Thursday, March 12th 2009

Futuremark Launches Peacekeeper Web Browser Benchmark

Futuremark Corporation today unveiled Peacekeeper, a free online benchmarking tool for measuring and comparing the performance of common internet browsers. Competition between browsers has never been as hotly contested, nor have internet users had as many choices as they do now. The big five: Internet Explorer, Firefox, Safari, Chrome and Opera, see regular releases of new and innovative features and each camp’s fans keep many a forum and blog busy. So far, words have been the only shots fired in the long-running browser wars. Now, with Peacekeeper web users finally have an easy to use, impartial tool for measuring and comparing the performance of different web browsers. Peacekeeper is a new online benchmark from Futuremark that realistically simulates the load placed on the browser by common JavaScript functions as used by popular, modern websites. For users who prioritize speed and performance, Peacekeeper helps answer the question of which browser is best for them.

Jukka Mäkinen, Head of PC Products and Services at Futuremark, said, "People have more choice now in how they experience the internet than ever before. But they may not realize that performance between browsers can vary dramatically, especially on lower-end PCs. With Peacekeeper, it’s simple to compare different browsers and see which one offers the best performance on your PC."

Many websites, such as social networks, video sharing communities and webmail services, place a heavy load on the web browser. For people who use these sites a lot, changing browsers to one that performs faster can make visiting those sites more fun, with less waiting for pages to load and display correctly. Peacekeeper makes that choice easier than ever.

Web users can run Peacekeeper now by visiting http://www.futuremark.com/peacekeeperSource: Futuremark
Add your own comment

86 Comments on Futuremark Launches Peacekeeper Web Browser Benchmark

#1
Dark_Webster


This using Vista and Firefox 3.0.7 :eek:.
Posted on Reply
#2
FilipM
Looks like no-one broke the 700 mark with a Mozilla

Posted on Reply
#4
FilipM
Is there a 3.1 beta already? 3.0.7 is the best ive used so far, havent crahsed even once
Posted on Reply
#5
DrPepper
The Doctor is in the house
CDdude55 said:
For people doing heavy multiple things on each browser maybe. Plus it takes stress off the one core to to allow the browser to run at a fast pace.
Yeah but then just stick it on the 2nd or 4th core.
Posted on Reply
#6
niko084
erocker said:
Who cares?! It's a free gimmiky benchmark. Why so serious?
Indeed... Lets run software to benchmark how fast software is.... WoW...

Safari, fast but doesn't work with a LOT of stuff...
Firefox, quick but has it's own annoyances..
IE, Internet Exploiter, but works with about everything..

The list goes on and on and on..
Posted on Reply
#7
CheetoLover


safari benches best but in a few tests i could SEE that it wasnt as smooth as other browsers
Posted on Reply
#8
Bl4ck
niko084 said:
Indeed... Lets run software to benchmark how fast software is.... WoW...

Safari, fast but doesn't work with a LOT of stuff...
Firefox, quick but has it's own annoyances..
IE, Internet Exploiter, but works with about everything..

The list goes on and on and on..
From my perspective :

Safari 3 & 4 speedy but has problems with some websites

Firefox 1,2,3, i never had any problems with this browser.

Opera ,had many crashes with Flash

Internet Explorer 6,7 , worst POS ever made , one window crashes every other module in browser, doesn't work good with CSS ,doesn't support CSS, isn't compatible with web standards, stupid activeX. (version 8 Beta isn't any better then the 6,7 ver.)
Posted on Reply
#9
CheetoLover
opera never crashes on me and i use the pre beta 10 version and watch flash videos and play flash games alot..........
Posted on Reply
#10
Haytch
This is another of many benchmarks.

Like all benchmarks, it depends on your hardware, software, temperatures, clocks, yourself and about 1 million other variables.

We can shrug this off because we are thick, or we can throw it into the collection of benchmarking tools and take it into consideration and nothing more, either option and the unmentioned 3rd is upto the individual, his/her past experiences and knowledge base.

When i get home, ill have to download it and look up some release notes, maybe try to find some paperwork on the engine and what it specifically is checking for.

Beta product benchmarks should be ignored from official results and only used as an expectation. Safari has always been more stable and faster for me, but it lacks what i need. I must be one of the rare lucky ones that did his research into the Ie browser, made some minor modifications, constantly edits the hosts file and has never ever had a single crash or been unable to do anything like watch a movie or play a shitty flash game. Obviously i use the browser several times per day etc etc. As for its speed, well, everything can always be faster, but the difference is too minimal to risk using a less secure/stable/able browser.

Multicore utilizing browsers are a MUST. Im sure that it will only be a matter of time before streamprocessing gets involved and throws these futuremark scores out the window.
Posted on Reply
#11
CheetoLover
need a browser to run on OpenCL(cuda/stream) hehe
Posted on Reply
#12
Duffman
It's an interesting test for browsers on your own machine. Thanks to this thread, I've downloaded just about all of them lol.

Posted on Reply
#13
LAN_deRf_HA
965 Points with today's firefox minefield release.
Posted on Reply
#14
CheetoLover
niko084 said:
Indeed... Lets run software to benchmark how fast software is.... WoW...

