Browser Battle (Speed and Benchmark Testing)

[Chromatinfish 123]

Disclaimer: All tests were purely homemade and are subject to some errors and may not be very precisely accurate, but who cares

Equipment Used:

- Dell Inspiron 546: AMD Athlon II X4 215 @ 2.7 gHZ, 4 GB RAM, ATI Radeon HD5450 (1GB Video Memory)
(Test Machine)

- MacBook Pro: Intel Core i5 @ 2.6 gHZ, 8 GB RAM, Intel Iris Pro
(Research Machine)

- iPhone 5C: Timer Only

- All Software Will Be Turned Off when running tests, including Anti Virus software, Ad blocking software, and all other non-essential tasks.

Tests Used:

Speed:

Cold Start

Load Scobleizer: Scobleizer - Entrepreneur in Residence

Load Precentral: webOS Nation | webOS Forums, News, Reviews, Apps and Help

Load CultOfMac: Cult of Mac

Benchmark:

Kraken: Kraken JavaScript Benchmark (kraken-1.1 test suite - In Progress...)

Browser Mark: Basemark Web 3.0 | Main page

B-Mark: BMark - A HTML5 3D Benchmark

Octane: http://octane-benchmark.googlecode.com/svn/latest/index.html

HTML5 Test: The HTML5 test - How well does your browser support HTML5?

Fishbowl: https://ie.microsoft.com/testdrive/performance/fishbowl/

JetStream: BrowserBench.org — Browser Benchmarks

Browsers That Have Been Tested:

IE

Firefox

Chrome

Opera

Vivaldi

Maxthon

Waterfox

Yandex

The Browsers Being Tested (Round 3):

Pale Moon

SlimJet

Comodo Dragon

Maxthon Nitro

More Browsers Currently Up To Testing (Round 4):

SeaMonkey

Please Send Me More Suggestions To Test More Browsers.

Ready To Place Your Bets?

Round 1 (IE, Firefox, Chrome, Opera):

Cold Start:

-Checking For Stray Processes.

No? Let's Go!

Internet Explorer: 20.30 seconds

Mozilla Firefox: 20.13 seconds

Google Chrome: 7.63 seconds

Opera: 14.36 seconds

Warm Start:

-Stop It Google Chrome! Stop Running Stray Processes!

Internet Explorer: 4.56 seconds

Mozilla Firefox: 4.78 seconds

Google Chrome: 2.08 seconds

Opera: 3.38 seconds

Website Booting:

The way we judge when the website has been fully booted is if all content, including adverts are shown, and the website icon on the tab has been fully displayed.
Scobleizer:

Internet Explorer: 6.71 seconds

Mozilla Firefox: 8.94 seconds

Google Chrome: 6.90 seconds

Opera: 9.25 seconds

Precentral:

Internet Explorer: 4.56 seconds

Mozilla Firefox: 3.25 seconds

Google Chrome: 4.40 seconds

Opera: 4.66 seconds

CultOfMac:

Internet Explorer: 7.88 seconds

Mozilla Firefox: 6.06 seconds

Google Chrome: 15 + seconds (Disqualified according to technical terms)

Opera: 12.05 seconds

Browser Benchmarks:

When testing, all non-essential running processes and add ons/extensions were terminated to prevent any incorrect measurement of the browser's performance.

Kraken:
Lower Score is better, determined by JavaScript performance.
Confidence Intervals are Ignored in the chart.
Internet Explorer: 5641.4 ms +/- 2.4%

Mozilla Firefox: 3379.3 ms +/- 4.1 %

Google Chrome: 2966.2 ms +/- 1.3%

Opera: 2943.0 ms +/- 1.0%

BrowserMark:

BrowserMark decided to throw a 404 error so no BrowserMark for you!

B-Mark:
Higher Score is better, determined by average FPS during graphical tests.
Internet Explorer: 147

Mozilla Firefox: 340

Google Chrome: 914

Opera: 1120

Octane:
Higher Score is better, determined by JavaScript performance (according to Google, in more real-life circumstances such as highly animated websites)
Internet Explorer: 6931

Mozilla Firefox: 9676

Google Chrome: 12693

Opera: 12391

HTML5 Test:
Higher Score is better, determined by how well the browser supports HTML 5
Internet Explorer: 336

Mozilla Firefox: 434

Google Chrome: 521

Opera: 520

Fishbowl:
Higher Score is better, determined by the number of fish withheld with 55+ fps.

Internet Explorer: 1

Mozilla Firefox: The Test Malfunctioned Due To Random Errors

Google Chrome: 21

Opera: 18

JetStream:
Higher Score is better, determined by effectiveness at handling advanced JavaScript workloads.

