4 ms·

IE9, FF4, Chrome 6 Browser Benchmark

12 points by bobf 16y ago

bustamove 16y ago
Since you are testing all beta versions here, why not use Chrome 7 beta for a new benchmark ?
- bobf 16y ago
  Good question :) I didn't write the article, maybe ask @lucidchart on Twitter? According to the actual article title though, it seems the main interest was testing FF4 and IE9 against existing browsers, which would explain the absence of dev channel versions of Chrome.
  - magamiako 16y ago
    Or more interestingly, they were looking at providing the best numbers to push their agenda the furthest. As noted in a previous comment, a fair comparison would be to run a proper benchmark--which guarantees similar operating conditions.
- etm117 16y ago
  To be fair, Chrome beta channel is still v6 series (6.0.472.59 beta). The dev channel is v7 series already though I believe.
- isleyaardvark 16y ago
  At the very least they could've tested the current stable release of Opera - 10.62 - instead of 10.53.
Perceval 16y ago
Fx4b6 does not include the new JaegerMonkey javascript engine, so the lack of a speedup compared to Fx3.6 is not terribly surprising. JaegerMonkey is in Fx nightly builds at the moment and is supposed to be featured in Fx4b7 (to be released later this month).
acqq 16y ago
Note that it's an "user drags something in the UI and we measure something" benchmark, so it's potentially suspicious if the things measured are comparable at all in different runs and browsers. For example, in games, frames per seconds are measured under basic assumption that the game has the mode in which there's no limit the increase of frames per second other than the speed of rendering and that that mode is always identically reproducible. Are we sure about that here? And as others noted, they are using the old version of Opera, 10.53 instead of 10.62 which is current.
bobf 16y ago
As an interesting comparison, I just saw that John Resig posted a benchmark of jQuery.css() performance across browsers. It doesn't include IE9, but does include Opera 10.62 and FF 4.0b6 - http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeresig/4999526752/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeresig/4999526752/

12 points by bobf 16y ago

bustamove 16y ago

Since you are testing all beta versions here, why not use Chrome 7 beta for a new benchmark ?

bobf 16y ago
Good question :) I didn't write the article, maybe ask @lucidchart on Twitter? According to the actual article title though, it seems the main interest was testing FF4 and IE9 against existing browsers, which would explain the absence of dev channel versions of Chrome.
- magamiako 16y ago
  Or more interestingly, they were looking at providing the best numbers to push their agenda the furthest. As noted in a previous comment, a fair comparison would be to run a proper benchmark--which guarantees similar operating conditions.
etm117 16y ago
To be fair, Chrome beta channel is still v6 series (6.0.472.59 beta). The dev channel is v7 series already though I believe.
isleyaardvark 16y ago
At the very least they could've tested the current stable release of Opera - 10.62 - instead of 10.53.

Perceval 16y ago

Fx4b6 does not include the new JaegerMonkey javascript engine, so the lack of a speedup compared to Fx3.6 is not terribly surprising. JaegerMonkey is in Fx nightly builds at the moment and is supposed to be featured in Fx4b7 (to be released later this month).

acqq 16y ago

Note that it's an "user drags something in the UI and we measure something" benchmark, so it's potentially suspicious if the things measured are comparable at all in different runs and browsers. For example, in games, frames per seconds are measured under basic assumption that the game has the mode in which there's no limit the increase of frames per second other than the speed of rendering and that that mode is always identically reproducible. Are we sure about that here? And as others noted, they are using the old version of Opera, 10.53 instead of 10.62 which is current.

bobf 16y ago

As an interesting comparison, I just saw that John Resig posted a benchmark of jQuery.css() performance across browsers. It doesn't include IE9, but does include Opera 10.62 and FF 4.0b6 - http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeresig/4999526752/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeresig/4999526752/