Safari, fast but doesn't work with a LOT of stuff...
Firefox, quick but has it's own annoyances..
IE, Internet Exploiter, but works with about everything..

The list goes on and on and on..
what dosnt work on safari?

i havent found any pages it wont work with yet........and I have looked.......
Posted on Reply
#15
Haytch
CheetoLover said:
what dosnt work on safari?

i havent found any pages it wont work with yet........and I have looked.......
Ummm, for starters, this futuremark peacemaker benchmark doest run on the new Safari, UNLESS you download Java. Safari IS able to run anything and everything, if you make it do so, but that goes the same with all browsers, just need to be a smart cookie for the less competant browsers.

So when i ran my benchmarks, Safari FAILED in accordance to my means of standard benchmarking and futuremarks peacemaker.

As a standard browser, without plugins or updates or addons, browsers should run the benchmark.
Posted on Reply
#16
niko084
CheetoLover said:
what dosnt work on safari?

i havent found any pages it wont work with yet........and I have looked.......
Go ask a mac tech...... Safari has the most problems accessing webpages and properly displaying them, even with the proper plugins.

Firefox, try Acua's webpage, along others, I just remember that one well..

IE... Well it just sucks

There is a reason I have Firefox and Opera on my computers.
Posted on Reply
#17
CheetoLover
Haytch said:
Ummm, for starters, this futuremark peacemaker benchmark doest run on the new Safari, UNLESS you download Java. Safari IS able to run anything and everything, if you make it do so, but that goes the same with all browsers, just need to be a smart cookie for the less competant browsers.

So when i ran my benchmarks, Safari FAILED in accordance to my means of standard benchmarking and futuremarks peacemaker.

As a standard browser, without plugins or updates or addons, browsers should run the benchmark.
in reality to use java u need to download java runtime enviroment installer, without it your system cant run anything java.

flash also requiers you install flashplayer.


so your complaint about having to download them is........silly.

for those intrested heres a link to the latist java build(been running it for months)
http://download.java.net/jdk7/binaries/

and if you cant get some browsers to play flash stuff the trick to get that working is easy

go to C:\Windows\SysWOW64\Macromed\Flash run FlashUtil10b.exe and NPSWF32_FlashUtil.exe

that should do the trick for you its worked for everybody else i know when safari,chrome,opera,ff and even IE stoped/wouldnt work with flash :)
Posted on Reply
#18
CheetoLover
niko084 said:
Go ask a mac tech...... Safari has the most problems accessing webpages and properly displaying them, even with the proper plugins.

Firefox, try Acua's webpage, along others, I just remember that one well..

IE... Well it just sucks

There is a reason I have Firefox and Opera on my computers.
when was the last time you tryed safari for windows?

my experiance is that 3 and 4 havent given me any problems other then the activeX requiered sites, and those are locked to IE if u dont want to hack other browers to make them less secure by enabling activeX in them.
Posted on Reply
#19
kiriakost
Futuremark find a new way , to cause new anxiety about upgrading to users .
And also found a new way to push users , to update the Java engine ...
If i was Java corp .. i would pay good money just for that, as advertising .

The funny part .... at this financially hard moments ...
nothing in the world can do that . "cause new anxiety about upgrading"
:laugh:


I run both IE and Firefox ..
Its good to see Firefox doing three times faster the job .

The highest possible score does not bother me , i do not use the Internet explorers for gaming .. do you ? :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :nutkick:
Posted on Reply
#20
Apocolypse007
went from 1362 to 1405 by upgrading chrome to 2.0. not a huge increase but I'll take what I can get.

Chrome just looks so much better and in my opinion has a better layout than Safari. I've use both and safari just has too much grey for me. Also chrome is now starting to support plugins so there really is no downside to it for me.
Posted on Reply
#21
theeldest
This is just sad. I did this at work and have the lowest score for this thread so far.

IE 6
Intel Pentium D 3.4GHz
2GB memory
Win XP SP2

Scored a 124!

OMG!
Posted on Reply
#22
z1tu
oh lol install firefox fast :D
Posted on Reply
#23
theeldest
Firefox gives me a 311, but doesn't work with much of the stuff I need here.
Posted on Reply
#24
z1tu
man that pc needs a format badly then
Posted on Reply
#25
Imhoteps
Sorry about no-screens (already deleted, lazy to run that test again).
My younger bro`s system: single core Celeron 2,8 GHz, GT 8600, RAM 2 Gb (puter`s old and weak, but he`s happy, pls don`t laugh).
===========================
XP Pro SP3/32:

Safari 4 beta - 549
Chrome 2.0.169 - 392
Opera 9.64 - 263
FF 3.0.7 - 148
IE7 - 75

=====================

Same system, OS - W7/32 b7048:

Safari 4 - 617
Chrome 1.0 - 455 (couldn`t install 2.0.169, dunno why)
Safari 3 - 379
Opera 9.64 - 272
FF 3.0.7 - 155
IE 8 beta - 142.

Final thoughts: any of IE is failure. FF`s disapointing me after yesterday. Safari 4 is quick, but crashed alot on W7 (well, it`s beta as well as W7). Chrome looks pretty quick and handy for now.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment