Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Chrome Tops Browser Speed Tests

Posted by kdawson on from the there-fixed-that-for-ya dept.

ThinSkin writes "So many Web browsers, so little time. The folks at ExtremeTech have assembled the ultimate browser test to determine which Web browser is king. From speed tests to rendering tests, different browsers traded off wins, but Google Chrome came out on top."

19 of 371 comments (clear)

  1. Google Chrome by freakmn · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Guess I must be the only one here using Chrome. No other comments yet.

    But seriously, the speed difference is noticeable. When I'm on my mac, I miss using it. Plugins are hard to come by, but other than that, it's great. Quick as Firefox used to be.

    --
    warning: This post is likely to contain gobs of dripping sarcasm. Consume at your own risk.
    1. Re:Google Chrome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      What is this Facebook you speak of?

    2. Re:Google Chrome by miffo.swe · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Guess I must be the only one here using Chrome."

      Thats because its not released for Linux yet!

      --
      HTTP/1.1 400
    3. Re:Google Chrome by srussia · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Guess I must be the only one here using Chrome."

      Thats because its not released for Linux yet!

      Busted!

      --
      Set your phasers on "funky"!
    4. Re:Google Chrome by beelsebob · · Score: 5, Informative

      The speed advantage of the nightly web kits is caused not by the fact that they're newer than chrome's rendering engine, but by the fact that they don't use Google's V8 javascript engine. Instead, they use the much faster (and also more correct) SquirrelFish Extreme engine.

    5. Re:Google Chrome by secmartin · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well you can use it anyway... There is a crossover version for both Mac and Linux, you can build your own version for both Mac and Linux, and there's a recent Mac build here. I'm sure there are lots of other builds available as well.

    6. Re:Google Chrome by drsmithy · · Score: 5, Funny

      Instead, they use the much faster (and also more correct) SquirrelFish Extreme engine.

      That sounds like some sort of obscene initiation rite...

    7. Re:Google Chrome by Sebilrazen · · Score: 5, Funny

      ...and myspace is like a good whiskey bar, it's where to go when you're looking for quality 12-year-olds.

      --
      "There are no facts, only interpretations." --Friedrich Nietzsche.
  2. Not a suprise to anyone who has tried Chrome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But speed isn't everything. The moment Chrome lets me use the 17 extensions I have to firefox and is still the fastest, I applaud. Currently I couldn't even consider having to lose all the extensions that help web development and surfing...

    This thing should be clear to everyone by now.

    Use Chrome if you want speed, Firefox if you want extensions, IE if you just want to annoy the hell out of all us Firefox fanboys, Opera if you want a ready package of speed and features, etc...

    1. Re:Not a suprise to anyone who has tried Chrome by isBandGeek() · · Score: 5, Funny

      And Safari's for people that don't want extensions or features. Right?

  3. Interesting, but nothing really new by Bearhouse · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Summary: IE is crap, Safari has some issues, Opera most compatible with Acid 3, Firefox is OK and Chrome is fast but not finished.

    So, a stripped-down browser is fast. Wow.

    In the real world, I'll be sticking with Firefox, with Ad blockers, Greasemnkey etc.

    1. Re:Interesting, but nothing really new by Bearhouse · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You are a leech on the rest of society

      Because I use ad-blockers? How about people who use TIVO? I have no problem paying for stuff, and contribute to free projects, donate to Wikipedia etc. Just because I sometimes want a less-intrusive browsing experience does not make me a leech. And who gives a shit about karma anyway?

    2. Re:Interesting, but nothing really new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In order to receive an ad, I have to actually request the ad (part of how HTTP works). Sure, my browser's default behavior is to request all images/flash/etc, but I can easily instruct it not to.

    3. Re:Interesting, but nothing really new by Atti+K. · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Using ad-blocker is simply stealing. And yes I do call it stealing because you are incurring a cost on the content provider without compensating them. Its no different from stealing at a store with poor security.

      So, is using links/lynx/w3m stealing too? Is turning off images in Firefox and not installing flash stealing too?

      --
      .sig: No such file or directory
  4. Re:Dosen't change the fact that by MrEricSir · · Score: 5, Funny

    Nonsense. I'm using Firefox.

    --
    There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
  5. Wrong use case by bazald · · Score: 5, Interesting

    ...at least for me. I don't care about optimizations that allow a page to be loaded and rendered 0.1 seconds faster. The lower bound on how fast a page loads is rarely imposed by the browser anyway.

    I often like to use the "Open All in Tabs" feature of Firefox, in which an arbitrarily high number of bookmarks in a folder are opened and loaded simultaneously. I can open and load 15 sites (with adblocking) in under 3 seconds. Chrome seemed to take a second to open just one tab, let alone 15.

    I'm not saying I'm the normal user, but test more than the scripting engine and the rendering system before saying a browser "tops speed tests".

    --
    Insert self-referential sig here.
  6. I'll give up a few milliseconds. by Beelzebud · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'll give up a few milliseconds for Firefox's features...

  7. Why IE7 and not IE8? by Numen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Chrome is the current browser beta from Google, and IE8 is the current browser beta from MS... so why compare Chrome in the same group as IE7?

  8. How come the only beta browser tested was Chrome? by rklrkl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's quite dubious that the only beta browser tested was Chrome, especially when most of the others have publicly available beta versions available for testing. Yes, I understand that the *only* release of Chrome is a beta, but then either Chrome should be disqualified from testing since it's not a final release or other browsers' beta releases should be allowed into the test (why not include both a final and beta release of those in that case, so we can see if there are improvements in the beta?).

    I'd also like to see tests on non-Windows platforms as well, although Chrome scores as badly as IE here - it's *only* available on Windows at the moment and there's been a vague promise of ports to Mac and Linux, but these seem to be predictably dragging on and on.