Post your Internet Browser Benchmark part 2

steve-pressman

Here is mine


Steve

A Guy

For 10.53 I had gotten 6818
For 10.60 I get 9571

By those numbers it is faster. Works great, and has been, so #'s are just #'s

A Guy

Firestrider

Broke 10K (CPU is stock with Turbo and HT enabled)

A Guy

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Firestrider

Broke 10K (CPU is stock with Turbo and HT enabled)

Zoom, zoom

A Guy

Snowdog

New Firefox 4 Beta. Minor Performance gain for FF. Seems to launch much faster as well, but I think it is more about the interface overhaul.

MiMA

Damn, just cant get more. Any suggestions for better score? (buying new hardware is not an option )

RST101

Here's mine

stve

Tested Opera 10.70 & Chromium 6.0.466.0(52241)
If Peacekeeper had included the complex graphics score in the benchmark Chromium would have won.

Toms hardware has just done a speed test on Windows ( only stable versions ) which Opera won
Web Browser Grand Prix 2: The Top 5 Tested And Ranked : Introduction
Haavard - Some clarifications regarding Tom's Hardware's browser tests.

stve

Tested Chrome 7.0.497.0 against Opera 10.70 Build 3483

mrdemon

Here is mine!

blackroseMD1

Wow...first time I've run it in a month or so...finally cracked 10K

wakeboardr116

Dave76

I haven't checked this since April.

Much better.

Alphamale

Here is mine for what its worth.

anders22

Chrome: 6611
Firefox: 2271


Chrome66kbenchmark.png picture by ichigoftw - Photobucket
Firefox21kbenchmark.png picture by ichigoftw - Photobucket

Maxxwire

I just installed the latest Opera 10.70 build 9044 snapshot which includes the upgraded Presto v2.6.34 Layout Engine and it scored 74 points higher on the Passmark Browser Benchmark. Lately every Opera 10.70 build gets faster and faster. Opera gets around the internet fairly quickly too...



~Maxx~
.

kurahk7

Opera 10.61

Hopalong X

Broke the 10K in Chrome.

Broke 1150 for IE8.

Maxxwire

Opera and Win 7 still hold the all time speed record at Peacekeeper.

~Maxx~
.

wakeboardr116

I was always against switching browsers from IE. I figured they were all similar so why change from something I already have. I guess I've finally been shown the light. I think I'll go with Opera though cause I cant stand the layout and look of chrome.



I never realized Java could run so fast. This will be really nice for doing my on line courses since they all use it.

Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by wakeboardr116

I think I'll go with Opera though cause I cant stand the layout and look of chrome.

I tried Opera 10.61, but I couldn't get it to work with the rather sizeable Content Blocking list I put together so I decided to go with Opera 10.70 instead...



This is what Opera 10.70 b9044 blocks on the Cnet download site and there are more scripts that can't be shown.

The attached screenshot is of Opera 10.70 b9044's new look for Speed Dial. I use Opera's reverse contrast page view which is why the Speed Dial tiles have a black background also.

~Maxx~
.

tw33k

FF vs Chrome:

Maxxwire

tw33k- From your results it appears as though Firefox needs coffee even more than you do!

~Maxx~
.

tw33k

lol..yeah. I was surprised it was sooo much slower

Francis93

�� Quote: Originally Posted by tw33k

FF vs Chrome:
Attachment 96580

It seems you haven't updated Firefox for a while. The latest and stable version is 3.6.9.

Dave76

Just loaded Chrome Dev, a little better than Beta...

Francis93

My bechmark result

SledgeDG

Here are my results...The new chrome clearly rocks (I run a portable version with Googles datamining disabled)
Firefox probably bogged down due to my 50+plugins
IE8: no comment



-DG

Francis93

LOL My Firefox benchmark. See the difference.

TheIntruder

Hi,

imeem

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Uploaded with ImageShack.us



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Dave76

IE9 seems pretty fast, but doesn't look very good here.

Hopalong X

Dave76

Unless IE9 does all the fancy graphics that the Chrome test does it will never have as high a score.

I think the test is a bit flawed that way.
My Chrone is 10x the number of the IE8 but it sure isn't 10x faster using it. Maybe and a big MAYBE 20% faster at best.

On XP maybe 10-15% actual usage faster. Maybe!
My opinion after six months of usage of both.

One thing I don't see as much of with Chrome is the spinning your wheels waiting forever for the page to load as much as IE8. Chrome might be slower than usual in these instances but it loads or quits. You won't have time for a nap waiting like with the IE8.
Mike

Dave76

I'm using Internet Explorer 9 beta.

It seems faster than chrome at this early stage.

Hopalong X

Dave76
That sounds good.

TheIntruder

A little better than ie8 (1114)

Firestrider

It's nice they cleaned up the UI a lot in IE9. It takes up about the same vertical space (pixels) as Chrome.

As far as speeds:
Sunspider
Chrome 7: 439.6 ms
IE 9: 546.0 ms
Peacekeeper
Chrome 7: 10199
IE 9: 3173
V8 Bench
Chrome 7: 7800
IE 9: 1774

And compliance:
Acid3
Chrome 7: 98
IE 9: 95
HTML5 Test
Chrome 7: 231
IE 9: 96

tw33k

�� Quote: Originally Posted by frzwin7

�� Quote: Originally Posted by tw33k

FF vs Chrome:
Attachment 96580

It seems you haven't updated Firefox for a while. The latest and stable version is 3.6.9.

I use Palemoon (technically)

Gornot

Not bad at all, in my opinion. Peformance suites me just well.

Maxxwire

Opera has been passing the Acid 3 Test ever since V10 was released...



~Maxx~
.

xXSevenXx

Without System Scan.

wysiwyg

Its all cloud cuckoo land, there is such a variation between similar browsers as to make ALL results garbage.

Can't you understand there is no basic standard, results can only be compared accurately it everyone had everything identical,
System
Time
Site
ISP details.
Etc,Etc,Etc.

Gornot

-__-

The (second) point of this thread is to give users feedback on how a single person's benchmark results of one web browser is compared to another, from the same user, not just showing off.

wysiwyg

So that means no browser is better than any other, only to the individual. so what are all the fanboys and their browsers, going to do now that the rugs been pulled from under them.


I use IE8 by the way and I'm totally satified with the speed.

Gornot

I completely agree. And I always say to people "there is no such thing as the best _____" (fill in with browser/player/software in gerenal).

Personally, I usea different browser every month: IE, FF, GC, Safari, MX. Haven't used opera since the first v10 versions. Now I stick with IE9 for the purpose of seeing how long till it gets me mad and I switch to another browser. So far so good

Maxxwire

Browsers serve a very functional and measurable purpose on the internet and I have found a browser that will function at download bandwidths very close to the 37 Mbps limit of my Motorola 501SB modem. I choose to use the Opera browser because it delivers a very acceptable level of performance for my personal use as a photographer uploading and downloading fairly large files some of which are in the .psd format and are in the 320 to 400 Mb size range.

As far as browser benchmarks are concerned it can be clearly seen from all of the results posted on this thread that all browsers are clearly do not offer the same performance when compared side bu side on the same computer. That said the greatest source of difference between different user results is primarily due to the hardware that their computer is using.

The bottom line for many users though is not blazing fast speeds or nearly instantaneous rendering but rather the number and type of features a browser offers which can not be measured with a series of benchmark tests and accounts for a wide variety of opinions as to which browser is the best.

~Maxx~
.

galaxys

Was on IE8. Now using FF 64 with IE 9 64 bit which is rocken

Dave76

�� Quote: Originally Posted by wysiwyg

So that means no browser is better than any other, only to the individual. so what are all the fanboys and their browsers, going to do now that the rugs been pulled from under them.


I use IE8 by the way and I'm totally satified with the speed.

Everyone knows different 'Browser Tests' favor different browsers.

Most companies have their own browser test.

The only results that are valid is the preference of the user on their system.
Use what works for you, has the features and plug-in's you want, the one you like.

I tend to use the browser, I like the 'feel' of, and is fast and/or fast with the few plug-ins I use.
IE8 was generally a bit slower for me, IE9 beta does run faster on this site, but is even or slower than Chrome on other sites.

I really don't understand these 'browser wars', if anyone wants to stay with a particular browser they like, that's great and obviously their choice, what's the big deal...

Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Dave76

I really don't understand these 'browser wars', if anyone wants to stay with a particular browser they like, that's great and obviously their choice, what's the big deal...

Neither do I. I know people who run Firefox strictly because there are certain add-ons that perform specific functions that no other browser will. I think that it is just great that there are so many choices of browsers these days to to cater to the needs of so many different people.

~Maxx~
.

Dave76

I can remember when there wasn't any choice.

Today's choices makes it better for everyone.

So let's enjoy them.

wysiwyg

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Maxxwire

Browsers serve a very functional and measurable purpose on the internet and I have found a browser that will function at download bandwidths very close to the 37 Mbps limit of my Motorola 501SB modem. I choose to use the Opera browser because it delivers a very acceptable level of performance for my personal use as a photographer uploading and downloading fairly large files some of which are in the .psd format and are in the 320 to 400 Mb size range.

As far as browser benchmarks are concerned it can be clearly seen from all of the results posted on this thread that all browsers are clearly do not offer the same performance when compared side bu side on the same computer. That said the greatest source of difference between different user results is primarily due to the hardware that their computer is using.

The bottom line for many users though is not blazing fast speeds or nearly instantaneous rendering but rather the number and type of features a browser offers which can not be measured with a series of benchmark tests and accounts for a wide variety of opinions as to which browser is the best.

~Maxx~
.

My b/band was limit was 17mb I regularly get, depending on time of day, 14.9 to 15.2 and I use IE8, in the ratio I think our results are on a par so that really puts the kybosh on this falacy that its the browser that matters, its the broadband quality.

Maxxwire

......................Firefox...................................Opera......

You're right Bandwidth is very important, but as this screencapture from Bandwidth Meter Pro shows using the same available Bandwith in back to back tests downloading the identical set of 64 Mb to 100 Mb files Firefox downloaded at a maximum Bandwidth of 15.5 Mbps and Opera had a peak download rate of 34.6 Mbps. The available bandwidth is equal, but the ability to access and employ that Bandwidth differs from browser to browser especially with the Opera browser which can be dramatically accelerated using simple performance adjustments in its GUI.

~Maxx~
.

xXSevenXx

With System Scan.

Maxxwire

xXSevenXx- Have you taken a minute and used Opera's on board network tools to allow it to tune it so that it will run as fast an efficiently as possible?

~Maxx~
.

xXSevenXx

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Maxxwire

xXSevenXx- Have you taken a minute and used Opera's on board network tools to allow it to tune it so that it will run as fast an efficiently as possible?

~Maxx~
.

How?

Maxxwire

In the Opera Menu go to Settings> Preferences> Advanced> Network and change the Max connections to a server and Max total connections settings from their defaults of 16 and 64 to 128 and 128 respectively literally doubled the speed that the Opera had with its default 'out of the box' settings when I first ran it. You may want to try other settings to see if they work better for you with your ISP, but these settings work best for me with Opera on Comcast Broadband...

