Microsoft demos IE9 hardware acceleration vs Safari 5

Microsoft has issued its response to Apple's recent Safari 5 release, demonstrating Internet Explorer 9's hardware acceleration abilities.

In a blog posting on Tuesday, Microsoft blogger Brandon LeBlanc posted a video comparing Internet Explorer 9 and Safari 5. "Apple announced and released Safari 5. We figured we would show IE9 and Safari 5 together", said LeBlanc. A video shows the two browsers running demos from Microsoft's Internet Explorer 9 test drive website.

The first demo used is the flying images JavaScript demo. Internet Explorer 9 manages around 50fps with Safari 5 struggling at 9fps. The second and final demo is the Flickr Explorer test. Internet Explorer 9 hovers around the 20fps mark whilst Safari 5 stays around 7fps throughout the test. Microsoft is currently developing Internet Explorer 9 internally and has issued preview builds for developers. LeBlanc also revealed that Microsoft has seen over a million downloads for the Internet Explorer 9 developer preview so far.

Get Microsoft Silverlight

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Cupidtino goes into open-beta

Next Story

Microsoft Office 2011 for Mac will be 32-bit only

82 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

It is so great that we support html5 when there is no html5 but flash. Hm...Safari has flash out of box. Ie9 you got to wait till it downloads just that in itself beats ie9 out of box. Flash render safari=30 sec. Ie9 = 30 for download and 5 min install 10 reboot and 50 sec render. Oh on first time run. Next time it gets slower as you add more pages to your temp folder. So you constantly have to delete the temp folder and cant find that important page in the history that you looked at say last year. In safari I used for almost a year now and I can still track down pages from last year. And yeah I keep all my history for nostalgic reasons. It all ways is fun to see what I was doing last year.

We are faster in beta than your finished product? Hm..... We don't even have a user interface but claim our speed. Hmmm.... Snow leopard boot time = 30 seconds. Faster than some routers. Windows boot time 10 minutes after a years use. Snow leopard still 30 seconds after a years use and all the crap i have installed on there. Windows slows down within a week. Let me see could it be the journaled file system? Also windows power loss = corrupt files. Mac power loss just last state. Don't get me wrong ie9 is going to be a great insecure product that need forever patching. Its great that microsoft writes such software that is so easy to infect so I can add you guys to my botnets and serve you all spam mooohahahaha.

I don't think that this test means lots of things because safari is an adaptation from mac os to windows so we must comparate internet explorer in windows and safari in mac os...

Will IE9 be available to multiple platforms? If not, then it's just a media player/Flash replacement turned browser. IE it's not just a browser, it's taking parts from Windows OS. So it needs a special category. It was not a browser by now, it won't be one in the near future.

The tests running by browser makers are all with cheating inside...choose the items that their product good at, and the others don't. So did Apple's HTML5 Test.

I personally don't care about benchmark of unfinished products. I'll believe it when i see it with my own eyes with all the bell and whistle.

IE 8 was a huge improvement over IE6 and IE7 *cough* 6.5 *cough* and i expect IE 9 to improve uppon that.

And what about global test? It's too easy to compare only one feature.

HTML5 (html5test.com):
Google Chrome 6.0.442.0: 217/300 + 10 bonus.
Mozilla Firefox 3.6.4: 139/300 + 4 bonus.
Safari 5.0: 207/300 + 7 bonus.
Opera 10.53: 129/300 + 4 bonus.
Internet Explorer 8: 27/300 + 0 bonus.
Internet Explorer 9 preview 2: 32/300 + 1 bonus.

Acid test 3 (http://acid3.acidtests.org):
Google Chrome 6.0.442.0: 100/100.
Mozilla Firefox 3.6.4: 97/100.
Safari 5.0: 100/100.
Opera 10.53: 100/100.
Internet Explorer 8: 20/100.
Internet Explorer 9 preview 2: 68/100.

Quite ridiculous.

BTW, if we try to compare safari and IE9 on a Windows Machine, is the same to compare Quick Time & Itunes on both: Windows & Mac.

Still no <canvas>, but what the hell I am thinking? <canvas> isn't everything in a browser, but things will get a little difficult when developing a site. I wish the 5 browsers had everything in common, but that would be too easy and too good to be true.

Anyways, I don't care if it's faster or slower than safari. What do I care is the great improvement that Microsoft has done to their Internet Explorer, is like they've revived a 10 year old browser. What do I hope, is that it's UI is as lighting as IE6 or faster than IE8 (although it has been a great improvement over the past IE (IE7)), because I don't use IE for the reason that I click "stop" and it loads the page completely, and then stops.... 0_o.

