I've been using Vivaldi and Brave browsers for a few days, and now I feel like Firefox is crawling. Has this always been the case?
Run some tests to compare them BrowserBench.org — Browser BenchmarksI've been using Vivaldi and Brave browsers for a few days, and now I feel like Firefox is crawling. Has this always been the case?
On my end, the first test with Brave was 14.9 then 2nd test 14.4 (Brave set to aggressively block). With FF, it was like watching things load in slow motion 9.92 (uBlock Origin, browser privacy/standard). Maybe a settings issue? Chrome was 26.3 (uBOL 201 blocks) And I've seen some incredibly better scores in other threads, but as for me and my device and its settings, I'll stick with Brave (and for my Google stuff, Chrome)Run some tests to compare them BrowserBench.org — Browser Benchmarks
The results are as the following:Run some tests to compare them BrowserBench.org — Browser Benchmarks
Testing should be performed without any extensions to determine the baseline related to the browser itself, not to the impact by extensions.@Jonny Quest
With me on Linux Chrome runs at 19.3 Brave at 18.8 and Firefox 9,9 normally Chrome is a bit faster than Chrome browsers offering extra functionality. It is also normal for Firefox to be slower (uBol is also a lot faster than uBo, so that does not help either). When Gorhill was attended to this difference his response was nonsense, but after afterwards I noticed uBol was blocking stuff during the tests.
It's not just you. Chromium has total benchmark superiority over Firefox. Every component of Chromium performs dramatically better in synthetic benchmarks, which doesn't necessarily reflect day-to-day browsing but still tells you something.I've been using Vivaldi and Brave browsers for a few days, and now I feel like Firefox is crawling. Has this always been the case?
I agree, I had half heartedly done it in my previous test, but left things as I mentioned there.Testing should be performed without any extensions to determine the baseline related to the browser itself, not to the impact by extensions.
According to your results, I conclude two things:I agree, I had half heartedly done it in my previous test, but left things as I mentioned there.
Now, in disabling the WARP app, F-Secure Browser protection and the extension, and clearing all history....
With Brave set on "Block trackers and ads" (not aggressively) it was 10.8
With Brave Shields totally disabled, it was 11.2 (I had cleared history again).
With FF having disabled uBlock, I went and made some coffee and had a sandwichwas 8.07
So needless to say, I will keep the Trinity (not the Matrix girl) enabled, for better results.
With aggressively block, Brave was better. And with FF, it is noticeably slower. Even though as @Miravi mentioned may not be an issue for most, who maybe don't try a different browser to see a difference, like @lokamoka820 did?According to your results, I conclude two things:
1- The impact of Brave adblocker is very small on performance (it is logic to be smaller than that of extensions)
2- Firefox is noticeably slower
You like to see the difference, run both browsers on an old PC with Windows 11 using a website loaded with videos and animations; I recommend IMDB.Even though as @Miravi mentioned may not be an issue for most
Great callYou like to see the difference, run both browsers on an old PC with Windows 11 using a website loaded with videos and animations; I recommend IMDB.
I believe this is true if you want to compare browsers in general, but as end users, we need the results to be based on how we use them. For instance, I don't use translator for Vivaldi or ad blocker for Brave because their built-in features are adequate, so I need to get the results while these extensions are installed.Testing should be performed without any extensions to determine the baseline related to the browser itself, not to the impact by extensions.
Unfortunately I do not, but fortunately I visit only very limited number of websites (good for cyber hygience), except for searching for some subject (then I enable Norton safe web extension).Great callDo you know of another site that is loaded with ads, to use for general testing?
That was my thought originally too, to test it with what I have enabled and why I have those enabled. But, I did like @Parkinsond idea, just to compare the differencesI believe this is true if you want to compare browsers in general, but as end users, we need the results to be based on how we use them. For instance, I don't use translator for Vivaldi or ad blocker for Brave because their built-in features are adequate, so I need to get the results while these extensions are installed.
Thanks for considering it, as I'm the same way as you, and didn't know of oneUnfortunately I do not, but fortunately I visit only very limited number of websites (good for cyber hygience), except for searching for some subject (then I enable Norton safe web extension).
Test can be performed twice, one time with no extensions (and internal adblocker turned off), the second with extensions and adblocker on.That was my thought originally too, to test it with what I have enabled and why I have those enabled. But, I did like @Parkinsond idea, just to compare the differences![]()
Would you expect a better performance by Presto engine, it was not deprecated?