~Maxx~
.

xXSevenXx

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Maxxwire

In the Opera Menu go to Settings> Preferences> Advanced> Network and change the Max connections to a server and Max total connections settings from their defaults of 16 and 64 to 128 and 128 respectively literally doubled the speed that the Opera had with its default 'out of the box' settings when I first ran it. You may want to try other settings to see if they work better for you with your ISP, but these settings work best for me with Opera on Comcast Broadband...

~Maxx~
.

I tried the settings you suggested, and they haven't improved anything. It has actually made things worse as it's unable to even finish the benchmark test.

xXSevenXx

I managed to get it to work by enabling Turbo, and this is the result with the settings you suggested.

Maxxwire

xXSevenXx- Opera Turbo enables server side compression that speeds up low bandwidth connections, but should not be used if you have a high speed internet connection. My computer has the same Core i7 930 processor and an ATI 5770 video card and this is how Opera 10.70 b9049 runs at Peacekeeper using Comcast Broadband...



Have you checked the download and upload bandwidth of your ISP at SpeedTest.net? Here's the result of the SpeedTest.net benchmark I ran on my ISP just a few minutes ago...



The results can vary somewhat throughout the day based on usage loads, but if you are using a similar bandwidth the Opera Turbo will slow Opera's performance down considerably.



This is my diminished ISP bandwidth with Opera Turbo enabled. On a low bandwidth wi-fi connection I have seen Opera Turbo speed up bandwidths as much as 8X, but it impedes a high speed broadband connection because of the same server side compression that speeds up a low bandwidth connection.

~Maxx~
.

xXSevenXx

Quote:

Maxxwire Opera Turbo enables server side compression that speeds up low bandwidth connections, but should not be used if you have a high speed internet connection. My computer has the same Core i7 930 processor and an ATI 5770 video card and this is how Opera 10.70 b9049 runs at Peacekeeper using Comcast Broadband...

I have Turbo on automatic, but I switched it on to do the benchmark test.
Any way I reinstalled it, adjusted the settings, and I got a slight improvement.
Turbo was on auto and went to x3
As for Broadband speed your upload speed is faster than my D/L speed, I usually average 5.7

Maxxwire

xXSevenXx- I would suggest that you try Peacemaker once again with Opera Turbo completely off and see if Opera 10.62 does any better. Your last Opera text parsing score was even higher than mine so it may be that Turbo is holding back the other scores due to delays caused by compression.

~Maxx~
.

xXSevenXx

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Maxxwire

xXSevenXx- I would suggest that you try Peacemaker once again with Opera Turbo completely off and see if Opera 10.62 does any better. Your last Opera text parsing score was even higher than mine so it may be that Turbo is holding back the other scores due to delays caused by compression.

~Maxx~
.

Here you go.

Hopalong X

These were done back to back.
Opera Turbo won't even load a web page. Too much compression.

Paddyy

opera and chrome <3

yowanvista

IE9 is not so fast

Hopalong X

This will do other browsers but which ones I don't know yet.

WebVizBench

Maxxwire

WebVizBench is for HTML 5 isn't it?

~Maxx~
.

Hopalong X

Maxxwire

It is.
The way I read it the first time I tried it would run others but not in HTML5.
Tried Chrome and no go.

Oh well. You can test your IE9 and your GPU.
Mike

Maxxwire

Opera will run through the HTML 5 test, but I think that the Opera developers who are now working on 2 builds simultaneously are concentrating more on their new Presto 2.6.35 rendering engine than HTML 5.

~Maxx~
.

royal tyrant

Here's mine again.

Maxxwire

The PeaceKeeper benchmark isn't really an accurate description of javascript performance - they're using js timers to do the timing for starters, which given the accuracy of a js timer in milliseconds (anyone who's ever tried to use one and have it be anywhere near accurate knows the horrors I speak of) means you could have a browser score 9,000 when it's nowhere close to that score, or the converse - a browser that doesn't update date.now quickly will have a poor score. Also, the fact that the test turns some of the operations into no-ops as the test runs (but still counts the no-op times.... wtf???) means a browser that can handle a no-op that you will never see in real life the fastest, or that updates (specifically) Date.Now() will have a higher score than ones that do not. Neither of these are real-world areas of pain, but they play a very large part in the PeaceKeeper score. Top it off with running inside a Java VM (and the browser's ability to run Java code faster will have an impact on the ultimate score) means it's a crap benchmark, because it has nothing to do with the real world nor is it laid out with actual performance testing in mind - it just tests some "things" and the fastest browser at those "things" that are in no way real-world tests will get a huge score.

The test, frankly, is a disaster and not very accurate. Heck, sunspider is more accurate at least at timing the execution of certain js functions, and we already know that test is wildly inaccurate because some browser makers have been tweaking their js engine load-times so that these tests look faster too. It is what it is, and using a multitude of benchmarks are nice, but what is really a good idea is to clear your cache and visit the sites you normally visit and see which browser is fastest at doing what *you* do with a browser, not testing random js functions or HTML4 or 5, or some CSS or DOM functions, and determining which is faster at a "test". The best test is which one works the way you work, and runs the sites you use without getting in your way.

Really, that is the best benchmark.

saakeman

......................Firefox..................................Opera.......

This is a very simple and yet practical test that I developed using my Bandwidth Meter Pro where each bar represents 1 second of time to measure how quickly different browsers could download 5 sets (pages) of 64-80 Mb pictures that I have posted at a site I regularly visit doing what I normally do with a browser.

~Maxx~
.

Maxxwire

lunascapes scriped broke halfway !
opera 10 is doing great !
firefox beta crashed !

saakeman

�� Quote: Originally Posted by saakeman

opera 10 is doing great !

I've been using Opera for almost 2 years and its been a very exciting ride especially now since they have both v10.62 and v10.70 in development!

~Maxx~
.

Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by saakeman

opera 10 is doing great !

I've been using Opera for almost 2 years and its been a very exciting ride especially now since they have both v10.62 and v10.70 in development!

~Maxx~
.

opera is a very cool browser, best looking interface, just sorry they have such a competitor like Google chrome
have you tried opera on any Linux systems
it bowled me away!
just like safari on mac

Seven Eleven

I've run Opera on Win Vista and Win 7 and on both its so fast that I have measured download speeds that are only 0.6 Mbps slower than the 37 Mbps bandwidth of my modem! And with over 5,000 skins Opera runs great and looks good doing it!

~Maxx~
.

Hopalong X

�� Quote: Originally Posted by saakeman

lunascapes scriped broke halfway !
opera 10 is doing great !
firefox beta crashed !

Peacekeeper used benchmark!
It was super effective!

Dave76

�� Quote: Originally Posted by cluberti

The PeaceKeeper benchmark isn't really an accurate description of javascript performance - they're using js timers to do the timing for starters, which given the accuracy of a js timer in milliseconds (anyone who's ever tried to use one and have it be anywhere near accurate knows the horrors I speak of) means you could have a browser score 9,000 when it's nowhere close to that score, or the converse - a browser that doesn't update date.now quickly will have a poor score. Also, the fact that the test turns some of the operations into no-ops as the test runs (but still counts the no-op times.... wtf???) means a browser that can handle a no-op that you will never see in real life the fastest, or that updates (specifically) Date.Now() will have a higher score than ones that do not. Neither of these are real-world areas of pain, but they play a very large part in the PeaceKeeper score. Top it off with running inside a Java VM (and the browser's ability to run Java code faster will have an impact on the ultimate score) means it's a crap benchmark, because it has nothing to do with the real world nor is it laid out with actual performance testing in mind - it just tests some "things" and the fastest browser at those "things" that are in no way real-world tests will get a huge score.

The test, frankly, is a disaster and not very accurate. Heck, sunspider is more accurate at least at timing the execution of certain js functions, and we already know that test is wildly inaccurate because some browser makers have been tweaking their js engine load-times so that these tests look faster too. It is what it is, and using a multitude of benchmarks are nice, but what is really a good idea is to clear your cache and visit the sites you normally visit and see which browser is fastest at doing what *you* do with a browser, not testing random js functions or HTML4 or 5, or some CSS or DOM functions, and determining which is faster at a "test". The best test is which one works the way you work, and runs the sites you use without getting in your way.

Really, that is the best benchmark.

No argument just a curiosity.
If Peacemaker is JAVA based then why do I have some of the highest scores posted with Chrome and Opera when I have no JAVA installed on my PC.
No JAVA/Sun software of any kind.

Things that make you go Hmmm???
Mike

Guest

Everyone's browser choice is the best browser.

All benchmarks are tainted and not real world.

This is an intersting thread, it's meant to be just a bit of fun.

Guest

[QUOTE=Hopalong X;974319]

�� Quote: Originally Posted by cluberti

No argument just a curiosity.
If Peacemaker is JAVA based then why do I have some of the highest scores posted with Chrome and Opera when I have no JAVA installed on my PC.
No JAVA/Sun software of any kind.

Things that make you go Hmmm???
Mike

You can run it without java, but on (for example) internet explorer or Firefox, you'll get a java window and part of the page runs from a java-based applet. Supposedly this doesn't affect the score, but in brief testing, machines where I did *not* run the java applet score consistently higher than the same test on the same machine in the same browser where I did run the java applet.

Very odd indeed.

Hopalong X

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Dave76

Everyone's browser choice is the best browser.

All benchmarks are tainted and not real world.

This is an intersting thread, it's meant to be just a bit of fun.

That is what I thought also.

WEI and Peacekeeper aren't REAL world testing? OMG!!!
Next you'll be telling me Homer is a cartoon character!

Maxxwire

Just out of curiosity the Passmark PC Benchmark has a 2D and 3D graphics test results. Do you guys also consider these tests biased and unreliable?

~Maxx~
.

Hopalong X

Maxxwire

I always use Passmark for bench testing. It is good to have a comparison to other systems.

Just as Peacekeeper and WEI gives a comparison to other peoples results here on the forum but it is also is used for fun. Most benchmarks can be both.

On the "Show us your WEI" thread we have been congratulating the SSD people on getting 7.9 scores and pretending some of us have hurt feelings because we don't have one.
They appreciate the kudos and know the rest is all in fun.

Mike

xXSevenXx

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Maxxwire

xXSevenXx- I would suggest that you try Peacemaker once again with Opera Turbo completely off and see if Opera 10.62 does any better. Your last Opera text parsing score was even higher than mine so it may be that Turbo is holding back the other scores due to delays caused by compression.

~Maxx~
.

Is this better?

Maxxwire

xXSevenXx- WoW! That's much better! What changes did you make to get Opera to run like that?

~Maxx~
.

xXSevenXx

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Maxxwire

xXSevenXx- WoW! That's much better! What changes did you make to get Opera to run like that?

~Maxx~
.

I un-installed Opera, then I deleted the Opera Programme folder and the Opera AppData Folder and re-installed Opera.
All settings should remain default.

Willowhoop

Here are my browser results...

Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by xXSevenXx

All settings should remain default.

That's interesting. On my computers Opera runs best with its network settings optimized because at the default settings its download speeds are cut severly according to Bandwidth Meter Pro on actual downloads from the internet.

~Maxx~
.