Well, running these same tests on my aging C2D (2 years old ) with the latest Firefox nightly (DirectWrite / Direct2D acceleration enabled) I get the following numbers:
* In the flying images (with Maximum images set) test IE9 gets ~25 fps while Firefox around ~45
* In the Flickr test IE9 got a pretty consistent 30fps (sometimes going up to 40) and Firefox was very inconsistent - sometimes 60fps all the run, sometimes went down to 20fps...

If you're thinking about trying it out for yourself here's a link with info on how to do it:
http://forums.mozillazine.org/...opic.php?f=23&t=1775755
I should note though that at the moment the Firefox nightly has a very annoying bug with D2D enabled - some of the main browser UI shows partly translucent, an easy workaround is to enable any persona (until the bug gets resolved of course)

Some of you Apple fanatics should open your eyes a little wider when you read the reviews. Just because Lord Jobs doesn't like to provide much in the way of Alpha previews doesn't mean that IE 9 preview is not great news. If you have no intention of using the product let alone understand how it truly functions then why are you making comments on it? To spread Lord Jobs message?

IE 9 will shape up to be one of the browsers to beat in terms of speed, stability and standards. They have taken their lumps and bruises with previous iterations and they will prove to those who are waiting for them to fail that an old dog can learn new tricks.

If you don't use the GPU, you loose the browser race.
That being said IE9 is still a tech preview and FF suffers from slow paced development.

i don't know if you guys noticed but in the flying images test form the ie9 test drive site:
safari 5 on win 7 (dell 1501, 1.6ghz turion x 2, ati x1150, 2.5gb ram) i get around 2-4 FPS
safari 5 on osx 10.6.3 ( mbp 13" 2.4 c2d, gforce 320m, 4gb ram) i get around 54-60 FPS

so in my opinion safari for osx is more optimized than the win version.

chrome 6 dev on win7 also scores 2-5 FPS
opera 10.6 on win7 gets i get around 30 FPS (like ie9 preview 2)

i don't have chrome & opera installed on osx to tell you my results.

Marius F said,
i don't know if you guys noticed but in the flying images test form the ie9 test drive site:
safari 5 on win 7 (dell 1501, 1.6ghz turion x 2, ati x1150, 2.5gb ram) i get around 2-4 FPS
IE9 is also running on that system, and doing better with the hardware than Safari is.

johnnyq3 said,
IE9 is also running on that system, and doing better with the hardware than Safari is.

as i said ie9 and opera 10.6 on that system (dell 1501) i get around 30 FPS while chrome 6 dev and safari 5 i only get 2-5 FPS

but what's curios that on osx safari 5 scores 55-60 FPS and i don't think the core 2 duo is 15x faster than the turion x2 so it's probably accelerated by the graphics card on osx only.
probably if i had a win pc with the same hardware like the mac, ie9 and opera would score around 60FPS too.

i don't have chrome and opera on my mac to tell you the results for those browsers. i heard firefox is also accelerated but i haven't tested it neither do i know which version of firefox is accelerated.

anyway the good part is that if one or two browsers it's hardware accelerated my guess is that all will get hardware acceleration, and that's why competition is good for the end user lol

Why does it bother you? I rather like getting ie9 news, just like I enjoy news about iOS 4 betas, etc.

^^ sorry reply was intended for rawr_boy81

thatguyandrew1992 said,
They also need to add Addons like FireFox.

Been using the IEPro add-on since IE7 mate... (which does various things like ad blocking, flash blocking, spell checking, dev tools, even a greacemonkey like script interface to do your own thing...)

IE8 = Vista
IE9 = Windows 7

IE9 is shaping up to be pretty good, like Windows 7, I hope MS continues the spirit of universal html5, css3 and javascript, and I hope other browser makers add gpu acceleration. Everybody wins.

J_R_G said,
IE8 = Vista

IE8 was one of the better aspects of Vista. Compared to what had gone before (IE6 and 7), IE8 was actually a major improvement in all areas. Not really fair to compare that to Vista.

J_R_G said,
IE8 = Vista
IE9 = Windows 7

IE9 is shaping up to be pretty good, like Windows 7, I hope MS continues the spirit of universal html5, css3 and javascript, and I hope other browser makers add gpu acceleration. Everybody wins.

I disagree with IE8 being aligned with Vista in terms of success.

- IE6 was, well IE6
- IE7 was IE6+, since many of the issues that IE6 had, IE7 still had.
- IE8 was the first IE browser that I've never really had to worry about in terms of CSS (different rendering, not missing features), since most of the legacy bugs present in IE6/7 were gone.
- IE9 may well be the browser that makes people start considering Internet Explorer a decent browser again though.

