Microsoft's IE team gets festive with new Penguin Mark website

Microsoft's Internet Explorer team has celebrated the holiday season before with a demo website that was created to also be a web browser performance benchmark. In 2011, it featured a snow filled-image called, naturally, "Let it Snow". Today, Microsoft launched its 2012 holiday benchmark website and it also involves snow, plus some penguins.

The Penguin Mark site features a number of happy cartoon birds singing, oddly, The Chipmunk Song from Alvin and the Chipmunks (maybe the chipmunks themselves turned out to be too expensive to sign up). The official IE blog states:

This experience brings together hardware-accelerated HTML5 capabilities like canvas, CSS3 animations and transitions, audio, WOFF, power and performance APIs, and more. Be sure to turn your volume up for maximum entertainment. The faster your browser, the higher your Penguin Mark score goes.

The team obviously believes people will get the best experience from Penguin Mark from using IE10 but any HTML5 browser should be able to run the website. As you can see, the penguins are wearing hats that show the logos of IE, Chrome, Firefox, Opera and Safari. Just be prepared to have that Chipmunks song in your head for a long. long time.

Source: IE blog | Image via Microsoft

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Gangnam Style is the first YouTube video to reach 1 billion views

Next Story

Google and Motorola working on "X phone"

53 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

From my initial runs it appears the way the 'score' is weighted is by browser resolution. This means more pixels with little different in performance will get a higher score.

This would explain why the Modern IE10 is getting higher marks than the desktop, as it is full screen with more pixels and little difference in speed.

If you hit F11 or Alt-Enter on the Desktop version of IE10, you should see the numbers normalize and be closer to the Modern IE10 numbers, as it will be weighted at the full screen resolution.

There still may be a slight loss for the Desktop version of IE10 depending on what add-ons and/or security monitoring overhead that is not allowed in the Modern IE10 version.

Philippe Pomerleau said,
Nothing wrong with IE performance. Only the interface and plugin support sucks.

Again, give a good case for a plugin/addon that you need in IE10, especially with 'HTML' level plugin functionality that is now being offered. (Native code plugins are going the way of the dinosaur.)

IE10 has the security tracking, ad blocking lists (if you turn them on). There is very little reason to be stuck using old plugins.

BTW You do realize the IE always LEAD the industry in providing addon support, it wasn't until the last few years that Microsoft tightened IE and developers stopped developing addons. (Note that in the early-mid 90s, addons were all the rage and were the #1 point of entry for malware.)

Sure, I must agree about the second part. I have not installed any addon on Chrome and IE. (Apart from the "Default" plugins, like Flash, Office...). For Ads-blocking I use a System wide proxy ad-blocker (paid software). But what about the first part? I am always faster with Chrome and that's the reason why I use it primary and not the IE. Examples? Try to open an URL that someone posted on a Website, try to open a Facebook notification window with a right click in a new tab, compare the results of the search bar in both browser,... I can make a long list of examples why the GUI from Chrome is much "faster" for me. No sorry, Overall the IE is not "faster" for me, I waste too much time inside the GUI. And it's not a question of using it. The IE ist still my system default browser.

These types of tests are pure HTML5 and demonstrate why a 'compile/run' engine technology is vastly faster than a 'document/display' engine.

These types of tests are why Google resorts to WebGL (a non-standard) to try to meet IE9/10's performance in richer dynamic graphical sites. It also demonstrates why an insecure technology like WebGL is NOT NEEDED for high end gaming/HTML5 performance.

Microsoft is getting near native graphical performance out of HTML5 by 'compile/run' and using the GPU technologies of Windows 7/8.

thenetavenger said,
These types of tests are pure HTML5 and demonstrate why a 'compile/run' engine technology is vastly faster than a 'document/display' engine.

These types of tests are why Google resorts to WebGL (a non-standard) to try to meet IE9/10's performance in richer dynamic graphical sites. It also demonstrates why an insecure technology like WebGL is NOT NEEDED for high end gaming/HTML5 performance.

Microsoft is getting near native graphical performance out of HTML5 by 'compile/run' and using the GPU technologies of Windows 7/8.


Shhh. You're ruining it for everyone.

So because IE is now a good browser it automatically means that people who said IE 6, 7 and 8 sucked for many years are wrong ?

Good logic ...

LaP said,
So because IE is now a good browser it automatically means that people who said IE 6, 7 and 8 sucked for many years are wrong ?

Good logic ...

Did he hurt your feelings?