Maxxwire

I downloaded the same 48 MB file from Filehippo first with Opera's network settings optimized which took 56 seconds...



This second download was done at Opera's network default settings and took 89 seconds to complete...



Obviously the Peacekeeper benchmark does not pick up on the 59% slower download speed that Opera has with its default settings because here is Opera's Peacekeeper benchmark with its default network settings and its only 2.4% lower than the score at Opera's optimal network settings...



~Maxx~
.






~Maxx~

lluchandre

i dont know if peacekeerper is broke but here is mine

Maxxwire

Welcome lluchandre! The Peacekeeper results are not strictly about the browser, but will vary from computer to computer.

~Maxx~
.

xXSevenXx

Look at this.

lluchandre

thanks for the welcome guys, i really find the site very useful.. sometimes i sit all day wondering what to do with my notebook. its all i can afford. thats why i wanna make most out of it.

blackroseMD1

Not bad. Still over 10K...

dgwin7

This is for Minefielfd 64-bit 4.0b7pre below.



This is for Chrome 64-bit below.



12K ??? wow

dg

Dave76

That's a really nice score for the Chrome Dev build.

Highest I've gotten is 10,983 for Dev 7.0.517.0

yowanvista

�� Quote: Originally Posted by dgwin7

This is for Minefielfd 64-bit 4.0b7pre below.



This is for Chrome 64-bit below.



12K ??? wow

dg

Chrome doesn't have a 64-bit version yet

Gornot

I have never seen Chrome so fast on my machine
Google Dictionary+Translate, AdThwart, Sexy Undo tab and two additions for smooth scrolling and putting new tabs to the foreground is all I have installed in the extension library+a new theme.

Do I get cake now?

neeraj

this is for my Firefox and Chrome..!

wakeboardr116

WebVizBench for IE 9 in full screen mode.

kurahk7

�� Quote: Originally Posted by wakeboardr116

WebVizBench for IE 9 in full screen mode.

Attachment 102381

Wow, great site to really show the potential of IE 9, bookmarked, or for the case of IE, favorited lol. +1
Edit: Ran it myself and got 5350 with my cpu overclocked from 2.67 to 3.3ghz with turbo and the gpu (9400gt) overclocked from 550/266/1350 to 750/450/1900, can't wait to get my 9800gt back from my friend.

StalkeR

wakeboardr116

Here's a microsoft site I came across that has some nice performance tests and other fun things to try out with IE 9 and HTML 5. Internet Explorer 9 Test Drive

bagavan

what about mine?

stve

Tested the latest from Opera 10.70 build 9069 snapshot against the latest Chrome dev & Chrome Canary.
Opera scored 15250 points

Maxxwire

Chorna

Your fastest score for Chrome 8.0.552.0
3974 Points

Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Chorna

Your fastest score for Chrome 8.0.552.0
3974 Points

Do you have a screenshot of the detailed results?

~Maxx~
.

Maxxwire

I took Opera 11 Alpha with the new Presto 2.6.37 engine out for a test run earlier today after getting it web-ready by pipelining it and loading it with the latest contentblock lists and it literally blew the doors off of v10.70's best Peacekeeper Browser Benchmark score by scoring more than 250 points higher and turning in a benchmark over 11k for the very first time on my Win7 x64 computer...

~Maxx~

Dave76

Nice, that's quite an improvement.

Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Dave76

Nice, that's quite an improvement.

Thanks Dave76. With each new version of the Presto engine in v10.6 and v10.7 I always noticed an improved Peacekeeper benchmark of 50-100 points on average, but for me Opera 11 Alpha has set a whole new standard of improvement which has been a long time and many 1,000's of man hours in the making, but there is no browser upgrade nearly as dramatic as upgrading to a decent Win 7 x64 computer which this Opera 10.6 on my Vista x86 laptop quite clearly proves...



~Maxx~

stve

Heres my scores for all the latest browser versions

Dave76

Nice reference.

My last scores for Chrome 7... and 8.0.552.11 were all above 10k.

There are so many variables in this type of benchmarks.

tw33k

Nid

Here is mine just for fun. Not really sure if it mean anything.

barky

opera faster than I thought it was!
IE8 a joke

additional: chrome 8.0.552.11 scores 6543

stve

Ran the Peacekeeper benchmark on Chrome 9.0.567.0 Canary against*
a fresh install of Opera 11a build 1029 Portable which I installed to a folder on my desktop.
Opera on Windows leads in all categories except Data where Chrome beats it by almost 19,000 points.


">

Dave76

Some nice scores there, looks good

Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by stve

Opera on Windows leads in all categories except Data where Chrome beats it by almost 19,000 points.

I found the open source Chrome based SRWare Iron browser also very strong in the Data category, but not nearly as strong as the Google Chrome benchmark you did although if you ran the benchmark SRWare Iron it would probably be much higher.

~Maxx~

stve

Tested Opera 11a, Chrome 9.0.567.0 Canary & firefox-4.0b8pre.

"


My best result ever for Opera beats my previous highest score on Opera 10.70 by
35*
I'm a bit surprised as its around 500 points higher than other Peacekeeper runs I've done with Op11a & all my previous high scores have been done with a new install of Opera & I've been using this install intensively for a couple of days.

Maxxwire

Congratulations on your new high benchmark at Peacekeeper! I also noticed an improvement with Opera 11 Alpha over 10.70.

~Maxx~
.

stve

Thanks i ran Peacekeeper on a private tab 30 mins later & got a score of 14558,
shows you the variability that can occur on a different run.
I don't remember any runs of Peacekeeper On Opera 10.70 or Opera 11 that scored over 14900 apart from one for 10.70 scoring 15250 & One for Opera 11 scoring 15285.

MS Windows

I was having some trouble with the benchmark test. It appears that Internet Explorer 5.01 does not support the version of JavaScript it uses. Oh well.

It would be nice if there was good benchmarking software that would work with Windows 3.1...

stve

It's pretty good you can still use it for anything after all this time.
Any reason you are still using a really outdated OS with a Pentium you should be able to run win 95 or Win 98 maybe even Windows XP
Probably a good thing you can't find any benchmarking software , it would only depress you.

Sheafy

Right im running
Processor: Intel Core i7-980X Processor
Graphics card: ATI Radeon HD 5850
Memory: 6144 MB
OS: Windows 7 Beta
And opera won by 2 points!
I'm happy with chrome at the moment
Plus Internet explorer actually fails.


- Sheafy

stve

@ Sheafy your PC spec is higher than mine & I get scores in the 14300 to 15281 for
Opera 10.63 & later snapshot like Opera 11 alpha.

Your scores look like you are using a cheap netbook.
Either you are mistaken about your spec or your PC is underclocked, did you build it yourself ?

My PC is overclocked but you should be seeing speeds in Peacekeeper over 12,000

maybe this will help
Let me google that for you

Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by stve

Your scores look like you are using a cheap netbook.
Either you are mistaken about your spec...

You are right about that in that the benchmark was not done with a Core i7 980x, but rather done with a computer using a July 2001 Celeron 900 processor...





~Maxx~

stve

Benchmarked Opera 11 build 1055 near enough same speed as the last two builds for me.
This snapshot is looking good so far stability wise, they have made lots of improvements to the Extension framework to make it easier for developers.

johncc

Firefox 3.6.12 scored 3149

Maxxwire

johncc- Welcome to the Windows 7 Forums! Nice Chrome benchmark. I run the Intel Core i7 930 as you do. Hope to hear more from you soon...

~Maxx~
.

stve

Tested Opera 11 build 1060
Google Chrominum 9.0.581.0 (66042)
Firefox 4.0b7

stve

Opera had a new snapshot yesterday Opera 11 build 1085 I ran the Peacekeeper benchmark twice First run was on a fresh install portable & scored 15146
Second run was after I'd synchronised my data & set up my mail client & i got a new high score of 15391

Opera 11.00 build 1085 portable install
Cromium 9.0.584.0 (6602) Latest available
IE 9 .0.7930.16406 beta displays blank page on the Dom & String sections
Firefox 4.0b8pre was updated today & displayed the comunity table section as a few random blue pixels.

johncc

Thanks for the welcome, Maxxwire, I'd been lurking for some time but pleased to be here now.

Impressive stats, Stve, especially from Opera; I might give it a go - it's the only major browser I don't use.

MiMA

Finnaly broke the o9k wall. Next goal is o10k. I'm wondering why I can't make Opera to perform better :-/

Maxxwire

I've been wondering the same about the Chrome based browsers I've tested.

~Maxx~

stve

�� Quote: Originally Posted by MiMA

Finnaly broke the o9k wall. Next goal is o10k. I'm wondering why I can't make Opera to perform better :-/

Don't worry about it , all PC's are a complex mix of hardware & software.
Just wait a couple of weeks & wait for Opera to release a faster version.

viruzth

Why my opera running so slow?

I guess it's because my old office desktop

Maxxwire

viruzth- The computer that you use to test Opera with makes a huge difference. My Opera benchmarks went from 3,689 with my Vista x86 laptop to 11,220 with my Win 7 x64 Desktop.

~Maxx~

MK2

Latest Chromium on my system:

Subsonic

Here's mine:

stve

checked out the latest Chrome Canary & Chromium & Opera 11_1085 & the latest 10_94
which is a little slower for me.

Kenard

Internet Explorer 8.

mickey megabyte

mickey megabyte

ah, that's better. chromeplus 1.5.00

zekramcross

Here we go I'm not going to post IE8 since its only 380pts. But, here is my FF score:



not to bad...

mickey megabyte

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Subsonic

Here's mine:

[ie8=716 chrome=5339]

these seem real low considering you have an i7.

were you browsing in other tabs whilst benchmarking?

Subsonic

�� Quote: Originally Posted by mickey megabyte

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Subsonic

Here's mine:

[ie8=716 chrome=5339]

these seem real low considering you have an i7.

were you browsing in other tabs whilst benchmarking?

I was initially, however, I get similar results with only one tab open and not touchin' nothin! I know that my graphics card isn't a powerhouse but I don't do any gaming so its ok for me. I did just notice something when I went to reply to you. In Chrome 9, I don't get the full "frame" of your post. Let me see if I can explain. At the bottom of your post you have your logo and I have the option to "quote" you. I see this fine in Firefox. In Chrome, all I see is a "reply" button and no logo. I just started experimenting with chrome so I may have to do some checking to see what is blocking that.

mickey megabyte

very strange - i'm using a chrome based browser, and i've always seen all the buttons.

i'm fairly confident that others do too...

Subsonic

�� Quote: Originally Posted by mickey megabyte

very strange - i'm using a chrome based browser, and i've always seen all the buttons.

i'm fairly confident that others do too...

