Browser speeds

[Georgelemmons]

Firefox and Chrome have been competing for speed for a while. Chrome just recently came out of its initial beta stage, and Mozilla just released a new beta that is supposed to be "up to 40 times as fast". I decided to investigate. Using the SunSpider benchmark, with no other windows or tabs open and no programs running, this is what I got:

 

[hide=Results][/hide]

 

*Please note that this is merely a Javascript speed test, and is not for regular html browsing (for those who don't know what SunSpider does)*

 

Chrome and Firefox are close, but Chrome clearly wins overall. (and :lol: :lol: :lol: at IE7)

 

 

 

Yes, I do love Chrome. It currently has a spell check feature, and an extension API is soon-to-be released (to the people who complained about the lack of these things)

 

 

 

 

 

How important is speed to you? (Discuss)

[Laura]

Very, I'm impatient. Chrome doesn't fair to well with Java though (and spell check!). :? I usually use both, one for each monitor for various tasks.

[BlueLancer]

After using Opera and going back/forward on web pages by clicking & holding mouse buttons, and having every page cached ready... It's really hard to go to a sluggish browser like IE. I got 10mbps down, and Opera pretty much opens every page like this topic, instantly.

 

 

 

I'll try Chrome though, those figures don't lie... Would be interesting to have even *more* speed.

[Georgelemmons]

After using Opera and going back/forward on web pages by clicking & holding mouse buttons, and having every page cached ready... It's really hard to go to a sluggish browser like IE. I got 10mbps down, and Opera pretty much opens every page like this topic, instantly.

 

 

 

I'll try Chrome though, those figures don't lie... Would be interesting to have even *more* speed.

 

 

 

I haven't benched Opera yet... *runs to download*

 

 

 

EDIT: uploaded new bench stats (yes, I forgot what font I used). Opera isn't the best for java, but it's probably faster for normal browsing because of all the caching it does, like you said.

[D. V. Devnull]

Got a question... Was the defaults for http requesting in FireFox used? :-s

 

 

 

I've been getting rather fast loads with the optimized settings I'm using, which allow me to load like 6 pages at once. If you want the numbers to test with, feel free to ask. I'd love to hear (as well as would probably everyone else) what you get back in results from that testing utility, while using the optimized http request settings. :

 

 

 

~D. V. "I blow my own socks off with this speed!" Devnull

[Georgelemmons]

Got a question... Was the defaults for http requesting in FireFox used? :-s

 

 

 

I've been getting rather fast loads with the optimized settings I'm using, which allow me to load like 6 pages at once. If you want the numbers to test with, feel free to ask. I'd love to hear (as well as would probably everyone else) what you get back in results from that testing utility, while using the optimized http request settings. :

 

 

 

~D. V. "I blow my own socks off with this speed!" Devnull

 

I'd been using the defaults for the beta. If you could give me the numbers (and tell me what to do with them :oops: ), that would be awsome. (I don't know my way around Firefox that well)

[eggzs]

I'll stick with FF because of its customizability.

[InkofDeath]

I'll stick with FF because of its customizability.

 

Don't really think anyone was trying to convince anyone to switch religi...browsers*.

 

 

 

But yea, Chrome is faster, but after using it for several months, I've come back to FF just because of the spellcheck and the customization available. The FF beta update thing has given us the default features we've wanted, and the features that in my mind put it ahead of Chrome & Opera even further.

 

 

 

No idea how IE7 has remained so slow and so unappealing through-out the years, thought Microsoft could learn, but guess not.

[D. V. Devnull]

Got a question... Was the defaults for http requesting in FireFox used? :-s

 

 

 

I've been getting rather fast loads with the optimized settings I'm using, which allow me to load like 6 pages at once. If you want the numbers to test with, feel free to ask. I'd love to hear (as well as would probably everyone else) what you get back in results from that testing utility, while using the optimized http request settings. :

 

 

 

~D. V. "I blow my own socks off with this speed!" Devnull

I'd been using the defaults for the beta. If you could give me the numbers (and tell me what to do with them :oops: ), that would be awsome. (I don't know my way around Firefox that well)

Before doing this, you may wish to back up your FireFox profile, just in case you get totally lost. After you're done doing that, then in your "about:config" (no quotes) ... search for "http.max" (again, no quotes) ... and use (ignoring the green dots I used for formatting) the following settings...

 

network.http.max-connections ................................. 48

 

network.http.max-connections-per-server .................. 12

 

network.http.max-persistent-connections-per-server ... 8

BTW, I'll admit that there is a small chance you could bump into some built-in maximum in Windows that won't let these settings work to their full potential... That is, if what I heard about some kind of TCP/IP connection limit is true... What I do know is that these settings work better than the defaults, so I've stuck with them, and been happy. :

 

 

 

I wish you well with the usage of them, and I look forward to hearing back on what the tests have to say. :thumbsup:

 

 

 

~D. V. "I'm browsing like lightning here!" Devnull

[Georgelemmons]

The test with optimized settings was just over 50ms faster overall. The settings most likely speed up web browsing, but NOT java, which is what this test is (my theory, at least).

