Waterfox 8.0

Waterfox | The fastest 64-Bit variant of Firefox!

Waterfox is a 64-Bit version of Firefox. The Firefox source code is taken and compiled to run specifically for 64-Bit Windows computers. To make Waterfox stand out a bit more, it’s compiled with optimizations so that it will run more efficiently and faster than just compiling Firefox as a 64-Bit program. For some people with older systems, the 64-Bit version loads quicker and is much more responsive than the 32-Bit build.

How does it compare to 32-Bit Firefox?
In benchmarks, the 64-Bit variant of Firefox out-performs the 32-Bit variant. Also because this variant is being built specifically for Windows, there might be further performance increases.

Were there any optimisations made?
Yes, Waterfox was compiled with SSE, SSE2, x64 favoring and the following optimisation flags: /Og /Oi /Ot /Oy /Ob2 /Gs /GF /Gy

Download: Waterfox 8.0 | 15.0 MB (Open Source)
View: Homepage | Release Notes

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Boxee Box Live USB Tuner "coming soon"

Next Story

Microsoft launches web site translator bookmarklet

15 Comments

According to my quick testing, it is a very little amount slower than 7.0.

If it was of any practical use, I'd post a spreadsheet of exact results of Palemoon, Waterfox and Ayakawa. The winning one is actually Palemoon, btw.


Peacekeeper (higher is better)

Nightly 11.01a1 (2011-11-16) (32bit) - 4512
Waterfox 8.0 (64bit) - 4376
Firefox 8.0 (32bit) - 4051


Sunspider (lower is better)

Waterfox 8.0 (64bit) - 346.3ms
Nightly 11.01a1 (2011-11-16) (32bit) - 361.2ms
Firefox 8.0 (32bit) - 380.3ms


Kraken (lower is better)

Nightly 11.01a1 (2011-11-16) (32bit) - 6123.2ms
Firefox 8.0 (32bit) - 9312.6ms
Waterfox 8.0 (64bit) - 9560.0ms


V8 Bench (higher is better)

Nightly 11.01a1 (2011-11-16) (32bit) - 4396
Waterfox 8.0 (64bit) - 3137
Firefox 8.0 (32bit) - 3047

I wish I could edit my comment above, but I don't think I can. Anyways peacekeeper takes to damn long so I cut it out. Here's with palemoon included.

Sunspider (lower is better)

Waterfox 8.0 (64bit) - 346.3ms
Pale Moon 8.0 (64bit) - 347.9ms
Pale Moon 8.0 (32bit) - 356.4ms
Nightly 11.01a1 (2011-11-16) (32bit) - 361.2ms
Firefox 8.0 (32bit) - 380.3ms


Kraken (lower is better)

Nightly 11.01a1 (2011-11-16) (32bit) - 6123.2ms
Pale Moon 8.0 (32bit) - 3925.0ms
Firefox 8.0 (32bit) - 9312.6ms
Waterfox 8.0 (64bit) - 9560.0ms
Pale Moon 8.0 (64bit) - 9673.7 ms


V8 Bench (higher is better)

Nightly 11.01a1 (2011-11-16) (32bit) - 4396
Pale Moon 8.0 (32bit) - 3330
Pale Moon 8.0 (64bit) - 3213
Waterfox 8.0 (64bit) - 3137
Firefox 8.0 (32bit) - 3047

Talking abou the benchmark:

Palemoon Site said
Inherently, this may result in less of a clear difference in benchmark scores when comparing to its vulpine sibling or previous versions of Pale Moon because of rebalancing of code priority when building. Maximum benchmark scores are nice, of course, but the main goal of Pale Moon remains to be as efficient as possible when taken as a whole, including those parts that aren't measured in limited benchmark tests.

Sems they are aware of the benchmark results, and I agree with them. If the use experience is not altered but bettered, then why bother with Benchmarks? (In this case only )

Edit: (Forgot to add the link)
http://www.palemoon.org/releasenotes-ng.shtml

The latest Waterfox version (7.0) had a very severe memory leak (Sometimes my memory reached over 2gbs) hope this one it's different.

Been using Waterfox for about four months now without any problems. As to memory leaks can't say I notice any problems. My memory on the average runs right around 220,000 mbs to 500,000 mbs (with twelve gigs of memory it really doesn't matter). I can say there is a speed increase which really helps, but only in a small way.

Well i installed it and it seems to be working fine with my extensions so far. but ill see how it works on youtube and general browsing over the next few days or so

Zagadka said,
Does this still cause complete system lockups every few hours?

Hasn't on any of my machines. Never had an issue with it so far. Been using it for a bit now. Using it right now even.

Commenting is disabled on this article.