script file or two). Keep in mind, Firefox allows you to automatically delete at closing, but also allows you to choose each time it closes. Again, more customizable. IE doesn't go that far and is still more hassle to get to that area to clear history in the first place.
0

Share this topic:


  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users