IMO IE8 gets a bad rap. Its a decent (albeit slow) browser, but its had the legacy of its predecessors to deal with.

J_R_G said,
IE8 = Vista
IE9 = Windows 7

IE9 is shaping up to be pretty good, like Windows 7, I hope MS continues the spirit of universal html5, css3 and javascript, and I hope other browser makers add gpu acceleration. Everybody wins.

IE9 will appear on vista as well because Vista has Direct2D and DirectWrite plus everything that Windows 7 provides in the way of APIs.

Majesticmerc said,
since most of the legacy bugs present in IE6/7 were gone.
They're still present. But like with IE7, and even IE6 to an extent, they're present in a "Quirks Mode" that must be invoked. It's a compatibility thing. Even IE9 has this.

DonC said,
I don't have a Mac, but does Mac Safari fare better than Windows Safari on those tests?

Much better. Safari gets a constant 60fps on both my Macs in that spinning logo test.

Elliott said,

Much better. Safari gets a constant 60fps on both my Macs in that spinning logo test.

Yeah, ATM Safari on my Mac is beating IE9 in that video.

I like the IE9 preview. After Vista, MS came back with wonderful Win7, so I have hopes with IE9.

Safari 5 is still ugly and slower than latest Opera alpha, anyway. Safari needs to be polished, and needs to get a god user interface first of all.

This is looking good for IE9, if Microsoft can keep the ball rolling and make it the best IE yet then it could pull people back to their browser.

Only time will tell.

Chasethebase said,
This is looking good for IE9, if Microsoft can keep the ball rolling and make it the best IE yet then it could pull people back to their browser.

Only time will tell.

It's already the best version of IE ('s rendering engine, Trident). It needs to be competitive with the top browsers, and I hope Microsoft doesn't stop developing it until it is.

yeah and even that unfinished product beats the hell out of Safari 5, so yes as Microsoft I would definitely show it.
But OK, this is just a small piece of the HTML5 standard, let's see if Apple comes out with similar tests and different results for other examples.

Robbeke said,
yeah and even that unfinished product beats the hell out of Safari 5, so yes as Microsoft I would definitely show it.
But OK, this is just a small piece of the HTML5 standard, let's see if Apple comes out with similar tests and different results for other examples.

This isn't about HTML5. It's about gpu acceleration, and the benefits it provides.

IphoneMini said,
What's the point ??

They show how fast their Javascript engine is at the moment and compare it to Safari.

IphoneMini said,
What's the point ??

The point is, if Apple did the same thing, you woudn't ask "What's the point ??", because Apple is your Placebo Effect.

safari 5 is out, but where is ie9? its extremely silly to compare them. microsoft shouldnt talk about an unfinished product

Dead'Soul said,
safari 5 is out, but where is ie9? its extremely silly to compare them. microsoft shouldnt talk about an unfinished product

Of course they should, thats what companies do. Would you rather we only hear of new products once complete?

Dead'Soul said,
safari 5 is out, but where is ie9? its extremely silly to compare them. microsoft shouldnt talk about an unfinished product

Also the final release will probably be FASTER due to the removal of any debugging.

Dead'Soul said,
safari 5 is out, but where is ie9? its extremely silly to compare them. microsoft shouldnt talk about an unfinished product

Why not? It's perfectly valid to come out and say... "hey!, look at our new product... even in an unfinished early beta state, it's way better than the crapple software that has finished being developed"

Dead'Soul said,
safari 5 is out, but where is ie9? its extremely silly to compare them. microsoft shouldnt talk about an unfinished product

I agree. However, i do not believe apple provides trunk builds of Safari, so Safari 5 is the latest version available. Tests like these are marketing BS anyhow....pure cherry picked numbers/tests to make IE look good. just like their bogus HTML 5 comparisons.

Bullhead said,

I agree. However, i do not believe apple provides trunk builds of Safari, so Safari 5 is the latest version available. Tests like these are marketing BS anyhow....pure cherry picked numbers/tests to make IE look good. just like their bogus HTML 5 comparisons.

Exactly, and just like the ACID and Sunspider tests and such. Essentially every "benchmark" out there for these standards was written by a company with a goal. ACID doesn't test much of anything useful, because companies end up writing routines into their rendering engines to make sure they pass it perfectly.

TCLN Ryster said,

Why not? It's perfectly valid to come out and say... "hey!, look at our new product... even in an unfinished early beta state, it's way better than the crapple software that has finished being developed"

+1

Bullhead said,

I agree. However, i do not believe apple provides trunk builds of Safari, so Safari 5 is the latest version available. Tests like these are marketing BS anyhow....pure cherry picked numbers/tests to make IE look good. just like their bogus HTML 5 comparisons.

a) Apple provides webkit nightly builds, and Apple's official webkit blog frequently makes postings where it compares a feature introduced in it's latest test build against other shipping browsers.

b) How is this a cherry picked test? They are running standard, graphically intensive web demos and showing how much of a difference hardware acceleration provides. Is it really that difficult for you to believe that gpu accelerated effects will run faster? I would consider it a given.

I just hope MS stick to standards and don't try implementing their own brand of scripting languages, like they have in the past. Not holding my breath though. MS track record isn't exactly good in this department.

Frankenchrist said,
I just hope MS stick to standards and don't try implementing their own brand of scripting languages, like they have in the past. Not holding my breath though. MS track record isn't exactly good in this department.

I worry about this too!

Frankenchrist said,
I just hope MS stick to standards and don't try implementing their own brand of scripting languages, like they have in the past. Not holding my breath though. MS track record isn't exactly good in this department.

No they won't. They learned their lesson, the hard way. Today, they are serious on getting standards compliance as perfect as they can. You can find their progress in the IEBlog.

CSS3 Selectors in IE9 is 100% Implemented
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/arc...-corner-css3-selectors.aspx

They Contribute Browser Test Suites to the HTML5 Standards Body
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/arc...ests-for-web-standards.aspx

Microsoft is one with Apple in HTML5 Video
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/arc...2010/04/29/html5-video.aspx

Proper Cross-Browser Coding Encouraged
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/arc...ing-cross-browser-code.aspx

DOM Level 3 Events support in IE9
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/arc...-events-support-in-ie9.aspx

DOM Range and HTML5 Selection
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2010/05/11/dom-range.aspx

Microsoft Attending SVG Open 2010 Conference
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/arc...g-open-2010-conference.aspx

Frankenchrist said,
I just hope MS stick to standards and don't try implementing their own brand of scripting languages, like they have in the past. Not holding my breath though. MS track record isn't exactly good in this department.

You mean like including xmlhttprequest?

I would like to install Safari 5 to test but I don't want their crap installed on my system. I wasn't happy the last time I tried Safari and said no to their extra software like quicktime and apple update yet it installed it anyway.

Still, good to see IE9 is looking promising and should hopefully make the web an easier place to build websites for if most switch from ie8 to it.

If you have windows 78 you can just install it in the XP Mode Virtual Machine ... and run it even more slowly than it runs in that video

Deviate_X said,
If you have windows 78 you can just install it in the XP Mode Virtual Machine ... and run it even more slowly than it runs in that video

Haha, I don't think it's even worth trying.

Deviate_X said,
If you have windows 78 you can just install it in the XP Mode Virtual Machine ... and run it even more slowly than it runs in that video

I knew Microsoft were speeding up Windows releases but how the hell did I miss 71 releases in the last 8 months?

I'm so glad they are starting to support proper standards now, unlike mozilla and others who use -moz etc for CSS. It's really annoying and breaks standards!

tunafish said,
I'm so glad they are starting to support proper standards now, unlike mozilla and others who use -moz etc for CSS. It's really annoying and breaks standards!

Wat? They use -moz etc to signify a Mozilla/Firefox-only feature because IE doesn't support... well, most things. If you don't want fragmentation like that, Internet Explorer would need to start supporting features, say, within a few years of other browsers ¬_¬

They should still use the normal standards, without -moz and -safari etc... Because then people that want to implement certain features now, won't have to record it when it becomes a full standard

callummr said,

Wat? They use -moz etc to signify a Mozilla/Firefox-only feature because IE doesn't support... well, most things. If you don't want fragmentation like that, Internet Explorer would need to start supporting features, say, within a few years of other browsers ¬_¬


You need to look into what the -moz prefixes are for. It's not because IE doesn't support it.

tunafish said,
I'm so glad they are starting to support proper standards now, unlike mozilla and others who use -moz etc for CSS. It's really annoying and breaks standards!

So what about -ms prefixed stuff (ie. filters)?

meh, this is just a small part of the HTML5 draft standard. Also MS should have waited for IE9 Preview 3 to compare to Safari in about 3 weeks from now.

torrentthief said,
meh, this is just a small part of the HTML5 draft standard. Also MS should have waited for IE9 Preview 3 to compare to Safari in about 3 weeks from now.

Why?

Seems acceptable to me to show their second preview build is vastly superior to Safari 5, then when preview 3 comes out show that is even better

torrentthief said,
meh, this is just a small part of the HTML5 draft standard. Also MS should have waited for IE9 Preview 3 to compare to Safari in about 3 weeks from now.

This has nothing to do with HTML5. It's about hardware acceleration and the benefits of it now that the web is become more graphically inclined.