IE is faster than Firefox

[cyoung1616]

I use IE 99% of the time but on this test FF was faster. I still prefer IE.

Cody

[+StevoFC MVC]

hmm... i just did it with safari so far since i'm on my laptop right now. through my wireless...

Throughput: 1679424?Bps

Throughput: 13435?kbps

something seems messed up haha

[cork1958]

That numion site sucks numb nuts! :no:

I gave up on using that ages ago.

[5Horizons]

I got 300kbps with IE

and 218kbps with Firefox.

I guess it makes sense because IE always has seemed faster to me, but I prefer FF anyway ;)

[Elliott]

hmm... i just did it with safari so far since i'm on my laptop right now. through my wireless...

Throughput: 1679424?Bps

Throughput: 13435?kbps

something seems messed up haha

585345764[/snapback]

Safari is blazing fast!:laugh:h:

Throughput: 1276687?Bps

Throughput: 10213?kbps

Tested in Safari 1.2:D. :D

[micro]

bah, my firefox pwns you all

Throughput

83712 Bps

bytes per second

Throughput

670 kbps

kilobits per second

[eugnostos]

Using IE...

Throughput

84043 Bps

bytes per second

Throughput

672 kbps

kilobits per second

Using Firefox...

Throughput

86916 Bps

bytes per second

Throughput

695 kbps

kilobits per second

Firefox won this round on my system.

Very close race though!

[Elliott]

bah, my firefox pwns you all

Throughput 

83712 Bps

bytes per second

Throughput

670 kbps

kilobits per second

585345897[/snapback]

Doesn't beat my Safari score. :p

[Tobb555]

IE

Throughput

100785 Bps

Throughput

806 kbps

Firefox

Throughput

61215 Bps

Throughput

490 kbps

kilobits per second

My IE Destoryed it

[_fOoL_]

sorry, but are u ppl actully comparing speed scores with browsers.... :rolleyes:

[hotwire]

guys... don't get confused by this freakin stupid test

most speed test tends to go with the most used browser or stupid IE which is y it's faster

anyhow, here is my specs..

FireFox:

Throughput

61162 Bps

bytes per second

Throughput

489 kbps

kilobits per second

IE: # alternative IE within XP

Throughput

72382 Bps

bytes per second

Throughput

579 kbps

kilobits per second

but i got for real u, y would u want to use something that will serve u nothing but virus, spam and all those crap? just be lazy like me. get firefox. also, it's not just me who is thinkin this way. didn't ya heard mikuosoft's stock is dropin and now it's like 90% of the world.... which uses that crappy shiz

however, if u have a really old machine like say..... back in the day... old school... :huh:

u might want to use that crap

also, haven't ya heard firefox is writtin by a 17 years old genius?

[xplatinum]

Throughput

93662 Bps

bytes per second 

Throughput

749 kbps

kilobits per second

Throughput

59283 Bps

bytes per second

Throughput

474 kbps

kilobits per second

[vcv]

These are my actual results. Firefox's layer flashing bug made it really annoying to watch it do the test. IE was at 80000 Bps for a while but then started to slow down.

Firefox

Throughput

63355 Bps

bytes per second

Throughput

507 kbps

kilobits per second

IE

Throughput

64412 Bps

bytes per second

Throughput

515 kbps

kilobits per second

Opera

Throughput

276389 Bps

bytes per second

Throughput

2211 kbps

kilobits per second

[megamanXplosion]

This test is indeed pointless in all aspects. First and foremost, sheer transfer speed is not dependant on the browser but on the operating system and the transfer speed will always be different every time that you do it, so one browser could be getting a good score because of luck. Not to mention the fact that it tests using frames which is a completely pointless test to begin with, nobody will be loading 41 (or even 5, for that matter) frames from different sites all at once. I've never seen anything close to that on the internet, except for "speed tests." Let's figure out how many random factors there are...

There's 41 sites so each random variable found will consist of 41 possibilities to change the outcome of the results. First and foremost, we don't know how many people are on the same ISP at the exact time that each test was done (41). We don't know how many people were using the same site at the exact time that each test was done (82). We don't know how many of those on the same ISP were looking at the same site (123). We don't know if some random router among the path to reach the servers had gone down for maintenance and that'll cause the traffic to take a different path than it usually would which means that sometimes it could be on a T3 line and others it could be on a DSL line, or even communicating with satellites (164). We don't know how many of those routers are sending updates and how often they do that because RIP routers talk every 30 seconds and IGRP routers talk every 90 seconds (205). We don't know if the websites are doing a backup of their server which will drastically alter the transfer speed (246). People who run firewalls might also have 41+ random variables to account for because some browsers might request 4 files at one time while another will try to get 10 and the router will need to check out all of the traffic and if it gets bombarded more with one browser than the other then it will cause a slowdown on the connection because some packets will be dropped and need to be redownloaded (287). I can keep naming those possibilities where things could go wrong, but I think 287 random factors is enough to prove that the test is not accurate in the slightest. In fact, no online speed test is accurate, so it's all pointless. This test even more inaccurate than what it should be, considering that this doesn't represent any real-life scenario that a browser should be concerned with, no browser is optimized to download from 41 servers at one time.

