IE is faster than Firefox

[zhangm Supervisor]

Firefox rapes IE... :p

[uniacidz]

Okkkkkkkkkkkkkkk

Should be a club called Fanboys Neowin

Criteria, have to be a fanboy to join.

[CoLdFuSi0n]

Throughput (2)

51799 Bps

bytes per second

Throughput

414 kbps

kilobits per second

[cybervisionx]

IE killed my FireFox, but opera beat it 375kbs.

[PseudoRandomDragon]

Some tests are built to be bias, so I would test it on multiple sources.

[LITTLEKID]

The only reason firefox loses is cause of all the extentions installed on it though on this test it shows firefox better than explorer http://www.24fun.com/downloadcenter/benchjs/benchjs.html

Firefox vs Opera lets start a new browser war java script:emoticon(':devil:')

smilie

Top Ten

1 Xite - Guatemala - Vamos mmoy !!, Opera 7.5x, Windows XP, 1.60-1.69GHz 4.58 seconds, July 28, at 17:27:42

2 Xite - Guatemala - Vamos mmoy !!, Opera 7.5x, Windows XP, 1.60-1.69GHz 4.63 seconds, July 28, at 17:25:45

3 Xite - Guatemala - Vamos mmoy !!, Opera 7.5x, Windows XP, 1.60-1.69GHz 4.9 seconds, July 28, at 17:23:58

4 Xite - Guatemala, Opera 7.5x, Windows XP, 1.60-1.69GHz 5.41 seconds, July 28, at 17:21:40

5 mmoy, Firefox 0.9, Windows 2000 Server, 2.00-2.19GHz 5.44 seconds, July 27, at 18:57:27

6 mmoy, Firefox 0.9, Windows 2000 Server, 2.00-2.19GHz 5.5 seconds, July 27, at 18:58:30

7 mmoy, Firefox 0.9, Windows 2000 Server, 2.00-2.19GHz 5.5 seconds, July 27, at 16:04:44

8 mmoy-js, Firefox 0.9, Windows 2000 Server, 2.00-2.19GHz 5.53 seconds, July 28, at 14:37:57

9 mmoy, Firefox 0.9, Windows 2000 Server, 2.00-2.19GHz 5.54 seconds, July 27, at 16:00:12

10 mmoy-js, Firefox 0.9, Windows 2000 Server, 2.00-2.19GHz 5.56 seconds, July 28, at 14:39:23 :devil: :devil:

[IceDogg]

Ok call me a noob, I don't care. But how does a browser affect your Throughput?? I goto dsl reports and get almost the exact same numbers with each browser. Or does this Throughput mean something else? I'm lost here. LOL. I thought all the speed that a browser affected was the rendering of the pages. I'm I wrong? if so please explain all this. Again sorry to be a noob, but I like to learn so please be patient and explain this.. thanks.

[Dessimat0r]

All this test is doing is using Javascript to refresh those tiny frames with logos in them when the loading of the image is complete. It then counts how many times those images have been reloaded successfully, and then multiplies by image filesize.

So, it also has to do with how fast your browser can reload frames, not just the images, and various other overheads. This is not a true test.

[bucko]

I use FireFox as my main browser but I use IE now and then when things don't quiet work right in Firefox. I also test designing my web site's in both browsers :D. I don't give a toss about speed, as long as you got broadband you won't notice much difference.

[DOGglee]

firefox is faster for me :)

[Jeffredo]

A better test of which is "faster" on the Numion site is to go to "stopwatch" and run the sites you visit most through it and compare the two. You will get much more accurate, "real world" results. The "Yourspeed" test favors IE for some reason and it will always be faster than Firefox or Opera using it. Using www.numion.com/Stopwatch/ Firefox or Opera beat IE about 3 times out of four on sites I have bookmarked.

[zephiK]

oh really jeff ill try it

[zephiK]

0.9.3 is faster than 0.9

Throughput (2)

44704 Bps

bytes per second

Throughput

358 kbps

kilobits per second

FireFOX is MUCH FASTER i just checked usin www.doom3.com 009 on IE 005 on firefox

[sperm]

Firefox

Throughput

49831 Bps bytes per second

Throughput

399 kbps kilobits per second

IE

Throughput

45610 Bps bytes per second

Throughput

365 kbps kilobits per second

Seeems that Firefox is faster on my side

[stockwiz]

I'm using bigbang's optimized build plus I'm decked out with tweaks and internet explorer just slightly beat firefox.. it's obvious to me the gecko engine handles images more slowly the internet explorer so for a test like this isn't nothing unexpected. Really the two scored virtually identical when I was testing them.