Must have been a glitch. I logged out of Sevenforums and re-logged in and now its fine. Thanks.

stve

Opera 11 build 1104

zekramcross

It seems like when I try to benchmark Google Chrome during the String Operations it say that an unexpected error occurred and to try again. Well, I did and stopped at the same point as the past 3 attempts. Should I re-install the browser again? If I could fix this without re-installing I would like to know how. Any help greatly appreciated. Thanks!

stve

Same for me with Opera & Chrome.
Might be days before they notice & fix it.

zekramcross

Hmm... I'll see what I can do with some simple troubleshooting then come back here for help. Anybody can post help.

stve

Nothing you can do, the problem's at the Peacekeeper site.

zekramcross

All right, no going onwards with my problem Thanks for those who helped.

stve

Peacekeeper is working again & Opera has released 11 beta build 1111

Browser Versions
Opera 11 beta build 1111.................15346
Chrome 9.0.593.0 Canary build....... 14036
Firefox 4.0b7...................................6880
IE 9 Beta 9.0.7930.16406..................3930

stve

Opera released 11 beta build 1128 today tested it with
Chromium 10.0.604.0

Nickmix

They say that they have one of the fastest browsers in the world.

Chiumiento

I always new google Chrome was the best browser since I first tried it. It is so fast. I love it.

xXSevenXx

Here.

stve

Opera 11 is now a release candidate & faster than ever.

xXSevenXx

I D/L Opera 11 and done a test.
In Opera 11, I put the 'view' at maximum, which is 300%, 20% (lowest) and at 160%, which is the optimum 'view' for my screen.
I tested it with Google Chrome.

Opera 11 @20% = 14785
Opera 11 @160% = 8842
Opera 11 @300% = 9194
Chrome @ optimum view = 12542

Google Chrome wins hands down.

Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by xXSevenXx

Google Chrome wins hands down.

The results you posted seem to contradict that conclusion.

~Maxx~

xXSevenXx

No, my conclusion is correct.

Maxxwire

That's odd because as Math Major in college we were taught that 12,542 (Chrome's overall score) was a lesser numerical value than 14,758 (0pera 11's overall score). Are you referring to some detail of those scores or possibly to scores at different 'views' which you have created?

~Maxx~

xXSevenXx

Please read my post again.

stve

�� Quote: Originally Posted by xXSevenXx

I D/L Opera 11 and done a test.
In Opera 11, I put the 'view' at maximum, which is 300%, 20% (lowest) and at 160%, which is the optimum 'view' for my screen.
I tested it with Google Chrome.

Opera 11 @20% = 14785
Opera 11 @160% = 8842
Opera 11 @300% = 9194
Chrome @ optimum view = 12542

Google Chrome wins hands down.

I always maximize the browser & set view to 100% when I benchmark but I did a comparison with Opera set at 160% & Chrome set at 172% (the closest option in Chrome on my 26 inch monitor) & Opera scored 9375 & Chrome scored 7366.

When you posted the other day comment #360 chrome beat Opera 10.70 by only 838 ,
was the view set at 100% or 160%. ?

Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by xXSevenXx

Please read my post again.

How could any results besides testing at 100% have any possible relevance for anyone? What is optimum view? Does this differ from having the browser set at 100%?

~Maxx~

xXSevenXx

�� Quote: Originally Posted by stve

�� Quote: Originally Posted by xXSevenXx

I D/L Opera 11 and done a test.
In Opera 11, I put the 'view' at maximum, which is 300%, 20% (lowest) and at 160%, which is the optimum 'view' for my screen.
I tested it with Google Chrome.

Opera 11 @20% = 14785
Opera 11 @160% = 8842
Opera 11 @300% = 9194
Chrome @ optimum view = 12542

Google Chrome wins hands down.

I always maximize the browser & set view to 100% when I benchmark but I did a comparison with Opera set at 160% & Chrome set at 172% (the closest option in Chrome on my 26 inch monitor) & Opera scored 9375 & Chrome scored 7366.

When you posted the other day comment #360 chrome beat Opera 10.70 by only 838 ,
was the view set at 100% or 160%. ?

Opera was set to 60%. Tried to make it look good. lol

stve

�� Quote: Originally Posted by xXSevenXx

Opera was set to 60%. Tried to make it look good. lol

If you want to make Opera look good make sure that Turbo mode is set to off & the view is at 100%.

Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by xXSevenXx

Opera was set to 60%. Tried to make it look good. lol

You tried to make Opera 11 look good? Really? lol

~Maxx~

Lebon14

3335 points with Firefox 3.6.13. Did not try another browser.

neeraj

I think Opera 11 impressive...

imeem

Weird, when I benchmarked Opera beta against Chrome, Opera beta was faster. But now Chrome is faster than Opera 11

Chiumiento

I honestly think from what I see on here. I will always either use chrome or opera. I personally love chrome. But like I said you all are making me really like opera also. So if I ever can not use chrome. Or if someone else does not want to. I will suggest opera I guess. I should really try it for my self first though. I do know that chrome made my old as could be 2003 computer run really fast on the internet though. Almost as fast as my brand new one I have now. I could not believe it seriously. That is what made me start to love chrome in the first place. I could not play Facebook games. Then got chrome on that old computer had no problem playing them. From what I see with opera it seems like that would be better for those types. It says that social networking is a lot faster with opera.

xXSevenXx

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by xXSevenXx

Opera was set to 60%. Tried to make it look good. lol

You tried to make Opera 11 look good? Really? lol

~Maxx~

I hope you know see the point of 'my test', the benchmark scores can be 'manipulated'.

Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by xXSevenXx

I hope you know see the point of 'my test', the benchmark scores can be 'manipulated'.

You might be able to slow Opera down, but can you get Chrome to do 20,302 on Peacekeeper? Some things just can't be manipulated.

~Maxx~

stve

�� Quote: Originally Posted by xXSevenXx

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by xXSevenXx

Opera was set to 60%. Tried to make it look good. lol

You tried to make Opera 11 look good? Really? lol

~Maxx~

I hope you know see the point of 'my test', the benchmark scores can be 'manipulated'.

Why bother with screwing around with the results if you want faster scores run the test again when your browser releases a newer faster version, we don't have to wait long these days if you use Chrome or Opera.
If you screw the test its the rendering, social networking & complex graphics that benefit the most the other sections barely change.

To be meaningful the Peacekeeper benchmark should be run at 100% in your browser & it is mainly useful for comparing different browsers on your own PC.

xXSevenXx

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by xXSevenXx

I hope you know see the point of 'my test', the benchmark scores can be 'manipulated'.

You might be able to slow Opera down, but can you get Chrome to do 20,302 on Peacekeeper? Some things just can't be manipulated.

~Maxx~

As far as my set up is concerned Chrome out performs Opera;

Opera 11 @160% (optimum view) = 8842

Chrome @ optimum view = 12542.

For me, Chrome is also more 'user friendly'.

PS I've un-installed Opera.

Maxxwire

xxSevenxx- I'm glad that you are satisfied with the result that you created.

~Maxx~

xXSevenXx

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Maxxwire

xxSevenxx- I'm glad that you are satisfied with the result that you created.

~Maxx~

I'm also glad that you - finally - got your 'maths major' head around it.

Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by xXSevenXx

I'm also glad that you - finally - got your 'maths major' head around it.

Sorry, I just can't 'get my head around' your nefarious misuse of the Peacekeeper Benchmark Test because as a math major I was taught to eschew methods of cheating because a can never yield a valid result.

~Maxx~

xXSevenXx

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by xXSevenXx

I'm also glad that you - finally - got your 'maths major' head around it.

Sorry, I just can't 'get my head around' your nefarious misuse of the Peacekeeper Benchmark Test because as a math major I was taught to eschew methods of cheating because a can never yield a valid result.

~Maxx~

That's the point of my test. doh

Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by xXSevenXx

That's the point of my test. doh

And what a pointless point you have made!

~Maxx~

xXSevenXx

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by xXSevenXx

That's the point of my test. doh

And what a pointless point you have made!

~Maxx~

If you say so.



UNSUBSCRIBED

Maxxwire

If someone invented an undetectable performance enhancing drug and used it to win a gold medal and set a world record in a particular event at the the Olympics that would no more invalidate Olympic level competition than your manipulated test has any bearing on the validity of the Peacekeeper Benchmark Test.

~Maxx~

Dave76

Come on guys, this is suppose to be for fun.

If it get's out of hand the thread will be closed, PLEASE take any long debates to another thread.

After all, they are only browsers

What a boring world it would be if we only had one choice.

Let's be happy with the fact that we have choices.

Use what you like, it's all good.

DeanP

MK2

Pretty quiet here, latest chromium on my system, not too bad.

Maxxwire

I ran a series of PassMark Benchtests the other day on my computer and they use a remarkably similar series of tests to the ones used on Peacekeeper which leads me to believe that the fastest computer will get the highest browser benchmark regardless of which browser is installed.

OS Windows 7 x64 HP
CPU Intel i7 980X Extreme Edition @ 4.4Ghz HT (1.3v)
Motherboard Asus Rampage II Extreme, Rev. 2.13, Bios 1914
Memory GSkill PI Blue Series, 6GB DDR3 @ 2000Mhz CL6-9-6-24-1N
Graphics Card EVGA GeForce GTX 580 FTW Hydro Copper 2 @ 850/1700/4196

Seeing results from Passmark Browser Benchtests from a blazing fast computer like MK2's done sequentially with several of the top Browsers would give a much more accurate account of which of them is indeed the fastest.

~Maxx~

stve

From the Peacekeeper site

Quote:

Other than the browser itself, the most significant factor affecting the Peacekeeper score is the type of CPU in your PC. That said, Peacekeeper is designed to compare the relative performance of different browsers on your PC.

The latest from Chrome & Opera both released today.
Opera 11.01 build 1164 is fastest in all the categories except Data (Chromium leads opera by over 34,000 in the Data section)

Opera still has a small lead over Chromium on my PC.

Dave76

stve, thanks for posting the benchmarks for these versions of browsers.

The best way to see the performance increase/level is to check the new versions on the same system, since the CPU and GPU have such an affect on these scores, we can see how much improvement comes with each new version.

Chiumiento

For some reason Chrome scored better than Opera on my benchmark. I did them both with the exact same everything. I ran them each in there own browser by them self one after another. But Opera was the first one I did. Also when I did Opera it had to download the futuremark thing first. So maybe that had something to do with it. Or maybe because I did not have turbo turned on could have also. I do not use turbo. Because it said I might make faster computers not work as good. I tried it but the it was saying some things could not load on sites. So I turned it off and now it is not saying it. Do you think Turbo will make it faster for someone with a non dial up or slow inter net. I have high speed. I do not have the highest high speed.

stratocaster

Won't allow me to benchmark with Chromium.

stve

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Chiumiento

For some reason Chrome scored better than Opera on my benchmark. I did them both with the exact same everything. I ran them each in there own browser by them self one after another. But Opera was the first one I did. Also when I did Opera it had to download the futuremark thing first. So maybe that had something to do with it. Or maybe because I did not have turbo turned on could have also. I do not use turbo. Because it said I might make faster computers not work as good. I tried it but the it was saying some things could not load on sites. So I turned it off and now it is not saying it. Do you think Turbo will make it faster for someone with a non dial up or slow inter net. I have high speed. I do not have the highest high speed.

Opera & Chrome are both fast on Peacekeeper , your PC has a different combo of hardware & software to mine & for your PC Chrome is faster, your result is just as valid as mine.
If you run Peacekeeper on Opera Turbo mode should be off & view should be at 100%.
The order you run the Peacekeeper tests does not affect the result as the test only starts after your PC has been validated.

Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Chiumiento

Do you think Turbo will make it faster for someone with a non dial up or slow inter net. I have high speed. I do not have the highest high speed.

Opera Turbo uses server side compression to speed up slow dial-up internet connections, but if it is used with faster connections it will throttle down the bandwidth and slow the browser down considerably which is why a warning message will appear if you try to use Opera Turbo with a high speed internet connection.

~Maxx~

wds7

Hi ..
This is Chrome on my laptop ...What does it mean ...?
Good ...no good ....fast ...slow ....

Maxxwire

wds7- Your laptop's Peacekeeper score for Chrome is not bad. My HP laptop's Opera score on Peacekeeper is about 3,200, but the desktop scores over 11,000.

~Maxx~

Chiumiento

Not to get off topic. But no sense to make a new thread for one question. Why does it matter what zoom percentage you are at when you run the Peace keeper? I have a keyboard that lets me zoom in both Opera and chrome. I could zoom way out or way in on both of them if I wanted to. What is the difference in doing it though?

Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Chiumiento

Why does it matter what zoom percentage you are at when you run the Peace keeper?

It wouldn't as long as you disclose the zoom percentage of your results when you present your Peacekeeper benchmark so that others will know how much it has been inflated.

~Maxx~

wds7

[QUOTE=Maxxwire;1179601]wds7- Your laptop's Peacekeeper score for Chrome is not bad. My HP laptop's Opera score on Peacekeeper is about 3,200, but the desktop scores over 11,000.

~Maxx~

Cool ....Thanks Maxx .
i thought ..it's pretty fast ..compare to IE8 ...

Chiumiento

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Chiumiento

Why does it matter what zoom percentage you are at when you run the Peace keeper?

It wouldn't as long as you disclose the zoom percentage of your results when you present your Peacekeeper benchmark so that others will know how much it has been inflated.

~Maxx~

Yes but how does it inflate it. Does it make it easier because it only has to load less stuff. Because there is less to fit on the page so means less to be loaded?

Maxxwire

I really wouldn't know nor does it matter to me. All Peacekeeper benchtests are relative to one another if they are done in the same way so I just do them at the full screen standard because I use Opera full screen and I'm not interested in inflated results about its performance.

~Maxx~

stve

Now that Firefox beta 9 is out I tested again.
Initial impressions of beta 9 are positive its quick loading pages & will probably take over from Chrome as my backup browser.

wds7

�� Quote: Originally Posted by stve

Now that Firefox beta 9 is out I tested again.
Initial impressions of beta 9 are positive its quick loading pages & will probably take over from Chrome as my backup browser.

Oh ..man ...So tempting ...But in my world ...don't like the word "beta" ...
I'll wait for the real one then i test ..
Ok with Chrome for now ..

GeneO

pre beta10

kurahk7

Here's my scores....the Chrome 8.0.552.344 is my CR-48.

Dave76

That CR-48 score is a little disappointing

kurahk7

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Dave76

That CR-48 score is a little disappointing

I wonder what a Windows 7 based netbook with the same specs, Atom 1.6ghz HT, 2gb ram, 16 gb ssd, would get with chrome.

FirewaveZ

My scores seem a bit low to me. What do you think?

Mercurial

wow, my topic has grown LOL! I need some rep yo~! XD (I'm kidding, thats against the rules don't bann me -_-

heres my latest with the two fastest browsers



I prefer chrome, because I like the UI, im kinda used to it now lol.

but I'm surprised that opera is really fast O_O; it just needs more GPU performance and awesome addons and thats it!

Safari is almost like GChrome XD. Its just the branding Apple - Google

I wish I could give the people here a link of the site im currently developing so they can visually see Firefox javascript performance vs Chrome,Opera,Safari(Firefox gets its butt kicked) :P but its highly classified lol

kurahk7

Here's my WebVizBench results.

kurahk7

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Mercurial

wow, my topic has grown LOL! I need some rep yo~! XD (I'm kidding, thats against the rules don't bann me -_-

heres my latest with the two fastest browsers



I prefer chrome, because I like the UI, im kinda used to it now lol.

but I'm surprised that opera is really fast O_O; it just needs more GPU performance and awesome addons and thats it!

Safari is almost like GChrome XD. Its just the branding Apple - Google

I wish I could give the people here a link of the site im currently developing so they can visually see Firefox javascript performance vs Chrome,Opera,Safari(Firefox gets its butt kicked) :P but its highly classified lol

I see that your Opera is 10.63, Opera 11 has been released quite a while ago and brings some noticeable performance improvements so it should perform even better.

imeem

Is it just me or that the silverlight plug in for chrome usually crashes when watching videos like on MSN Videos?

Maxxwire

Opera wins! Google Chrome is right behind though.

Mercurial

Opera wins! Google Chrome is right behind though. [/QUOTE]

Go Acer Aspire One!

~Maxx~

stve

But Chrome still wins JavaScript execution performance though :P!

imeem

Tested the latest from Chromium & Opera
Opera 11.01 build 1179 the latest builds have been about stability rather than performance.
Chromium 10.0.649.0 is getting close.

stve

ChromePlus (8.0.552.224) vs. latest version of Chrome.

Guest

Included 2 browsers from 2007 that i downloaded from Old Apps.
They are pretty slooow in the benchmark but browsing the net they both feel snappy on most sites.

oreo27

Here's mine. I'm actually using Pale Moon, not Firefox. Also, this is the office Desktop. I'll try it again later at my house

The Pale Moon Project homepage

Subsonic

�� Quote: Originally Posted by oreo27

Here's mine. I'm actually using Pale Moon, not Firefox. Also, this is the office Desktop. I'll try it again later at my house

The Pale Moon Project homepage

Hi Oreo27,

Had never heard of Pale Moon before. Pretty nice. Thanks for posting!

oreo27

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Subsonic

�� Quote: Originally Posted by oreo27

Here's mine. I'm actually using Pale Moon, not Firefox. Also, this is the office Desktop. I'll try it again later at my house

The Pale Moon Project homepage

Hi Oreo27,

Had never heard of Pale Moon before. Pretty nice. Thanks for posting!

It's indeed great mate. Just a bit of better performance from Firefox. I discovered it from a member in the Forums I moderate in.

This reminds me, I still have yet to do a benchmark at home

architect

hi,
here are my scores, not knowing what they exactly mean....
i only know, that chrome 10 is very fast in my opinion...

oreo27

Well, as an update. I'm posting three browsers.

Firefox 3.6.13, again is not Firefox, It is Pale Moon. Chrome owned in this benchmark but I still prefer Pale Moon.

Gornot

Subjectively speaking, this is a colossal improvement, even when compared to the official beta:



IE 9.0.8073.6003

snit3

Win 7-64 Pro, just installed IE-9

wds7

From Chrome 8 = 3500 ..to chrome 9 ....: Much faster ....;

snit3

Just installed Chrome on this machine alongside IE-9. Interesting comparison!

imeem

Chrome 9 vs. Chrome 8.

Chrome 8 won the first 3 test and Chrome 9 won the last 3 test.

OCing my video card barely did anything to the score.

stve

Quote:

imeem : OCing my video card barely did anything to the score.

From the Peacekeeper FAQ

Quote:

What factors affect the score?

Other than the browser itself, the most significant factor affecting the score is the type of CPU in your PC. After that, the power of your graphics card affects the result somewhat, though mostly in situations where the card is very slow, or no drivers have been installed for it. Running other applications that consume system resources at the same time as the benchmark is running will naturally affect the score. The size of the viewable browser area also affects the score, so the screen resolution you use, the size of the browser window and whether the window is minimized affect the score as well. Beyond these, other factors are usually not significant. Your internet connection speed and network latency do not influence the score in any way.

Gornot

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Gornot

Subjectively speaking, this is a colossal improvement, even when compared to the official beta:

Attachment 136676

IE 9.0.8073.6003

Update: And here's the RC

valdir

�� Quote: Originally Posted by oreo27

Here's mine. I'm actually using Pale Moon, not Firefox. Also, this is the office Desktop. I'll try it again later at my house

The Pale Moon Project homepage

Thanks for the link ... looking at Pale Moon

Chiumiento

Hi, here's my IE9 RC score, I think it's OK

Chiumiento

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Ciara

�� Quote: Originally Posted by oreo27

Here's mine. I'm actually using Pale Moon, not Firefox. Also, this is the office Desktop. I'll try it again later at my house

The Pale Moon Project homepage

Thanks for the link ... looking at Pale Moon

I want to see a benchmark for this browser.

GeneO

The one that says firefox is actually A browser called Pale Moon. It is based on firefox but supposed to be faster.

Lava King

Anybody have the IE9 RC compared to the latest Frirefox beta (beta 11 or pre12) on the same system?

stve

Hmm...I'm unable to get to Peacekeeper or any FutureMark page.


Not trying to muddy the waters or anything, but this thread made me curious so I searched for some alternatives.
Sunspider 0.9.1 goes through its tests rather quickly so I ran it on several different machines using different browsers with startling results.

Test scores are in milliseconds, lower numbers are better.

This machine:
Core 2 Duo E8500 3.1 GHz
4 GB Ram
BFG 9800 GT OC graphics
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit
WD Scorpio Black 1 TB hdd
IE8 score: 3673.2 ms
Chrome: 222.1 ms

Apple MacBook Pro 2010
Core i5 2.4 GHz
4 GB Ram
GT 330 graphics
Mac OSX 10.6.6
Safari: 315.0 ms
Firefox: 799.7 ms

Toshiba Satellite A305-S6848
AMD Turion TL-60 2.0 GHz
3 GB Ram
ATI x1300 graphics
Windows 7 Home Premium 32-bit
IE8: 8732.5 ms
Chrome: 491.4 ms

AMD Athlon x2 4000+
2 GB ram
ATI on-board graphics
Ubuntu 10.04
Firefox: 1724.1 ms

So, what does all this mean? Probably not much in the grand scheme of things. I'll keep trying Peacekeeper and post back when it becomes available.

Kent

oreo27

IE 9 RC is not completing Peacekeeper its getting hung up on the string section.

The Sunspider benchmark is not very useful anymore all the more recent modern browsers are very fast.

The fastest on my PC is
IE 9 133 ms
Firefox Beta 11 162 ms
Opera 11.01 166 ms
Google Chrome 11.0.667.0 canary build,,,,173 ms

In all the other benchmark tests I've run V8 Benchmark
Mozilla Kraken & Dromeo IE 9 is the slowest.

Did Internet Explorer 9 Cheat In The SunSpider Benchmark?

Guest

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Ciara

�� Quote: Originally Posted by oreo27

Here's mine. I'm actually using Pale Moon, not Firefox. Also, this is the office Desktop. I'll try it again later at my house

The Pale Moon Project homepage

Thanks for the link ... looking at Pale Moon

Sure

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Chiumiento

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Ciara

�� Quote: Originally Posted by oreo27

Here's mine. I'm actually using Pale Moon, not Firefox. Also, this is the office Desktop. I'll try it again later at my house

The Pale Moon Project homepage

Thanks for the link ... looking at Pale Moon

I want to see a benchmark for this browser.

Here's the benchmark mate. Firefox is actually Pale Moon. I don't have one compared to Firefox itself though.