There's just so many reasons why certain browsers will appear faster than others that it's impossible to get reliable data from a speed test, especially one like this.

[CleanFilm]

Lol, IE Is faster because its so Buggy

IE Is realy realy buggy so its VERY fast.

Firefox displays pages better.

[ZZOOzzoo]

Lol, IE Is faster because its so Buggy

IE Is realy realy buggy so its VERY fast.

Firefox displays pages better.

585347929[/snapback]

Um... okay.... :huh: :rolleyes:

[Malisk]

Hmm, this looks a bit too "artificial" to give a good indication of browser performance, page rendering speeds, etc. It doesn't necessarily tell what performance differences there are on neowin.net for example.

Anyway...

IE:

Throughput

28107 Bps

bytes per second

Throughput

225 kbps

kilobits per second

Opera:

Throughput

22036 Bps

bytes per second

Throughput

176 kbps

kilobits per second

Firefox:

Throughput

20135 Bps

bytes per second

Throughput

161 kbps

kilobits per second

Then I cleared the cache in Opera and checked again, just to see how reliable speeds it gave...

Opera Run #2:

Throughput

28425 Bps

bytes per second

Throughput

227 kbps

kilobits per second

Umm, not very reliable at all... :no:

Edited January 24, 2005 by Jugalator

[Renshaw]

IE Throughput 45488 Bps

Throughput 364 kbps

rarly used bowser called advant broswer got this

Throughput 45800 Bps

Throughput 366 kbps

I think buggy could be true :p

Edited January 24, 2005 by renshaw2k4

[inactive]

i think this is overall BS... speed wise i would say there pretty close either way ;)

[ivand67]

there are too many polarized people for this discussion, the firefox heads will put down any advantage IE has and vice versa. if you think ie is "the best", you don't need to preach it... to each his own

584244823[/snapback]

I think everyone should be allowed to preach their favorite browsers... except IE users!!! :devil: Just kidding...

Seriously though, IE is so old, it's hard to believe people still use it. Especially after using Firefox for most of 2004.

I'll never switch back - Firefox is not only faster - it's much, much better.

Opera is also very good and Netscape is making a comeback.

What matters is that Microsoft is losing ground - rather quickly. Putting IE inside of Windows was a sure winner - but I think it's unfair. Microsoft doesn't even want people to know that there are other browsers, and as soon as other browsers start making some noise, they start talking $hit about them.

At all costs, screw Microsoft. They are the evil empire of the computer world - don't be a Microsoft ######!!!

And BTW, for those of you that don't know, Internet Explorer doesn't even follow all the standards of the World Wide Web Consortium. (w3.org) These guys set the standards for proper web design and development, and IE DOES NOT follow their standards. Firefox does.

[planetik]

Lol, IE Is faster because its so Buggy

IE Is realy realy buggy so its VERY fast.

Firefox displays pages better.

585347929[/snapback]

wtf? :huh:

[echotheory]

IE was much slower for me.

[at0mican]

Running that test, Firefox is slower than IE here.

[+LogicalApex MVC]

And BTW, for those of you that don't know, Internet Explorer doesn't even follow all the standards of the World Wide Web Consortium. (w3.org) These guys set the standards for proper web design and development, and IE DOES NOT follow their standards. Firefox does.

585410443[/snapback]

lol when will people realize the W3C standards are RECOMMENDATIONS, meaning no one HAS to follow them. Also no browser avalible today is 100% compliant to every version of the W3C's HTML related standards...

[Chouzan]

What matters is that Microsoft is losing ground - rather quickly. Putting IE inside of Windows was a sure winner - but I think it's unfair. Microsoft doesn't even want people to know that there are other browsers, and as soon as other browsers start making some noise, they start talking $hit about them.

585410443[/snapback]

Quite the opposite, Microsoft has promoted the use of alternatives although they do stand behind Internet Explorer as any developer would. Seems most of the mud is from the hands of those supporting Mozilla foundation.

Sorry if this comes off harsh, but most of your argument seems more like bellyfeel than anything else.