LaP said,
So because IE is now a good browser it automatically means that people who said IE 6, 7 and 8 sucked for many years are wrong ?

Good logic ...


The attitude probably has more to do with the surprising number of people who said they would never, ever, ever, under any circumstances, EVER use IE as a primary browser. Ever.

LaP said,
So because IE is now a good browser it automatically means that people who said IE 6, 7 and 8 sucked for many years are wrong ?

Good logic ...


I was been sarcastic (sorry I failed it digitally deliver that expression). I never stopped using IE through all editions.

PmRd said,
It's testing rendering performance which IE is the king. There's no silly tricks like other browser tests

I'm always surprised how IEtestdrive's are always by W3 HTML5 standards. Unlike indeed many other HTML tests that use non-standards or things that even have been denied to become a standard. And do so because they know IE scores low on these (html5test.com is a nice example).
And due to Fx and Chrome implementing many HTML5 features very poorly, their raw performance on HTML5 websites is incredibly low.
But they'll counter by claiming these tests are IE biased.

Crimson Rain said,
How?

I'm getting ~20k on i7 3770K, GTX 580

I would have expected a bit higher from that setup... and i have a hex-core i7 3930K overclocked to 4.9GHz and two AMD 6970's in CrossFire.

Crimson Rain said,
How?

I'm getting ~20k on i7 3770K, GTX 580

GPU GPU GPU

Any SLI/Crossfire/Shared(Windows Tech) is going to punch past a single GPU system. IE10 threads out to the GPU for more than just the rendering stages.

The important thing to note, is that even if the number is low in IE10 because of a slower system, the FPS and animations almost always run well.

Got 47563,

IE 10 - 64bit Windows 8, Intel I7 3770K OC 4.5Ghz, 32Gb ram, GTX 670, Resolution 2560x1600.

Just did the test in the metro interface - got 109,021 score, seems metro version of IE 10 is much much faster than the desktop one.

pgxl said,
Just did the test in the metro interface - got 109,021 score, seems metro version of IE 10 is much much faster than the desktop one.

I got 101K with IE10 desktop, but using the enhanced protected mode (x64 mode.) System is a 3930K OC'd to 4Ghz, GTX 580, 16GBs RAM.

Crimson Rain said,
How?

I'm getting ~20k on i7 3770K, GTX 580

almost the same specs as mine and I got 56483..I have 16GB of ram though..I wonder if that has something to do with the difference?

mls67 said,

almost the same specs as mine and I got 56483..I have 16GB of ram though..I wonder if that has something to do with the difference?

It may be an indication of some hardware anomaly or configuration error if your numbers are significantly less. Would be a good time to recheck your system, and compare passmark and windows score to other systems.

thenetavenger said,

GPU GPU GPU

Any SLI/Crossfire/Shared(Windows Tech) is going to punch past a single GPU system. IE10 threads out to the GPU for more than just the rendering stages.

The important thing to note, is that even if the number is low in IE10 because of a slower system, the FPS and animations almost always run well.

IE10 don't use multiple GPU's. I'm not aware of any browser that does.

I disabled CrossFire and got 48k without it, and the same with CrossFire enabled (got lower in IE10 before because i had 40+ tabs open in Chrome). His score seem very low, especially if someone else got 56k on a similar system. Seems to work better with Nvidia GPU's.

Edited by 1Pixel, Dec 22 2012, 5:59am :

1Pixel said,

IE10 don't use multiple GPU's. I'm not aware of any browser that does.

I disabled CrossFire and got 48k without it, and the same with CrossFire enabled (got lower in IE10 before because i had 40+ tabs open in Chrome). His score seem very low, especially if someone else got 56k on a similar system. Seems to work better with Nvidia GPU's.


Yes IE10 does use multiple GPU's.
IE9 already does this (not as good as IE10, but it does).
You are aware that IE9 and IE10 have full DirectX capabilities? And are completely GPU accelerated?
Indeed no other browser has this, closest 'GPU acceleration' is through WebGL from Fx and Chrome.

mls67 said,

almost the same specs as mine and I got 56483..I have 16GB of ram though..I wonder if that has something to do with the difference?


I also have 16GB (@2400MHz).

I do run the 64bit enhanced protected mode.

Do you have more than 1 monitor?

Shadowzz said,

Yes IE10 does use multiple GPU's.
IE9 already does this (not as good as IE10, but it does).
You are aware that IE9 and IE10 have full DirectX capabilities? And are completely GPU accelerated?
Indeed no other browser has this, closest 'GPU acceleration' is through WebGL from Fx and Chrome.

