Battle Firefox vs. Brave vs. Vivaldi

Which browser—Firefox, Brave, or Vivaldi—is your favorite?

  • Firefox

    Votes: 36 45.0%
  • Brave

    Votes: 33 41.3%
  • Vivaldi

    Votes: 11 13.8%

  • Total voters
    80
Compare list
Firefox vs. Brave vs. Vivaldi
Platform(s)
  1. Any platform
Any browser, without a big tech supporting, is vulnerable to sudden death, regardless of how marvelous it is.
Remember Thorium?
I'm currently focusing on Brave and Vivaldi because they both have strong support and resources and show respect for user privacy and feedback.
 
Brave chances are higher to survive compared to Vivaldi; Vivaldi comes no 7 after Yandex
Both Brave and Vivaldi share a similar history: each CEO previously led browser development projects before leaving to create their own browser with new ideas, so both bring incremental experience compared with newer entrants.
Even though I’ve read the explanation provided by support, I still don’t understand why Brave fails this test when third-party cookies are disabled in the settings:

Are Third-Party cookies enabled in my web browser?

With Firefox, too, it’s always possible to block third-party cookies whenever the user chooses.
That's odd,I just tested the link in both browsers: Brave shows "Yes" while Vivaldi shows "No."
 
Last edited:
Both Brave and Vivaldi share a similar history: each CEO previously led browser development projects before leaving to create their own browser with new ideas, so both bring incremental experience compared with newer entrants.
and both share a built-in adblocker; it's only Brave's one is more capable and they do marketing more successfully.
 
Both Brave and Vivaldi share a similar history: each CEO previously led browser development projects before leaving to create their own browser with new ideas, so both bring incremental experience compared with newer entrants.

That's odd,I just tested the link in both browsers: Brave shows "Yes" while Vivaldi shows "No."

Even if you set a policy, it doesn't make a difference; Brave still fails the test.
 
Even if you set a policy, it doesn't make a difference; Brave still fails the test.
I have reached a reasonable protection by Brave through adding hagezi pro to its ad blocker; no more popup ad windows on media piracy websites.

Only uBO, uBOL, and AG could provides such a level, not Vivaldi, not Ghostery.
 
I have reached a reasonable protection by Brave through adding hagezi pro to its ad blocker; no more popup ad windows on media piracy websites.

Only uBO, uBOL, and AG could provides such a level, not Vivaldi, not Ghostery.
Can you watch videos on this site with that setup without redirect links or pop-ups appearing every 10 seconds when you click the media controls?
 
Can you watch videos on this site with that setup without redirect links or pop-ups appearing every 10 seconds when you click the media controls?
I do not stream; just download.
While using Brave with built-in filter lists or Vivaldi even with hagezi, I have to pass through several popups until I reach the download link.
One of them do not even accept to load properly with Brave + hagezi pro; I have to use uBOL to work.
 
I ran a test on my PC.
Brave + uBlock Origin is 20.66% slower in the Speedometer 3.1 test compared to Chrome + AdGuard Browser Extension.
This is unacceptable to me, so I will continue to use Chrome.
Brave uninstalled.
What are you doing in your day to day surfing, that you notice this difference, other than using Speedometer to evaluate things?
With Brave set to aggressively block trackers and ads, I'm as happy as a clam with how its working.
 
What are you doing in your day to day surfing, that you notice this difference, other than using Speedometer to evaluate things?
With Brave set to aggressively block trackers and ads, I'm as happy as a clam with how its working.

Reduced to 8.9 %.;)

P.S.

Having too many extensions enabled slows down your browser.
Now I only have 2 extensions that are always enabled.
 
Last edited:
Every extension that does something to a website will slow down every web browser in these useless tests. They are modifying network requests and how the website looks, and that takes away something on the test.

I tested on Firefox AdGuard and then uBO. Result I got was exactly the same.

Btw another reason why I don't trust Speedometer 3.1 results are valid. With Chrome Mask enabled, result is slightly higher than with it being disabled. Not by a lot, but results are consistent every time I tested.

Chrome Mask enabled:
View attachment 297987

Chrome Mask disabled:
View attachment 297988

I just tested Vivaldi with uBoL.

2026-06-14 18.54.39 browserbench.org b615aa6a138d.jpg


Not sure what it means to be honest.
 
I just tested Vivaldi with uBoL.

View attachment 298175

Not sure what it means to be honest.
I agree, if we didn't have that webpage to evaluate the browsers "speed", would we even notice, unless it was enough to notice when using a different browser?
If I'm not noticing a difference, I go with what I like using, and its features :)

edit: the thing I would notice is if a AV's browser extension were slowing things down, or a VPN.
 
Last edited: