Microsoft launches new Minesweeper website as IE10 benchmark

Microsoft finally launched the Windows 7 version of its Internet Explorer 10 web browser on Tuesday, and with that launch comes a new way to test out how the browser handles intensive HTML5-based sites. It's also happens to be a new take on the classic work time killer game Minesweeper.

Microsoft's IE blog has the details on the Minesweeper game-benchmark that can be checked out as part of the company's IE Test Drive site. The site uses a number of elements, including HTML5, CSS3, WOFF and more that are designed specifically to test modern web browser performance. Microsoft says it was made to work best with web browsers that support hardware acceleration. It adds:

Minesweeper’s performance mode measures how long it takes the browser to solve the minesweeper board, so you can test your browser performance with different minesweeper boards with different complexity.

The blog also has information on the over 30 new web standards that IE10 supports, including new support for websites that have better special effects, more detailed and sophisticated layouts and more. Microsoft says that IE10 supports over 60 percent more web standards than IE9. IE10 also loads websites up to 20 percent faster than IE9.

Finally, IE10 integrates new features such as spell checking and auto-correct inside the web browser and has made the closing of many tabs in the browser faster.

Source: Microsoft | Image via Microsoft

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Slacker music streaming app comes to Xbox 360

Next Story

Windows 8 and RT get new security update to fix Flash exploit

26 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

minesweeper, Pacman, Astroid... what about more complex games, like farmville or Quake? What about more complex Websites? On the IE, Google, Firefox HTML5 test drives? They talked for years about the HTML5 assets, (okay, they talk more about drawbacks of other browsers) and now we get more or less only this stupid games (or other small code snippets)?

Lastwebpage said,
minesweeper, Pacman, Astroid... what about more complex games, like farmville or Quake? What about more complex Websites? On the IE, Google, Firefox HTML5 test drives? They talked for years about the HTML5 assets, (okay, they talk more about drawbacks of other browsers) and now we get more or less only this stupid games (or other small code snippets)?

Both have their HTML5 examples. Mozilla made a RPG game remember? And IE has the testdrive.

AMD FX6100 8GB DDR3 GeforceGTX560

IE10 Benchmark: 1.10 Seconds(IE10) 9.30 Seconds (Firefox V19.0)
Checker Benchmark 3.90 (IE10) 47.90 Seconds (Firefox)
Island Benchmark 3.90 (IE10) 11.20 (Firefox)

Also firefox doesn't seem to be able to run the MP3 sound effects.

Does Firefox have any sort of similar HTML5 benchmarks developed themselves which we can try out?

How do you make it learn and play against itself?

Enter Number of Players 0

A strange Game, the only winning move is ____________

What a waste of time and resources. I really don't see the point of making such stuff.

Especially when programming and coding power could be spent on:

- fixing / enhancing the horrible Windows 8 stock apps
- putting Calender on outlook.com in Metro UI style since Windows 8 is out now since october
- further develop and enhance Windows Phone
- creating new Xbox franchises like Gears, Halo
- list goes on...

No instead we make website with a game that is in Windows since 1990 and still is in WIndows 8. Ugh

For Microsoft pushing developers to HTML 5 is important. They see HTML as the future interface for all app related GUI's. Therefore they put some effort into it, this is marketing for developers.

Also, Microsoft has a lot of programmers, the IE team will definately not create new Xbox franchises, and you know that very well. But still you like to whine about it.

They probably built it to test IE10's speed for in-house evaluation, and then decided to release It to the public or something. Talk about trying to find something to complain about.

Lol no. But those comments remind me of another good example: the IE app on Xbox. Also wasted effort since everybody uses their tablets, phones or laptops to surf the web.

About HTML the future of GUI's. I dunno. I would hope it since it will take less time to develop native stuff. However native stuff usually does perform faster then pure HTML5...

WarwickFiddlesticks said,
Lol no. But those comments remind me of another good example: the IE app on Xbox. Also wasted effort since everybody uses their tablets, phones or laptops to surf the web.

Just because you lack imagination or an immediate need for something does not make it an instant failure. IE on the XBOX is great for example when you want to browse the web with a family or something. Coupled with the SmartGlass apps, this really is something special. It lets you browse a website on your tablet or mobile, then throw it to your TV so the whole room can look at it, while you interact with it on your tablet/phone.

Better yet, where are your criticisms for TV manufacturers who feel the need to infest TVs with apps and other useless junk, rather than focusing on making a great looking display panel.

There's a disconnect when thinking like this. The team that makes, maintained, alters Windows 8 may not be related or even communicated with the team that did programming for this page. It very likely each team may not have the ability work on each other projects.

Also, Making a benchmark optimized to IE rendering engine and still HTML 5 compliant may make this speed possible. I've noticed Chrome and Firefox work great now in older IE html 5 speed test sites.

I do think IE 10 is a solid browser.

Asurax, you are saying the people that possess the sole responsibility of developing a web browser (and its rendering engine) should instead take on the responsibility of 5 other teams in completely different divisions, fixing or improving features that you think need to be worked on instead, because spending time developing a unique way of testing and pushing the boundaries of said web browser is a waste of time? Naaaa...I agree, COMPLETE waste of time! /s

a benchmark done by Microsoft for IE10 and IE10 is last place - just LOL. Firefox don't support MP3 music but is 2x faster to me than IE10, and Chrome supports the music and is a little slower than Firefox.

What is your setup? I'm on Win 8 x64 Pro, 3930K, GTX 580, Intel 520 SSD, 16GBs RAM. In the benchmarks IE10, checker, island, I get in IE10:
(seconds)
.90
3.90
3.90
In WaterFox 18.1 (x64 version of FireFox I use) I get:
12.90
61.xx
12.80

Yea I know it's accelerated, but it's not as good as IE10 is what I'm saying. Where as whatever it does with the cpu is better than IE10, which is maybe why your weak GPU (compared to mine) scores better with FF but for me IE10 scores better.

You're benchmarking it wrong

IE10:

"IE10": 0.8
Checker: 3.9
Island: 3.9

Firefox:

"IE10": 5.4
checker: 27.3
Island: 7.7

Chrome:

"IE10": 6.2
Checker: 28.9
Island: 8.3

Opera:

"IE10": 6.5
Checker: 35.8
Island: 10.5

This is on Win 8 (32GB RAM, i7 3930k, 2x 6970's, RAID SSD's).

1Pixel said,
You're benchmarking it wrong

IE10:

"IE10": 0.8
Checker: 3.9
Island: 3.9

Firefox:

"IE10": 5.4
checker: 27.3
Island: 7.7

Chrome:

"IE10": 6.2
Checker: 28.9
Island: 8.3

Opera:

"IE10": 6.5
Checker: 35.8
Island: 10.5

This is on Win 8 (32GB RAM, i7 3930k, 2x 6970's, RAID SSD's).


Facts and statistics have NOTHING to do here in this flamebait trap!

Chrome: ..........................Mine

"IE10": 6.2........................5.4
Checker: 28.9..................27.10
Island: 8.3..........................8.20

got an acer 731-4470 400$ laptop 4gb ram, 2.2ghz - 2mb L3 intel b960, hdd not sdd, intelhd graphics

and I am sure you don't need a 5000$ rig for some browser benchmark for +-1s in render ..... really!