Of course i'm aware it uses DirectX, what else would it use! MS are not going to use OpenGL are they. All Windows browsers use DX for GPU acceleration, just not to the same extent as IE9/10. Firefox has supported DX acceleration since version 4. WebGL is something else completely different, it's a web standard used to create content. When Chrome or FF show WebGL content it's rendered through the DX pipeline. You don't seem to know what you're talking about.

And no IE10 don't support multiple GPU's. My testing also showed that. It don't even make sense to support Crossfire or SLI in a browser.

Crimson Rain said,

I also have 16GB (@2400MHz).

I do run the 64bit enhanced protected mode.

Do you have more than 1 monitor?

I have multiple monitors (3x 2560x1600) and for me it has no affect whether i disable the other 2 monitors or not. But i do have different GPU's and 32GB, but i VERY much doubt RAM will have any affect on this.

You should be scoring higher with 64bit enhanced protected mode, not lower... weird! Does the Metro version of IE10 score the same? Maybe update graphics drivers?

1Pixel said,

I have multiple monitors (3x 2560x1600) and for me it has no affect whether i disable the other 2 monitors or not. But i do have different GPU's and 32GB, but i VERY much doubt RAM will have any affect on this.

You should be scoring higher with 64bit enhanced protected mode, not lower... weird! Does the Metro version of IE10 score the same? Maybe update graphics drivers?


~76k on metro IE.

Updated to latest driver. No change. Very strange

Checked GPU/CPU load.

CPU load never goes above 15%.
GPU load stays between 9% to 20%. GPU core clock doesn't even stay at max (~770MHz I think). Keeps dropping to 50% or less.
GPU temp is only ~55c.

Edited by Crimson Rain, Dec 22 2012, 9:48pm :

You know the only people that pedal that BS about Linux and the year of the desktop are the haters. Most actual Linux users really don't care if Linux becomes the favoured desktop OS. Whether it's #1 or not, we're happy.

Majesticmerc said,
You know the only people that pedal that BS about Linux and the year of the desktop are the haters. Most actual Linux users really don't care if Linux becomes the favoured desktop OS. Whether it's #1 or not, we're happy.

No, actually a friend of mine is a Linux fanatic and keeps insisting that year x is the year of the linux

I said 'most' Linux users, he's obviously in the exception. Besides, he's likely to be disappointed. Realists really don't expect a "year of Linux", it was mainly a statement intended to mock Linux users in the beginning because they didn't understand that Linux doesn't need to be #1 to be a good OS.

Edited by Majesticmerc, Dec 21 2012, 9:05pm :

Majesticmerc said,
You know the only people that pedal that BS about Linux and the year of the desktop are the haters. Most actual Linux users really don't care if Linux becomes the favoured desktop OS. Whether it's #1 or not, we're happy.

Ignorance is bliss.

cybertimber2008 said,
@PmRd: Andoid.

Further proof that the only way Linux can get anywhere is when it's buried a mile beneath a VM and has a massive, proprietary corporate ecosystem behind it.

Even the FOSSies parading the "purity" of CM are, every last one of them, snatching the proprietary gapps add-on. Comedy all around.

Majesticmerc said,
I said 'most' Linux users, he's obviously in the exception. Besides, he's likely to be disappointed. Realists really don't expect a "year of Linux", it was mainly a statement intended to mock Linux users in the beginning because they didn't understand that Linux doesn't need to be #1 to be a good OS.

Most Linux users are Microsoft/Apple hating losers that will claim anything to improve the credit of Linux and discredit anything closed source.
And most believe Linux is far superior then anything else and because its so called superiorness it should be the #1 OS around.
But yeah,according to them the only reason Linux isn't growing is because of Microsoft.

Look man don't speak to found about Linux fans, many of them are fanatics similar to religious nuts.
Go on freenode and find out

Shadowzz said,

Most Linux users are Microsoft/Apple hating losers that will claim anything to improve the credit of Linux and discredit anything closed source.
And most believe Linux is far superior then anything else and because its so called superiorness it should be the #1 OS around.
But yeah,according to them the only reason Linux isn't growing is because of Microsoft.

Look man don't speak to found about Linux fans, many of them are fanatics similar to religious nuts.
Go on freenode and find out


The fanatics among them are the sort that, ten years ago, insisted KDE looked nothing like Windows because a gradient in a particular spot was different.