Internet Explorer: 50.53

Mozilla Firefox: 38.52

Google Chrome: 77.39

Opera: 76.53

Conclusions:

In terms of the Speed Tests (Booting and Loading),

Google Chrome took 2 tests,
Mozilla Firefox took 2 tests,
Internet Explorer took 1 test.

Google Chrome started up quicker than any other browser both with a cold start or warm start even after I had to manually terminate the processes after I closed it down. However, Mozilla Firefox took the lead in the Speed tests, outperforming Google Chrome significantly, and Internet Explorer (surprisingly) loaded the fastest in one test, narrowly outperforming Chrome.

Then came the benchmarks...

Google Chrome took 4 tests,
Opera took 2.

(The ones that Opera took were Mozilla's Kraken and B-Mark)

Internet Explorer and Mozilla Firefox performed quite poorly, not coming close to taking any of the benchmarks. Unfortunately, Firefox also glitched out on the Fishbowl test, making me disqualify it from the benchmark. Google Chrome, by far, outperformed the competition by a comfortably large margin.

Final Results:

Speed: Chrome/Firefox
Benchmark: Chrome

The winner, from these tests, is Google Chrome.
Round 2 (Vivaldi, Maxthon, Waterfox, Yandex):


Cold Start:

Vivaldi: 6.81 seconds

Maxthon: 5.63 seconds

Waterfox: 15.96 seconds

Yandex: 6.11 seconds

Warm Start:

Vivaldi: 4.76 seconds

Maxthon: 4.45 seconds

Waterfox: 6.25 seconds

Yandex: 5.99 seconds

Website Booting:

The way we judge when the website has been fully booted is if all content, including adverts are shown, and the website icon on the tab has been fully displayed.
Scobleizer:

Vivaldi: 6.55 seconds

Maxthon: 4.33 seconds

Waterfox: 11.05 seconds

Yandex: 10.14 seconds

Precentral:

Vivaldi: 7.66 seconds

Maxthon: 3.23 seconds

Waterfox: 5.00 seconds

Yandex: 6.30 seconds

CultOfMac:

Vivaldi: 11.25 seconds

Maxthon: 5.11 seconds

Waterfox: 8.05 seconds

Yandex: 7.56 seconds

Browser Benchmarks:

When testing, all non-essential running processes and add ons/extensions were terminated to prevent any incorrect measurement of the browser's performance.

Kraken:
Lower Score is better, determined by JavaScript performance.
Confidence Intervals are Ignored in the chart.
Vivaldi: 2931.4 ms +/- 1.2%

Maxthon: 3365.9 ms +/- 1.6%

Waterfox: 3057.0 ms +/- 1.8%

Yandex: 2958.2 ms +/- 0.5 %

B-Mark:
Higher Score is better, determined by average FPS during graphical tests.
Vivaldi: 966

Maxthon: 464

Waterfox: 463

Yandex: 1076

Octane:
Higher Score is better, determined by JavaScript performance (according to Google, in more real-life circumstances such as highly animated websites)
Vivaldi: 12678

Maxthon: 10140

Waterfox: 9715

Yandex: 13269

HTML5 Test:
Higher Score is better, determined by how well the browser supports HTML 5
Vivaldi: 521

Maxthon: 467

Waterfox: 493

Yandex: 521

Fishbowl:
Higher Score is better, determined by the number of fish withheld with 55+ fps.

Vivaldi: 10

Maxthon: 0

Waterfox: 10

Yandex: 25

JetStream:
Higher Score is better, determined by effectiveness at handling advanced JavaScript workloads.

Vivaldi: 78.80

Maxthon: 91.70

Waterfox: 59.11

Yandex: 75.99

Conclusion:

In Speed,

Maxthon took all 5.

Maxthon aced all 5 speed tests, starting the quickest of all the Round 2 browsers.In fact, it would've even beaten Chrome in the Cold Start category. When it came to loading websites, Maxthon was no slouch either. Loading at crazy fast times compared to every other browser, it definitely shines in this respect.

The benchmarks tests then came about...

Yandex took 3 (And tied 1),
Vivaldi took 1 (And tied 1),
and Maxthon took 1.

Yandex definitely showed its true colors in the benchmark testing. However, something to note is that Maxthon achieved a record high 91.70 in the JetStream benchmark, which nobody in either of the two rounds came close to.


Round 3 (Pale Moon, SlimJet, Comodo Dragon, Maxthon Nitro)

In this round we have several browsers which are peculiar in all different ways. All of these browsers are forks of the Gecko or WebKit engines, with different reasons for existing.
Cold Start:

Pale Moon: 5.96 seconds

SlimJet: 5.06 seconds

Comodo Dragon: 10.69 seconds

Maxthon Nitro: 3.93 seconds

Warm Start:

Pale Moon: 2.86 seconds

SlimJet: 3.48 seconds

Comodo Dragon: 7.08 seconds

Maxthon Nitro: 1.21 seconds

Website Booting:
The way we judge when the website has been fully booted is if all content, including adverts are shown, and the website icon on the tab has been fully displayed.