�� Quote: Originally Posted by oreo27

Well, as an update. I'm posting three browsers.



Firefox 3.6.13, again is not Firefox, It is Pale Moon. Chrome owned in this benchmark but I still prefer Pale Moon.

Chiumiento

�� Quote: Originally Posted by oreo27

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Ciara

�� Quote: Originally Posted by oreo27

Here's mine. I'm actually using Pale Moon, not Firefox. Also, this is the office Desktop. I'll try it again later at my house

The Pale Moon Project homepage

Thanks for the link ... looking at Pale Moon

Sure

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Chiumiento

I want to see a benchmark for this browser.

Here's the benchmark mate. Firefox is actually Pale Moon. I don't have one compared to Firefox itself though.

�� Quote: Originally Posted by oreo27

Well, as an update. I'm posting three browsers.



Firefox 3.6.13, again is not Firefox, It is Pale Moon. Chrome owned in this benchmark but I still prefer Pale Moon.

I actually have already benchmarked it myself a couple posts before this one. I really did not see much significance to keep it.

Unknown ID

Hiks Iam open 10 Tabs in same Time



Here you can check my Result in here

Chiumiento

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Unknown ID

Hiks Iam open 10 Tabs in same Time



Here you can check my Result in here

Did you do your benchmark with 10 tabs open? I am not sure. But I think that would drastically lower your benchmark scores. I do not think I have even seen a chrome benchmark that low before. Though I have not seen them all. I am sure there is a few. But That is lower than IE9 was on my system. I do not have a very good system either.

snit3

I thought it would be interesting to fire up an old (el cheepo) e-machine and take the browser test as I update from IE7 to IE8, then Chrome. This is a T1840 e-machine using Win XP, SP3. Comes stock with a Celeron 1.8 GHz processor, 40 GB HD, 128 MB RAM, and 48 MB (whew!) of ON BOARD AGP mem. I did the tests using one of my 22" Sceptre monitors at 1600 x 900 resolution and 32 bit color just to "strain" the stock system.

The IE-7 test results are (as suspected) super lousy. I didn't bother with screen shots for a couple of reasons. Anyway, here are the numbers:

IE-7 (7.0.5730.11) tested at 107 (about the slowest I've seen on this thread)
IE-8 (8.0.6001.18702) tested at 157
Chrome (9.0.597.98) tested at 1753 WOW!

If you want a way to speed up surfing (noticeably) on an old or cheep machine, try Chrome instead of a new graphics card. It's free, and you won't even have to pull of the cover!

Dzanan

this explains why I never use IE:

IownAmoneyPit

Chrome with multiple(6) tabs opened and with single tab

Hellriser

IE 9 RC and FF beta 11

Subsonic

Did the test on Palemoon 3.6.14

Hellriser

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Hellriser

Did the test on Palemoon 3.6.14

Here it is on Palemoon 4.0b11-MCP

Guest

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Subsonic

Here it is on Palemoon 4.0b11-MCP

OMG. That is freakin' fast! Can't wait for the official release.
Edit, just tested the current Firefox beta build - 4.0b12. Gave me a score of 4537.
Big improvement from the version 3 firefox.

Dave76

Since I haven't posted mine in a while...

stve

Tested the latest browsers with Peacekeeper & IE 9 test drive demos Maze Solver 40x40 layout.
CSS Layout Performance Test

Fastest Opera 12 seconds
Slowest Chrome 10 beta 500 seconds

Subsonic

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Hellriser

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Subsonic

Here it is on Palemoon 4.0b11-MCP

OMG. That is freakin' fast! Can't wait for the official release.
Edit, just tested the current Firefox beta build - 4.0b12. Gave me a score of 4537.
Big improvement from the version 3 firefox.

Just got hold of Firefox 4 RC. Here's what it gives:

mattburles

does someone have a benchmark between ie 9 RC and firefox 4 Rc1? Im curious whichc one does better.

Chiumiento

I think it is pretty close in some areas. But I think that Fire Fox rates better most times. But With the way that IE9 works now with the GPU rendering. I think that depending on the Graphics card someone has also makes a huge difference in IE9

Maxxwire

I tried the Palemoon 3.6.15 and tested it along with Firefox 3.6.15 before I upgraded to 4.0 RC and Palemoon was a little faster, but still far behind Minefield and Opera 11.10.

~Maxx~

imeem

Lowest score is IE9 x64.

I thought they said IE9 is the fastest web browser.

Dave76

Ie9 appears to be faster than Firefox on your snip.

In this benchmark higher is better.

imeem

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Dave76

Ie9 appears to be faster than Firefox on your snip.

In this benchmark higher is better.

i know that. But other ppl posted chrome vs. IE9 and chrome got way higher scores. I can't test chrome myself because it won't start up.

stve

Opera rules Peacekeeper

Punkster

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Hellriser

Did the test on Palemoon 3.6.14

Hmm.. that avatar looks familiar, waaaaaaaaaaaay too much familiar

Hehe. Did you take it from me? (Just wondering)

Phone Man

IE9-64bit is NOT running the same engine as IE9-32bit and it shows.

MS put their resources into the 32bit IE and just token effort into 64-bit.

IE9-32bit



IE9-64bit


UPDATED TO INCLUDE FF 3 and 4

FF 3.6.15


FF 4.0



Jim

sordid

I ran FF vs Chrome on my local webserver, a very old rig running Ubuntu 10.04 LTS.
The hardware is top notch, Intel P4 2.80GHz w/ a blazing gig of RAM.
Well, I only use it for testing purposes so it's sufficient.

The results are devastating for FF - they can be grateful the canvas tests is not part of the final result because Chrome appeared to be 10x faster at least.

So here's the shameful facts for FF:



And here's Chrome in all its glory:

Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by sordid

The results are devastating for FF - they can be grateful the canvas tests is not part of the final result because Chrome appeared to be 10x faster at least.

There was a time when I thought that FF's low Peacemaker Benchmarks were a horrible indictment against the browser, but after I started actually using it I found that it functioned quite well even compared to Opera which is my primary browser and is known to post Peacekeeper Benchmarks over 20,000. Evidently not all Benchmark results translate fully and directly into improved functionality on the internet.

~Maxx~

sordid

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Maxxwire

Evidently not all Benchmark results translate fully and directly into improved functionality on the internet.

No doubt about that, mate.
But I could easily tell by just watching that Chrome performed way better on my tertiary rig.

imeem

IE9 final vs. FF 4 final.

BTw why does IE 9 64 bit is slower than 32 bit? I thought it was suppose to be faster

Phone Man

�� Quote: Originally Posted by imeem

IE9 final vs. FF 4 final.

BTw why does IE 9 64 bit is slower than 32 bit? I thought it was suppose to be faster

MS put their resources in the 32bit version and just a token effort in the 64-bit. The 64-bit uses the old engine from IE8 while the 32bit got an updated engine.

Jim

yohoyoho

image attatched

Britton30

bleah! yuck!, etc. A zero on complex graphics.

Raynian

LOL. But in real usage, My FF4 works much faster than my IE9

gendoikari1

Usually I use Opera. I'm still sticking with it.

recall

My results

MadSupra354

I still like Internet Explorer 9 better

Dave76

Just tested the new Chrome 12.0.712.0 dev release.

MadSupra354

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Dave76

Just tested the new Chrome 12.0.712.0 dev release.

Attachment 145788

Where? I can't find it

indianacarnie

Opera 11.01
AMD Turion x2
4 GB RAM

2911 points and I did have other tabs open

Dave76

�� Quote: Originally Posted by MadSupra354

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Dave76

Just tested the new Chrome 12.0.712.0 dev release.

Attachment 145788

Where? I can't find it

The Chromium Projects


Click here:
Early Access Release Channels


Look for: Subscribing to a channel

johncc

Opera is growing on me; it seems a lot faster than the others - not reflected in this benchmark, but in the user experience for the sites I generally visit. After so many years with FF, Opera has become my default (love the built-in "No Script" & blazing fast image load; hosts file takes care of the ad filtering.)

[I seem to recall FF 3.6 scored near 10 000 before, however, it is faster than the previous release whatever this benchmark says.]

oreo27

Here's the overall benchmark on all the installed browsers on my system.



Here's Chrome



Firefox



Internet Explorer



My personal choice is still Firefox.

soho1

My results:

• Could not find result for key 5f4P. If you trying to benchmark another browser please make sure you have copied the url correctly and try again.

Perhaps it did not like the many browsers I have installed.

Phone Man

�� Quote: Originally Posted by soho1

My results:

• Could not find result for key 5f4P. If you trying to benchmark another browser please make sure you have copied the url correctly and try again.

Perhaps it did not like the many browsers I have installed.

I get that same error but somehow I clicked on something (don't remember) and the results showed up. Try refresh, maybe that was it.

Jim

Snowdog

�� Quote: Originally Posted by soho1

My results:

• Could not find result for key 5f4P. If you trying to benchmark another browser please make sure you have copied the url correctly and try again.

Perhaps it did not like the many browsers I have installed.

I think not, likely something wrong with the install portion of the bench mark. I had something similar before.

I would uninstall your old "Futuremark systemInfo".

Then run the benchmark again, don't click "run without system scan", let it scan.

FWIW, here are my results. Despite it being "slowest" FF4 is my browser of choice and the speed differences don't show up in the real world. I just keep the others around for testing.

Even when I had IE8 and it was reporting a score of about 1200, it was still unnoticeable.

SRWare Iron, is Chrome enhanced for privacy (removed calling home to Google, and always running agent). I think it is also the first time I cracked 10000.

stve

I've had the same problem with Opera, Chrome & Firefox over the last few months every now & again I get the could not find the result message & have to reload the page to get it to show

ganjiry

Hi all,
heres mine.

stve

New snapshot Opera 11.10 beta Build 2076 tested with latest browsers.

IownAmoneyPit

�� Quote: Originally Posted by IownAmoneyPit

IE 9 RC and FF beta 11

Scores are now much higher on a newly built system and release of IE 9 final and FF 4.0

Dave76

Nice jump in the scores, the new rig must be quick

IownAmoneyPit

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Dave76

Nice jump in the scores, the new rig must be quick

Rig takes more time on BIOS screen than starting windows to desktop, the SSD and 2600K processor sure help.

ganjiry

i use chrome all the time so i had not install ie9. i benchmarked ie8 and it was terrible. it barely scored a 1000.

heres my chrome and ie9 benches

diehrd

Chrome(v10.0.648.204) Scored:
10713 Points


Thats with a boat load of tabs open so I am sorta happy I scored that well .

kurahk7

Attached is the score with my CR-48 running the latest Beta update.

Dave76

Something wrong there, my last Chrome v11 build was +10k.

We have similar system build, the score should be much higher.

kurahk7

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Dave76

Something wrong there, my last Chrome v11 build was +10k.

We have similar system build, the score should be much higher.

There's nothing wrong, it's just that I ran it using my chromebook.

Dave76

Ah ha, I see now

yohoyoho

a little slow

Britton30

I have tried Opera based on the glowing reports. This screen was sohown for several minutes. For me Opera=0.

