Firefox 3.5RC2 Performance In Windows Vs. Linux

pizzutz writes "Andy Lawrence has posted a Javascript speed comparison for the recently released Firefox 3.5RC2 between Linux (Ubuntu 9.04) and Windows(XP SP3) using the SunSpider benchmark test. Firefox 3.5 will include the new Tracemonkey Javascript engine. The Windows build edges out Linux by just under 15%, though the Linux build is still twice as fast as the current 3.0.11 version which ships with Jaunty."

Comments

Don't benchmark it on Ubuntu

[petrus4]

Ubuntu typically has everything but the kitchen sink running in the background; it's even worse than XP for frivolous defaults.

Get Slackware, or something else minimalistic, where you're likely to have a marginal amount of memory left after the operating system and residents are loaded in. ;)

Re:Don't benchmark it on Ubuntu

[Anonymous Coward]

So how hard is this to test? Anyone want to run firefox win32 binaries on linux with WINE? Since the executable code will be faithfully executed by the CPU we can eliminate the compiler differences from the equation.

Somebody else do it. :) I'm busy.

But why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is there any explanation as to why there is the difference?

Re:But why?

[moon3]

The problem is that GCC is pretty much the only compiler on Linux used these days and while the code is very nice C++ compilers on Windows produce a bit better code still.

But when I mention Watcom C++ or other aspiring open source compiler here, a compiler that could possibly interest Linux community and spawn some competition for GCC then I get modded down often by people citing GCC is good enough for everybody and everything.

Re:But why?

[guyniraxn]

What if we threw SwiftFox in to the comparison?

Re:But why?

[electrosoccertux]

It feels just as slow. It's not just Gnome, it's slow in KDE and XFCE, too.
It is currently faster to run Firefox.exe under Wine than it is to run it native in Linux. (Yes I have tried this, the difference is night and day; it's just as fast in Wine as it is in windows).

Re:My problem with Firefox is this

[pablomme]

But on Linux, it is inherently ugly. The beast looks ancient and the fonts and dialogs make matters worse.

Widgets and dialogs, ok, that's your aesthetic preference. But fonts? After a couple of years using Ubuntu I hate how Windows fonts look pixelated even with Cleartype on. Freetype is much better at its job than Cleartype. If only because of that, I prefer the looks of Firefox on linux than on Windows.

It's not only Javascript

[Anonymous Coward]

that matters when it comes to browser speed. I am running 3.5 beta on Ubuntu right now, with TraceMonkey turned on, and it really does well in terms of javascript performance.

But this doesn't change almost anything. GUI is still horribly sloooow. I have to reboot Firefox every few hours to keep it running somehow.

When I'm listening to online radio in one tab, and try to upload large file in other tab, my music is gone, Compiz marks firefox in grey as "not responding" and 2 of my 2GHz cores get 100% CPU usage for 10 mins. This is horrible.

The situation with Linux flash isn't any better. I really wish I could live without it, but as a web developer I cannot yet.

Watched documentary about beginning of Mozilla, a guy was given a job, maybe still on Netscape then, and he wanted "to make Mozilla run faster on Linux". Yeah, right. How many years have passed? 5? 10? crap.

Re:maybe linux carries some of this blame

[gilesjuk]

Indeed, GCC just isn't as good at producing fast code as Microsoft or Intels compilers. This is probably the price you pay for having a fairly portable compiler such as GCC.

Where's the proof that GCC is solely to blame?

[pembo13]

I keep hearing people saying that it's all GCC's fault, but I have seen no real proof of that. Nor why a profit making company such as Mozilla can't throw devs at GCC to fix the underlying problem.

Re:Where's the proof that GCC is solely to blame?

[characterZer0]

Why can't they just use Intel's compiler?

Re:Where's the proof that GCC is solely to blame?

[mR.bRiGhTsId3]

Its my understanding that a bunch of the firefox core is written in C++. ICC uses a different name mangling scheme that GCC, so you can't link C++ code compiled with ICC with code compiled by GCC.

Re:Where's the proof that GCC is solely to blame?

[asa]

Why can't they just use Intel's compiler?

Who is "they"?

Builds created by Mozilla get used but very few people compared to builds made by Ubuntu and other Linux distros. Perhaps you should contact them and as them why they're not using the Intel compiler.

Re:There! You have it!

[Colonel Korn]

This proves that, um, Windows,er, Linux is....um...what the fuck does this prove again?

And why the fuck should I care if there's a 15% difference in performance of Firefox between those two OSes? I use my particular OS for reason that have nothing to do with how well Firefox runs on it.

That 15% could very well be measured in hours when the Slashtard coders get through with their Web 2.0 abominization of Slashdot.

People have been complaining or quite some time about poor performance on slashdot. What is it that shows this poor performance? I don't recall doing anything that isn't instantaneous here.

Re:maybe linux carries some of this blame

[asa]

Got links? I'd love to see some support for this. Until I get those, I'm going to take the large number of anecdotal accounts from the people who actually compile popular apps like Firefox on Windows and Linux as having a bit more weight than your lone voice without any supporting evidence or even specif anecdotes.