Scobleizer:

Pale Moon: 3.70 seconds

SlimJet: 6.45 seconds

Comodo Dragon: 7.48 seconds

Maxthon Nitro: 2.01 seconds

Precentral:

Pale Moon: 3.91 seconds

SlimJet: 4.46 seconds

Comodo Dragon: 4.43 seconds

Maxthon Nitro: 3.13 seconds

CultOfMac:

Pale Moon: 6.63 seconds

SlimJet: 7.43 seconds

Comodo Dragon: 6.91 seconds

Maxthon Nitro: 15.16 seconds (All iFrames must be loaded until time stops)

Browser Benchmarks:

When testing, all non-essential running processes and add ons/extensions were terminated to prevent any incorrect measurement of the browser's performance.

Kraken:

Lower Score is better, determined by download speed.
Confidence Intervals are Ignored in the chart.

Pale Moon: 3890 ms +/- 1.7%

SlimJet: 3146.6 ms +/- 0.6%

Comodo Dragon: 3229 ms +/- 7.3%

Maxthon Nitro: 3541.1 ms +/- 3.7%

B-Mark:
Higher Score is better, determined by average FPS during graphical tests.

Pale Moon: 255

SlimJet: 954

Comodo Dragon: 898

Maxthon Nitro: 925

Octane:
Higher Score is better, determined by JavaScript performance (according to Google, in more real-life circumstances such as highly animated websites)

Pale Moon: 7701

SlimJet: 11991

Comodo Dragon: 13401

Maxthon Nitro: 10849

HTML5 Test:
Higher Score is better, determined by how well the browser supports HTML 5

Pale Moon: 404

SlimJet: 521

Comodo Dragon: 518

Maxthon Nitro: 476

Fishbowl:
Higher Score is better, determined by the number of fish withheld with 55+ fps.

Pale Moon: The Test Failed Due To Random Errors.

SlimJet: 25

Comodo Dragon: 25

Maxthon Nitro: The Test Failed Due To Random Errors.

JetStream:
Higher Score is better, determined by effectiveness at handling advanced JavaScript workloads.

Pale Moon:

SlimJet:

Comodo Dragon:

Maxthon Nitro:

 

[frogboy]

Looking forward with some interest to round two should be good.

 

[Chromatinfish 123]

Round 1 is complete

Will finish off the charts so you don't have to read thousands of lines of text.

 

[AlphaBeta]

I was hoping to see edge instead of IE in round 1. Round 2 sounds interesting with all the uncommon browsers.

 

[conceptualclarity]

Thanks for doing this.

Good idea to include Maxthon.

You MUST include Pale Moon: it's the second most popular Gecko browser; it's here to stay.

Other browsers worth testing include Comodo Dragon, Comodo Ice Dragon, and FlashPeak Slimjet.

 

[Chromatinfish 123]

Big Notice: The Testing Continues In Another Post (#14).


Quota:
1. Finish off charts for Round 1



2. Round 2 (Now Testing):

Vivaldi
Maxthon
Waterfox
Yandex
New! Maxthon Nitro (Included alongside Maxthon Cloud)

3. Round 3 setup:

Pale Moon
Slimjet

If I do Edge it will be on a different, slower computer since the desktop is running on Windows 7.

Note: I remade the layout for Round 2, but it's not ready just yet.

 

[Chromatinfish 123]

---Update 10:56 AM EST---

- All Charts For Round 1 Finished

- All Tests For Round 2 Finished

- Round 3 Announced:

Pale Moon
SlimJet
Comodo Dragon
Maxthon Nitro

Note: 1,000th Post Yay

 

[Amiga500]

far too many variables to be considered for these benchmarks and results to be even remotely viable to anyone.
.Diffferent computers.
.varying architectures.
.Different software installed.
.differing internet speeds.

So my conclusion is these results are not really a true factor in determining which browser is faster etc.
Speed is something you see visually yourself and sense.
Personally i feel palemoon is noticeably quicker than other browsers,but that of course is on my computer but should not be taken as a general fact.

 

[Chromatinfish 123]

---Update 4---

- Now testing Round 3

- Going to do Charts for Round 2

- Round 4 Announced:

SeaMonkey
Cyberfox
Chromodo
Cent

(All Browsers Subject To Change)

far too many variables to be considered for these benchmarks and results to be even remotely viable to anyone.
.Diffferent computers.
.varying architectures.
.Different software installed.
.differing internet speeds.

So my conclusion is these results are not really a true factor in determining which browser is faster etc.
Speed is something you see visually yourself and sense.
Personally i feel palemoon is noticeably quicker than other browsers,but that of course is on my computer but should not be taken as a general fact.

Yes, you will need to make the final decision, however benchmarks do provide a certain amount of information.

 

[tonibalas]

Nice test you have done there @Chromatinfish 123.
You should also include Cyberfox and Cent browser.
Thank you for your hard work.

 

[_CyberGhosT_]

Awesome results, still not using Chrome though.
I really wanted to see Edge as well.
Thanks for the awesome post.
PeAcE

 

[Chromatinfish 123]

Round 2 completely finished (yes... the axis are messed up )

I will now start to test Round 3.

 

[conceptualclarity]

Just because an individual test is not definitive so as to answer all questions and terminate all debate does not mean it is not valuable and worthwhile. An aggregation of multiple pieces of data can be very impressive, much more than any of the single components. But you never get to an aggregation of data without first creating specific data points. Thanks be to those who do the work of creating such data.

By the way, Pale Moon was indeed the winner on a test done a couple of years ago on raymond.cc, a very good website.

 

[Chromatinfish 123]

OK... Since my edit time mysteriously expired, here is Round 3 and Final Conclusion Graphs ( + the JetStream Results):

JetStream Results:

Pale Moon: Test Failed: Stuck on Latency benchmark cdjs
Slimjet: 79.65
Comodo Dragon: 79.55
Maxthon Nitro: ERROR on Throughput benchmark bigfib.cpp

Benchmark:

 

[frogboy]

A bit of a pity round two went missing, thanks for the effort in posting the tests.

 

[Chromatinfish 123]

A bit of a pity round two went missing, thanks for the effort in posting the tests.

I've actually never seen the edit expiration notice before. I'm very annoyed by it as it will not even let me post a notice that I have more rounds here.

 

[Chromatinfish 123]

OK... Round 4 is testing:

-SeaMonkey
-CyberFox
-Chromodo
-Cent Browser

Cold Start:

SeaMonkey: 9.01 seconds

CyberFox: 7.21 seconds

Chromodo: 11.78 seconds

Cent Browser: 8.85 seconds

Warm Start:

SeaMonkey: 3.95 seconds

CyberFox: 3.58 seconds

Chromodo: 6.90 seconds

Cent Browser: 2.23 seconds

Website Booting:
The way we judge when the website has been fully booted is if all content, including adverts are shown, and the website icon on the tab has been fully displayed.

Scobleizer:

SeaMonkey: 5.16 seconds

CyberFox: 4.05 seconds

Chromodo: 9.45 seconds

Cent Browser: 4.53 seconds

Precentral:

SeaMonkey: 3.24 seconds

CyberFox: 5.45 seconds

Chromodo: 6.96 seconds

Cent Browser: 9.58 seconds

CultOfMac:

SeaMonkey: 7.11 seconds

CyberFox: 6.10 seconds

Chromodo: 7.16 seconds

Cent Browser: Time Out (All iFrames were not loaded properly)

Browser Benchmarks:

When testing, all non-essential running processes and add ons/extensions were terminated to prevent any incorrect measurement of the browser's performance.

Kraken:

Lower Score is better, determined by download speed.
Confidence Intervals are Ignored in the chart.

SeaMonkey: 2984.8 ms +/- 0.9%

CyberFox: 3016.7 ms +/- 2.3 %

Chromodo: 3035.1 ms +/- 1.3%

Cent Browser: 3071.9 ms +/- 4.0%

B-Mark:
Higher Score is better, determined by average FPS during graphical tests.

SeaMonkey: 311

CyberFox: 484

Chromodo: 1103

Cent Browser: 958

Octane:
Higher Score is better, determined by JavaScript performance (according to Google, in more real-life circumstances such as highly animated websites)

SeaMonkey: 9470

CyberFox: 11158

Chromodo: 12964

Cent Browser: 12404

HTML5 Test:
Higher Score is better, determined by how well the browser supports HTML 5

SeaMonkey: 468

CyberFox: 478

Chromodo: 518

Cent Browser: 521

Fishbowl:
Higher Score is better, determined by the number of fish withheld with 55+ fps.
Note: The Gecko Engine does not like Fishbowl.
SeaMonkey: The Test Failed Due To Incorrect Rendering

CyberFox: The Test Failed Due To Incorrect Rendering

Chromodo: 50

Cent Browser: 25

JetStream:
Higher Score is better, determined by effectiveness at handling advanced JavaScript workloads.

SeaMonkey: 67.35

CyberFox: 66.75

Chromodo: 76.91

Cent Browser: 75.92

 

[frogboy]

Looking forward to it as at the moment as i am using Cent and CyberFox browsers.

 

[Chromatinfish 123]

--

 

[Chromatinfish 123]

OK... I will make some final charts and results of all 16 browsers.