Attachment 147868

ganjiry

lol opera just cant seem 2 get a decent browser 2gether can they.

Maxxwire

So if Opera is not a decent browser then what does that say about every other browser that scored less than Opera's blazing 20,302 at Peacekeeper???

@Britton30- Before you discredit the fastest browser to ever test at Peacemaker you might consider that there may be some problems over at the Peacekeeper website that are causing the problem you are experiencing. According to the message I just got wen I visited there a few minutes ago the website does not currently have a valid digital certificate.

~Maxx~

Britton30

@Maxx~
I'm not discrediting Opera but saying it doesn't work on my system. I'm inclined to believe that it's not all in the browser either, but rather the system specs as well. You have a blazing Intel CPU and I have a flickering AMD X4.
I've tried the much bally-hooed Firefox too along with Safari and Chrome but I have so far returned to IE8. Heck, I'm not jumping on the IE9 early adopter wagon.

ganjiry

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Britton30

@Maxx~
I'm not discrediting Opera but saying it doesn't work on my system. I'm inclined to believe that it's not all in the browser either, but rather the system specs as well. You have a blazing Intel CPU and I have a flickering AMD X4.
I've tried the much bally-hooed Firefox too along with Safari and Chrome but I have so far returned to IE8. Heck, I'm not jumping on the IE9 early adopter wagon.

i benchmarked ie9 the other day on the same system as i benched chrome miniutes apart. ie9 was knowhere near as quick as chrome. on my system anyway

Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Britton30

@Maxx~
I'm not discrediting Opera but saying it doesn't work on my system. I'm inclined to believe that it's not all in the browser either, but rather the system specs as well.

Yes, system specs have a lot to do with it as evidenced by my Win 7 desktop being able to score just over 3 times as high on Peacekeeper as my Vista laptop both computers running Opera.

~Maxx~

oreo27

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Britton30

@Maxx~
I'm not discrediting Opera but saying it doesn't work on my system. I'm inclined to believe that it's not all in the browser either, but rather the system specs as well.

Yes, system specs have a lot to do with it as evidenced by my Win 7 desktop being able to score just over 3 times as high on Peacekeeper as my Vista laptop both computers running Opera.

~Maxx~

Yup. I noticed that too.

Benchmarks are truly to test different browsers on the same system. Speaking of which, I'll do a Internet Explorer 9 benchmark and update here

Britton30

A new IE8 assessment today. Old was 939

Attachment 147893

EDIT: I just tried to check Opera again and the Peacekeeper page stuck again, maybe server overload.

mpam

Here are a few benchmarks I ran a few days ago (NB: Opera 11.00 is a spoof, it's in fact Iron 10 ^^):

And more global results:

kurahk7

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Britton30

I have tried Opera based on the glowing reports. This screen was sohown for several minutes. For me Opera=0.

Attachment 147868

You're not supposed to run it with Turbo mode; Turbo mode is for those with slow dial-up connections.

oreo27

�� Quote: Originally Posted by oreo27

Here's the overall benchmark on all the installed browsers on my system.

Attachment 145893

Here's Chrome

Attachment 145896

Firefox

Attachment 145895

Internet Explorer

Attachment 145894

My personal choice is still Firefox.

And just to add.

stve

Chromium just manages to grab top spot owing to its massive lead in the data section,
Data is the section that takes less than a second on my PC.
Opera has a healthy lead in all the other sections of the Peacekeeper test especially Complex Graphics that is not included in the overall score.

Quote:

Complex graphics
These tests use 'Canvas', a new web technology for drawing and manipulating graphics without external plug-ins. Canvas is not yet supported by all major browsers so the scores from these tests are not included in the overall Peacekeeper score.

All Major browsers now support Complex Graphics

A Guy

Opera 11.01





A Guy

RitualJman

Maxxwire

The new 120 GB 25nm Intel 320 SSD gave Opera 11.10 a boost in its Peacekeeper score on my Win 7 x64 desktop...

~Maxx~

Commodore Pet

Here is mine with 64 bit Nightly6.0a1. I might try it again with 64 bit explorer 9 just to compare.

Commodore Pet

Now with IE9

A Guy

Opera 11.10 bumped me a bit.





A Guy

kurahk7

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Commodore Pet

Now with IE9

The x86 version of IE9 uses the new engine while the x64 uses the IE8 engine iirc.

Commodore Pet

Ok I tried the new Opera too. Even though it is 32 bit and I am trying to only use 64 bit software. It is the winner, this week

Subsonic

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Commodore Pet

Here is mine with 64 bit Nightly6.0a1. I might try it again with 64 bit explorer 9 just to compare.

Just installed 64 bit Nightly6.0a1. It is working well and seems very fast, however, I'm unable to get a Peacekeeper benchmark on it. Keeps giving me the following:

Commodore Pet

When you get to that point just do a Refresh/Reload and the results should appear.

Subsonic

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Commodore Pet

When you get to that point just do a Refresh/Reload and the results should appear.

Now I'm not even getting to that point. Its choking here:

Maxxwire

Subsonic- I tried to benchmark Opera 11.10 twice last night and I got exactly the same results that you did.

~Maxx~

.

A Guy

yes, just ran it again, and it stops there. Must be a Peacekeeper problem. A Guy

Subsonic

�� Quote: Originally Posted by A Guy

yes, just ran it again, and it stops there. Must be a Peacekeeper problem. A Guy

Good to know. I've never had a problem benchmarking any browser before and now I get the same result whether I use IE9, Firefox 4, or Nightly 6. Hopefully they'll sort it soon. Anyway... 64 bit Nightly 6.0a1 seems real fast too me!

johncc

I have tried the sunspider 0.9.1 JS benchmark and it tells a slightly different story, though not as comprehensive as the Peacekeeper test. IE9 renders JS fastest on my system, followed by FF4. Chrome is slowest.

IE9 - 199.9ms
FF4 - 224.6ms
Opera - 235.1ms
Chrome - 262.0ms

Attachment shows IE9 and FF4

There's something about the Peacekeeper test that does an injustice to IE9; though it's my least favourite browser, it is quick in a way Opera is quick yet it generally rates lower than Chrome and FF4. And my measurements for FF4 recently confirm that in my system, at least, Firefox has become a lot slower (1/3 of the speed of 3.62 per the Peacekeeper test!) - intuition tells me there is something not quite right about that particular benchmark.

Mike Connor

Well, just for giggles...........



Regards....Mike Connor

richport29

These are my results.

stve

First time I've topped 16,000

richport29

�� Quote: Originally Posted by stve

First time I've topped 16,000

Nice score.

Are you using default settings in Opera?. I've noticed in this thread Opera and Chrome scores are usually very close. However on my PC opera scores over 1000 points less, weird.

stve

I'm using default settings Opera 11.50 alpha build 1009 downloaded as the portable option.
They are still not including the Complex graphics scores even though all major browsers support them else Opera would have won by a wider margin maybe topping 17,000

richport29

�� Quote: Originally Posted by stve

I'm using default settings Opera 11.50 alpha build 1009 downloaded as the portable option.
They are still not including the Complex graphics scores even though all major browsers support them else Opera would have won by a wider margin maybe topping 17,000

Hmmm, where can I get the portable version?

stve

For the stable version Opera 11.10 download it at Opera web browser | Faster & safer | Download the latest Internet browser free

For the latest snapshot on the Next channel get it at Opera web browser | Opera 11.50 alpha

Both versions have the option to install as a portable version built into the installer.

When you download the Installer click on options & on the second screen change the install path anywhere outside program files make sure you make a new folder to install into.
When you have changed the install path the install for option becomes available change to stand alone installation USB for the portable.

no entries get changed in the registry, If you want to uninstall it simply delete the folder.

StalkeR

My score. I haven't posted here for a while..

richport29

�� Quote: Originally Posted by stve

For the stable version Opera 11.10 download it at Opera web browser | Faster & safer | Download the latest Internet browser free

For the latest snapshot on the Next channel get it at Opera web browser | Opera 11.50 alpha

Both versions have the option to install as a portable version built into the installer.

When you download the Installer click on options & on the second screen change the install path anywhere outside program files make sure you make a new folder to install into.
When you have changed the install path the install for option becomes available change to stand alone installation USB for the portable.

no entries get changed in the registry, If you want to uninstall it simply delete the folder.

thanks

StalkeR

This is strange... On Firefox 4.0.1 I got 3886 score,but now on Chrome on Linux....

oreo27

�� Quote: Originally Posted by StalkeR

This is strange... On Firefox 4.0.1 I got 3886 score,but now on Chrome on Linux....
Attachment 154635

What's so odd about that?

StalkeR

Give a look again at the results and you'll see what's so odd. The benchmark of the Chrome is bigger that FF.

Dave76

If you mean the benchmark score for Chrome is higher than the benchmark score for FF, just look back through this thread and you'll see that it is normal.

For this benchmark Chrome scores much higher than FF.

StalkeR

Yes,I know that Chrome has higher score than FF,but not so high...

TheReaper

Here's mine:



Is it a good, bad or average result for FF 4.0.1?

Commodore Pet

The race is on. It is neck and neck.

64 bit Nightly
32 bit Opera

stve

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Commodore Pet

Ok I tried the new Opera too. Even though it is 32 bit and I am trying to only use 64 bit software. It is the winner, this week

That's a big slowdown for Opera from 10757 4 weeks ago.

added Safari to my previous result as well as being the slowest it has problems with pasting the Peacekeeper link into the address bar I finally worked out how to do it.
Paste the result in and delete the last character & add it back with the keyboard pretty weird behaviour.

Commodore Pet

�� Quote: Originally Posted by stve

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Commodore Pet

Ok I tried the new Opera too. Even though it is 32 bit and I am trying to only use 64 bit software. It is the winner, this week

That's a big slowdown for Opera from 10757 4 weeks ago.

That is a big drop! Since then, I have changed my internet security software to BitDefender from MSE and turned on SuperAntiSpyware real time scan.

I will start digging.

Commodore Pet

I looked back at my 10757 score and it was with version 11.10 of Opera.

This latest score of 6747 was Opera 11.50. I tried disabling SuperAntiSpyware and BitDefender and the difference was minimal.

I will try 11.10 again and see.

Commodore Pet

Here is 11.11.

Eblim

I was a Firefox user until version 3.6 was released. Got tired of the heavy feeling that Firefox has. They still haven't fixed that heaviness feeling. From the results posted here on Opera, I had to give it a try. I've never used Opera because I never liked the interface, as the last time I used it, it was very poor and minimal looking. I'm disappointed with the results. As far as Safari goes, I would have been shocked to see if it even got half the score Firefox got, but I was even more shocked that it overtook Firefox.

These tests were done on my slowest computer. NOT the computer with the listed specifications.

chrysalis

here mine. main rig but with tons of background apps running.

xHazard

Here are mine

natedp

Pretty terrible IMO...

monsteranh

Is this good?

stve

Been getting inconsistent results with Opera in the rendering section, 3 weeks ago Opera scored nearly 17,910 in the rendering section ran the test a few times since then & rendering scores ranged between approx 12,000 to 15,500.
I suspected it was something to do with the operating system so I tried disabling the page file & the rendering score went up to 18,205, ran the peacekeeper test with a couple of different Opera installs, Opera 11.11 scored 17,400 in the rendering section.

