Discussion in 'News' started by malware, Mar 12, 2009.
Don't run F@H while doing this! It makes you fail!
Run it without it and see how much it went up.
Firefox 3.0.7 - 517
Safari 4 Beta - 1543
You can actually see the difference between the two.
Now how do I OC FireFox? (558 points)
Those rendering test ran like poo Now that there is a benchmark, hope someone codes firefox faaaast, only beating IE is kinda lame. Come on fox, you can run faster
779 with 5 tabs open on Firefox 3.0.7
1666 - safari 4
minefield 3.2a1 64bit = 432p
ff 3.0.7 = crashed
There is processorlimit anyway, and uses only 1 core
I get 602 in Firefox. I tried Safari but it's not faster than Firefox and the UI is stupid. I also have a mutual dislike of anything apple.
Agreed, but the Ipod is not that bad.
Multi-threaded browsers are kind of pointless anyway
1362 On chrome with Core 2 6420 @ 3200mhz
Here is my score
I never though safarai was that fast. I usually use firefox, like it a lot.
Not too bad for Internet Explorer 8(I guess)
why so serious indeed.
does anyone really have a speed (fps ) issue when browsing the net, that's not a internet speed limitation?
chrome is doing pretty good too
safari is pretty cool
Chrome 2.0 dev channel release, score: 2268
System: i7-920 CPU, 6GB of RAM, EVGA X58 motherboard.
I don't think the Futuremark folks are updating their database. Notice how in the bottom left corner it shows someone's "Fastest system" as Safari 4.0 with score of 2264.
Yet another Futuremark gimmick: "this is the fastest processor and graphics card, GET IT". Like having GeForce GTX 280 has anything to do with browser performance.
It'll be weird if someone was able to get a web browser to handle page rendering through the use of GPGPUs. At least once your connection has downloaded the content, it'll display really quick. LOL.
hmm ? i've got 580ish with 3.0.7 :F
Opera 10 Alpha scores above 1000 around 1060 ,
based on 6gb of ram, Vista x64 , and Wolfdale @ stock 3167Mhz (E8500) , i guess its all about the "http pipelining " enabled within Firefox , and the java engine within the browser.
hmm i won't agree , check the stats for Chrome (best use of multi core cpu's) and then Safari , and check again Opera 9 series on multi core cpus, you will see that Opera for example scores lower with multi core cpus then with 1 core ;F
People tend to forget that Web browser today runs applications based on Java,Flash, ect. Check the Quake Live for example.
sry for post after post ;/
Boy its really pissing me off that some people can load a web page a few milliseconds faster than me.
I have a fairly low-end system and was running a defrag lol. Might do it again, probably not a good idea to run stuff like that during a benchmark I also have a measly 2GB RAM lol
AMD 7750BE, 2GB RAM, Gigabyte GA-MA770-UD3 i scored 608 with 2 tabs and then ran it again with 3 and scored 609 )
I still can't see why a browser would need more than one core. Its supposed to be lightweight and efficient.
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.
Separate names with a comma.