4 ms·
Some rough figures: IE7: 0% (base, 1x) IE8: 24% faster (1.24x) FF3: 73% faster (1.73x) FF3.5: 183% faster (2.83x) Opera 10: 196% faster (2.96x) Chr
by ashleyw 17y ago
Some rough figures:
IE7: 0% (base, 1x)
IE8: 24% faster (1.24x)
FF3: 73% faster (1.73x)
FF3.5: 183% faster (2.83x)
Opera 10: 196% faster (2.96x)
Chrome 2: 354% faster (4.54x)
Safari 4: 427% faster (5.27x)
Personally I use Safari because I prefer WebKit (it being fast is nice too), but I'm very impressed with Firefox 3.5. It makes a very good development environment with all the extensions available for it! :)
- jeresig 17y agoWhat are you using to arrive at those numbers? SunSpider, Dromaeo, some other benchmark?
- ashleyw 17y agoPeacekeeper: http://service.futuremark.com/peacekeeper http://service.futuremark.com/peacekeeper As I said, it's very rough, but seems to be a good indication of where abouts browsers are in comparison to each other. Though, once you get to a certain point (around 2x IE7, I'd say), it becomes irrelevant to 99% of what you'd want to do. Or should I say, irrelevant of what you can do, while slow browsers still have high market-shares...
- jeresig 17y agoI agree with your perception - most of the modern browsers are just fine at this point. I've been skeptical of Peacekeeper, though - the tests may be fine but it's hard to tell since they haven't released the source of them, at all. I'm not even really sure how to determine if/how improvements could be made. As far as I know, none of the major browser vendors use Peacekeeper as a benchmark for their engines (which is really what a good benchmark should strive for: to push for the improvement of the browsers that it measures).