 

 

 

Link to the benchmarks - http://www2.webkit.org/perf/sunspider-0 ... 9,83%5D%7D

 

 

 

Here's a link to the chrome results- http://www2.webkit.org/perf/sunspider-0 ... 7,67%5D%7D

 

 

 

Click on one of the links, and paste the other link into the box that says compare (this will give you the difference, and how many times greater/lesser the second performed than the first) To copy, you either need to open the link in a new tab or click quote to get the whole (veery long) url.

[Arixe]

 

Before doing this, you may wish to back up your FireFox profile, just in case you get totally lost. After you're done doing that, then in your "about:config" (no quotes) ... search for "http.max" (again, no quotes) ... and use (ignoring the green dots I used for formatting) the following settings...

 

network.http.max-connections ................................. 48

 

network.http.max-connections-per-server .................. 12

 

network.http.max-persistent-connections-per-server ... 8

BTW, I'll admit that there is a small chance you could bump into some built-in maximum in Windows that won't let these settings work to their full potential... That is, if what I heard about some kind of TCP/IP connection limit is true... What I do know is that these settings work better than the defaults, so I've stuck with them, and been happy. :

 

 

 

I wish you well with the usage of them, and I look forward to hearing back on what the tests have to say. :thumbsup:

 

 

 

~D. V. "I'm browsing like lightning here!" Devnull

 

 

 

I made those changes and my browser is a LOT faster than it was before. Everything loads noticeably faster. Thanks \

[Georgelemmons]

other about:config things you can use to add speed:

 

 

 

network.http.pipelining false to true

 

 

 

network.http.proxy.pipelining false to true

 

 

 

network.http.pipelining.maxrequests 30 to 8

 

 

 

network.http.pipelining.ssl false to true

 

 

 

network.http.proxy.pipelining false to true

 

 

 

The bold is what you change the value to.

 

 

 

 

 

Random Firefox easter eggs - about:mozilla

 

- about:robots

 

:thumbsup:

[D. V. Devnull]

Georgelemmons, thank you anyway for testing. I appreciate it. :thumbsup:

 

 

 

 

 

As for this...

 

other about:config things you can use to add speed:

 

 

 

network.http.pipelining false to true

 

 

 

network.http.proxy.pipelining false to true

 

 

 

network.http.pipelining.maxrequests 30 to 8

 

 

 

network.http.pipelining.ssl false to true

 

 

 

network.http.proxy.pipelining false to true

 

 

 

The bold is what you change the value to.

I tried monkeying with pipelining... It causes nothing but trouble with some of what I do... In example, http://www.xgenstudios.com/play/stickarena, XGenStudios.com's "Stick Arena: Ballistick"... Their flash applet apparently doesn't like out-of-sync packets. :(

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<<<Quote Snip>>>

 

 

 

I made those changes and my browser is a LOT faster than it was before. Everything loads noticeably faster. Thanks \

You're very welcome. I am very glad that I could make your browsing much more happy. :

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~D. V. "Life has many interesting things... Where you find them, you never know." Devnull

[Sbrideau]

Why use Opera 6.2 instead of 9.62? That makes some of your results flawed, as I use both Opera and Firefox at the same time often, and Opera is faster than Firefox, and not just when pressing the back button.

[thrash-boy]

i lol'd at ie :lol:

 

chrome may be a bit faster but ill still be recommending firefox. we don't want Google to take over the entire internet do we.

[Sbrideau]

i lol'd at ie :lol:

 

chrome may be a bit faster but ill still be recommending firefox. we don't want Google to take over the entire internet do we.

 

 

 

They already pretty much have and are still progressing.

[Georgelemmons]

Why use Opera 6.2 instead of 9.62? That makes some of your results flawed, as I use both Opera and Firefox at the same time often, and Opera is faster than Firefox, and not just when pressing the back button.

 

 

 

I used 9.62.. :|

Georgelemmons, thank you anyway for testing. I appreciate it. :thumbsup:

 

 

 

 

 

As for this...

 

other about:config things you can use to add speed:

 

 

 

network.http.pipelining false to true

 

 

 

network.http.proxy.pipelining false to true

 

 

 

network.http.pipelining.maxrequests 30 to 8

 

 

 

network.http.pipelining.ssl false to true

 

 

 

network.http.proxy.pipelining false to true

 

 

 

The bold is what you change the value to.

I tried monkeying with pipelining... It causes nothing but trouble with some of what I do... In example, http://www.xgenstudios.com/play/stickarena, XGenStudios.com's "Stick Arena: Ballistick"... Their flash applet apparently doesn't like out-of-sync packets. :(

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<<<Quote Snip>>>

 

 

 

I made those changes and my browser is a LOT faster than it was before. Everything loads noticeably faster. Thanks \

You're very welcome. I am very glad that I could make your browsing much more happy. :

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

~D. V. "Life has many interesting things... Where you find them, you never know." Devnull

 

 

 

:shock: Noes! Now I have to change it back -.-

 

 

 

It really helped, but stick arena overrides speed :)

 

 

 

Thanks for the help.

[D. V. Devnull]

As for this...

 

other about:config things you can use to add speed:

 

 

 

network.http.pipelining false to true

 

 

 

network.http.proxy.pipelining false to true

 

 

 

network.http.pipelining.maxrequests 30 to 8

 

 

 

network.http.pipelining.ssl false to true

 

 

 

network.http.proxy.pipelining false to true

 

 

 

The bold is what you change the value to.

I tried monkeying with pipelining... It causes nothing but trouble with some of what I do... In example, http://www.xgenstudios.com/play/stickarena, XGenStudios.com's "Stick Arena: Ballistick"... Their flash applet apparently doesn't like out-of-sync packets. :(

:shock: Noes! Now I have to change it back -.-

 

 

 

It really helped, but stick arena overrides speed :)

 

 

 

Thanks for the help.

You're welcome. Keep in mind, though, that you can keep the other settings in place (the ones about maximum number of connections at one time) that I mentioned. They will have no negative impact, unlike the pipelining. (Proof is in the fact that I've got them in effect as I type this nifty post.) In fact, the ones about the non-pipelined multiple connections will allow Stick Arena's maps to load faster. This extends to RuneScape also, due to the nature of the content. :)

 

 

 

~D. V. "Some things are still good, even if others don't work so well." Devnull

[Dracion1]

And a non windows version of chrome is...where exactly?

[OldJoe]

And a non windows version of chrome is...where exactly?

 

 

 

OS X and Linux versions are under development.

[Laura]

Did you test Chrome now that it's out of Beta? They say it's 1.4-1.5X as fast as before.

[Georgelemmons]

Did you test Chrome now that it's out of Beta? They say it's 1.4-1.5X as fast as before.

 

 

 

Yes, it's the most current version of Chrome (1.0.154.36)

 

 

 

And a non windows version of chrome is...where exactly?

 

 

 

They've been under development for a while, but it should speed up now that Chrome for Windows is out of the beta stage.

[BlueLancer]

I downloaded the Chrome browser today, after using Opera and Mozilla browsers for years.. I can easily say without shame it has better performance and smoother browsing.

 

 

 

Fanboyism is bad for advancement.. Sure, I like the idea of FF/Opera in general, but I think I'll be using Chrome for a long time until something better comes out.

 

 

 

Don't know about you guys, but at least to me, facts and experience are what matter. Chrome instantly proved to be superior to other browsers I used in the past. It also renders heavy pages extremely quick.

 

 

 

There's really no reason for not using it, the interface is ridiculously easy to understand, you can even import all settings from previous browsers. It's the Bugatti Veyron, the purple diamond, the Cohiba cigar of current browsers. In other words it's superior to anything else on the market... In all it's modesty and light size.

[InkofDeath]

There's really no reason for not using it, the interface is ridiculously easy to understand, In other words it's superior to anything else on the market... In all it's modesty and light size.

 

Don't mean to nag or start an argument here but you've given no reasons except vague, general descriptions which could be applied to any decent browser like FF/Opera or Chrome. Reasons you listed were also quite personal with the 'ridiculously easy interface', which can be said for any browser, and especially those that let you change or mess around with the skins.

 

 

 

Don't know about you guys, but at least to me, facts and experience are what matter. Chrome instantly proved to be superior to other browsers I used in the past. It also renders heavy pages extremely quick.

 

What facts? The ones posted in this topic are so close that they'll hardly ever be subjected or thought about to the normal regular user.

 

 

 

The only things I found useful in Chrome was better support for my CPU, as well as having a 'favourite site' thing(Same thing in Opera) when you make a new tab, and the list of bookmarks/latest history as well. Those were what were useful compared to other browsers, but now with Firefox 3.1 almost coming out of Beta FF will be back on top with features for sure.

 

 

 

But yea, I was just getting bugged by how you stated reasons but had none to begin with. Or do you have any? Not trying to be mean or a smart idiot about it but it's just bothersome.

[Dracion1]

And a non windows version of chrome is...where exactly?

 

 

 

They've been under development for a while, but it should speed up now that Chrome for Windows is out of the beta stage.

 

 

 

The same has been said for many other pieces of software. It's just one of the reasons I'd rather stick with Firefox, if not for the customisability and the fact I don't need to install google's annoying update software.