All browsers at 100% view & the Windows page file set to off.

Turning off the Page file only seemed to help Opera.

dogbert2

Here are my results (Win 7 x64 ultimate w/SP1, Quad Core 2.8Ghz AMD, 8GB RAM):<br><br><br>

Guest

google chrome is better than mozilla for my computer.

A Guy

Wondering what it is about this test that Opera scores so much higher than other browsers?



A Guy

TedFire

Opera all the way!

Did this with IE 9 on the same pc and only got about 6600.

Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by A Guy

Wondering what it is about this test that Opera scores so much higher than other browsers?

A Guy

Indeed...

~Maxx~

JoshuaXiong

Britton30

IE9 in Win 8 Test

Maccman

Score of 3433 in Firefox3.
Score of 11115 Iron.

Maccman

What does this benchmark test or prove?

A Guy

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Maccman

What does this benchmark test or prove?

Not much I'd say. I don't know it to be a true test of a browsers capabilities in everyday use. I think a good test would be if it displays web pages correctly. How fast it does so. How it does with javascript, etc. For now, it is the chance for us Opera users to say we are #1! Lol. A Guy

Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Maccman

What does this benchmark test or prove?

define.com defines benchmark as...

A test or series of tests designed to compare the qualities or performance of different devices of the same type. Certain sets of computer programs are much used as benchmarks for comparing the performance of different computers.

~Maxx~

.

stve

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Maccman

What does this benchmark test or prove?

Its an Independent benchmark most of the other benchmarks originate with Chrome or Mozilla & its possible they design benchmarks to make their own browser look good compared to the competition.
Peacekeeper its a benchmarking tool for comparing browsers on your own PC & will only tell you what is fastest on your own computer.
Other people with different hardware configuration's may have different rankings to you.

Quote:

From the Peacekeeper FAQ
What is Peacekeeper?

Peacekeeper is a free online browser benchmark tool. With Peacekeeper it�s quick and easy to compare different browsers to find out which one offers the best performance on your PC.
What's with the name?
What can I use it for?

Peacekeeper will show you which browser performs best on your PC. At the end of the test your browser receives a score indicating its overall performance. It�s simple to compare scores by running Peacekeeper again in a different browser. Changing browsers to one that's faster can mean that pages with dynamic content will be more responsive.
What does it test?

Peacekeeper measures your browser's performance by testing its JavaScript functionality. JavaScript is a widely used programming language used in the creation of modern websites to provide features such as animation, navigation, forms and other common requirements. By measuring a browser�s ability to handle commonly used JavaScript functions Peacekeeper can evaluate its performance.

Peacekeeper - The Browser Benchmark from Futuremark Corporation

The Complex graphics scores are still not included in the test

Quote:

6-13-2011, 08:02 PM #4
Jarnis
YouGamers Staff
Arconaut

Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Finland
Posts: 5,540 Re: Complex Graphics (Canvas) still not included in the scores
Yes, but at this point commentary is limited as completely new revision of Peacekeeper is under development.

In other words, minor issues with existing Peacekeeper probably won't be addressed until the new revision is out.
__________________
Jarno Kokko - Senior Editor, YouGamers

MadSupra354

Testing the new Firefox 5 against IE 9.

stve

Couple of weeks ago I posted that turning of the Pageing file increased Operas scores in the rendering section.
Turns out I was wrong I updated the Sun Java plugin & the rendering scores dropped down to 12,000 .
After uninstalling the Sun Java plugin they shot back up again.Post your Internet Browser Benchmark

Benchmarked Opera 11.50 beta build 1065 against Chrome 14

Markmental

Firefox 6 alpha 2 (my baby) I bet i got a low score because I use dsl internet.

Markmental

retest with opera and ie8

Markmental

ran it on my ipod touch with the bing browser.

77273GU

IE 9 wins one.

Gornot

From me, IE10PP2 this time. Pretty darn good considering the performance on my IE9, which is about 5600 points:

ganjiry

heres mine

Subsonic

IE10 looks good. Still gotta have my Firefox extensions though!

PinkRayneDrop

This was with 4 other tabs open, plus other numerous things working in the background. Plus I was scrolling up & down the page.

Is it good?

Gornot

Um, the test clearly states that there shouldn't be any other open browser windows/tabs...

PinkRayneDrop

I know that, but as I was half way through the test I read that part & because I was in the middle of something I was not about to close the tabs to do it.


I just did it again then with no other tabs open, it came out way lower mark. There goes that theory.

Gornot

Weird xD

Dave76

That is strange, I've tried it with other tabs open and with no other tabs open and always got a slightly better score with no tabs open.

PinkRayneDrop

I know right? It's a strange thing but I always do seem to go faster with more open

Commodore Pet

I haven't posted updates in a while. Nightly is 64 bit all others 32 bit. Opera 12 pre-alpha build 1033.

TheReaper

Here's an update of my earlier results.

stve

�� Quote: Originally Posted by PinkRayneDrop

I know right? It's a strange thing but I always do seem to go faster with more open

Coincidence you can repeat the test & get a different score nothing to do with tabs its more to do with system resources.
On a fast PC with 20 tabs open its no problem unless one of those tabs is poorly scripted or is incompatible with your browser.
Even on a fast PC open 100+ tabs & the Peacekeeper scores will drop.

Quote:

What factors affect the score?

Other than the browser itself, the most significant factor affecting the score is the type of CPU in your PC. After that, the power of your graphics card affects the result somewhat, though mostly in situations where the card is very slow, or no drivers have been installed for it. Running other applications that consume system resources at the same time as the benchmark is running will naturally affect the score. The size of the viewable browser area also affects the score, so the screen resolution you use, the size of the browser window and whether the window is minimized affect the score as well. Beyond these, other factors are usually not significant. Your internet connection speed and network latency do not influence the score in any way.

I think the Peacekeeper FAQ used to mention not having tabs in the past but use your commonsense.

stve

Opera scored over 17,000 after I increased my overclock on my i7 920 CPU from 4 Ghz to 4.252 GHZ

A Guy

�� Quote: Originally Posted by stve

Opera scored over 17,000 after I increased my overclock on my i7 920 CPU from 4 Ghz to 4.252 GHZ

Wow

Mine:





A Guy

kurahk7

�� Quote: Originally Posted by stve

Opera scored over 17,000 after I increased my overclock on my i7 920 CPU from 4 Ghz to 4.252 GHZ

Opera 12 lets you have a split screen inside Opera?

A Guy

�� Quote: Originally Posted by kurahk7

�� Quote: Originally Posted by stve

Opera scored over 17,000 after I increased my overclock on my i7 920 CPU from 4 Ghz to 4.252 GHZ

Opera 12 lets you have a split screen inside Opera?

Looks like 2 instances side by side

A Guy

stve

Its Opera's Multiple document interface its not new Opera has always had it. Tabbed browsing came later.
Just right click a tab >arrange & tile . To restore tabbed browsing right click a tab on the tab bar >arrange maximize all.
The second picture shows a page open in the panel as well & after I've grabbed the tab bar & pulled down to show the thumbnails.

stve

Opera 12 pre alpha compared to other browsers.

Dave76

The most ridiculous article on browsers I have seen.

Thought you might get a laugh out of it

BTW, I don't use it anymore

A Guy

Dave, you need to read the forum more The story was posted and discussed. Then the fact it was all a hoax was posted as well

A Guy

Dave76

Link


As per your suggestion, posting from Opera, so far it's good.

A Guy

Internet Explorer Users are More Stupid Than Others: Study

Yeah, I've tried all the browsers, keep FF on my system, but use Opera 99% of the time. A Guy

Belgarionbg

FF forever

Maxxwire

�� Quote: Originally Posted by A Guy

Yeah, I've tried all the browsers, keep FF on my system, but use Opera 99% of the time. A Guy

After enduring the routine crashes of IE5 I looked around to check out my potential browser options and found Firefox 2.14 which I liked, but Opera 9.8 was just what I was looking for. In download bandwidth comparisons using Bandwidth Meter Pro Opera proved to be twice as fast as Firefox at downloading 6 sets of photographs that I have hosted on the internet.

~Maxx~

imeem

FF is still last.

Dave76

Haven't ran this for a while.

'Safari Unknown' is Maxthon 3.1.5.600

stonebear

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Dave76

Haven't ran this for a while.

Safari Unknown is Maxthon 3.1.5.600

Attachment 170721

Why have you got such a high score for Chrome compared to mine, is the dev version that much faster? I might try it, any bugs?








Last time I tried Chrome there was no minimum font setting, now there is I am switching from Firefox.

imeem

�� Quote: Originally Posted by stonebear

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Dave76

Haven't ran this for a while.

Safari Unknown is Maxthon 3.1.5.600

Attachment 170721

Why have you got such a high score for Chrome compared to mine, is the dev version that much faster? I might try it, any bugs?








Last time I tried Chrome there was no minimum font setting, now there is I am switching from Firefox.

maybe because he overclocked his cpu and/or he ran the benchmark minimized?

stonebear

�� Quote: Originally Posted by imeem

maybe because he overclocked his cpu and/or he ran the benchmark minimized?

I didn't realise the CPU would affect the benchmark score so much but I suppose it would.

Anyway, I am just glad I found this thread or I wouldn't have switched to Chrome today, I am loving it.

Dave76

�� Quote: Originally Posted by stonebear

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Dave76

Haven't ran this for a while.

Safari Unknown is Maxthon 3.1.5.600

Why have you got such a high score for Chrome compared to mine, is the dev version that much faster? I might try it, any bugs?



Last time I tried Chrome there was no minimum font setting, now there is I am switching from Firefox.

Browsers use your hardware (GPU is an option) for acceleration, so it also depends on your system.
My CPU is overclocked but, EIST is enabled so when this test ran it was running at a mere 1.440GHz.

BTW, I ran the test with my browser at my usual size, ~95% of the screen, not minimized.

I've been using the Chrome dev channel version for over two years. Only had one issue and was back to dev channel in a couple of days. It's been great, with only the one issue.

This benchmark is for you to compare how different browsers run on your system, or maybe someone with a near identical system.

stonebear

I just found your score shockingly high, lol.

I agree the main use is to compare browsers on your own system. FF actually feels slower to me and the benchmark shows that.

I tried the test again with the CPU at different speeds and the difference in the score was negligible if there was any difference at all.

Dave76

If you look through the thread you will see higher scores than mine

stve

�� Quote: Originally Posted by Dave76

If you look through the thread you will see higher scores than mine

My CPU is an Intel i920 overclocked to 4.25 Ghz the latest generation of Intel CPU's run approximately 17% faster than mine & can be overclocked to 5 Ghz.

I captured the Opera browser running Peacekeeper to video , recording video is a performance hit, recording full screen you lose around 2,000 points so I recorded a smaller window unfortunately Opera was not centered properly & the left hand edge is lost.
Opera12 build1047 Peacekeeper - YouTube
The video is 5 minutes long , the beginning shows me installing Opera as a Portable version using the options.

stve

Opera 12 is build 1065 snapshot

Peacekeeper - free universal browser test from Futuremark