[mmoy]

I'm using bigbang's optimized build plus I'm decked out with tweaks and internet explorer just slightly beat firefox.. it's obvious to me the gecko engine handles images more slowly the internet explorer so for a test like this isn't nothing unexpected. Really the two scored virtually identical when I was testing them.

I'm using bigbang's optimized build plus I'm decked out with tweaks and internet explorer just slightly beat firefox.. it's obvious to me the gecko engine handles images more slowly the internet explorer so for a test like this isn't nothing unexpected. Really the two scored virtually identical when I was testing them.

It depends on the kind of image. I've done quite a bit of work improving jpeg rendering performance and have several more medium-sized project to go. The best performance is on Pentium 4s but I'm doing a few things for older processors too.

At the moment, I'm sitting on 10 hash code optimizations and 15 graphics code improvements and lots of improvement projects in the pipeline. Many of those improvements are waiting for testing. It takes a fair amount of time testing and also building for MMX, SSE and SSE2 times FireFox, Thunderbird and SeaMonkey.

Personally I find FireFox to be fast. If there's a particular test that it is slow on, I can run a code profile on that test using ltProf, find the modules that FireFox is spending a lot of time in and then try to fix problems or optimize slow code. So if the browser is slow for something I do, I have the tools to improve it in that area.

BTW, I think that you mean bangbang, not bigbang.

[L3thal Veteran]

I can safely say they are at par on my system, though IE has the advantage because of its ability to render pictures much quicker.

[mmoy]

I can safely say they are at par on my system, though IE has the advantage because of its ability to render pictures much quicker.

Just pulled a 5.0 seconds at 24fun on my 2.0 Ghz system after putting in some of those code optimizations. BTW, the site says that network latency issues are isolated because of the way that they do the tests but I'm not completely convinced that this is true.

I did some performance testing on JPEG rendering and my code changes reduced JPEG rendering time by 50% from FireFox without my changes. I tested Internet Explorer as well and FF beat IE by a comfortable margin. This was in rendering a 30 MBs of JPEG images (images on local RamDisk to remove network latency concerns). It's next to impossible to test Opera because it reports back that it's done after the first page is loaded but continues to load the rest of the images in the background.

FireFox is not great on GIFs though most medium and large images are JPGs. One thing about FireFox is that if you don't like the performance of something, you can actually do something about it besides filing a bug report.

You can also balance quality and speed too. In the upsampling routines, you can choose between box filters or triangle filters. Box filters have less quality but are faster whereas triangle filters provide better quality but cost more in cpu time (actually I can't really tell the difference myself). The default is triangle filters for the most common cases. Changing a compile-time switch will drop you down to box filters for everything making rendering a bit faster.

If you can build FireFox and can code and debug, you have an incredible amount of flexibility in building the browser that you want.

[_I am Reptar]

i'm downloading alot of things :shifty:

firefox:

Throughput (2)

29511 Bps

bytes per second

Throughput

236 kbps

kilobits per second

IE:

Throughput (2)

34575 Bps

bytes per second

Throughput

277 kbps

kilobits per second

[Scorbing]

It may be faster, but it sure as heck is not safer. I was an IE user for a lot of years until I discovered Mozilla 1.7.2.

[offroadaaron]

i have to say that when i run ad-aware after going on the net with firefox, i have alot less spyware and stuff than when i use IE that is my main issue with IE

[mmoy]

It may be faster, but it sure as heck is not safer. I was an IE user for a lot of years until I discovered Mozilla 1.7.2.

It's amazing to me that so many very smart people are willing to live with Spyware on their systems. I have many very smart people ask me how to get rid of spyware on their machines. They tell me that they do scans about once a week or once every few weeks and find lots of spyware. I personally wouldn't tolerate a virus or any spyware on my system and would reformat the disk and reinstall the OS if there was something that I couldn't get rid of.

Fortunately I haven't had a problem in this century.

When they ask me what to do, I give them a list of things to do. One of them is to always stop using Internet Explorer. Use Opera, Netscape, K-Meleon,

Mozilla, FireFox, whatever. But don't use Internet Explorer. And if you're thinking of upgrading, consider an AMD chip with NX (no execute feature) to thwart buffer overflow exploits (MS will support this in SP2).

[Rudy]

It's amazing to me that so many very smart people are willing to live with Spyware on their systems. I have many very smart people ask me how to get rid of spyware on their machines. They tell me that they do scans about once a week or once every few weeks and find lots of spyware. I personally wouldn't tolerate a virus or any spyware on my system and would reformat the disk and reinstall the OS if there was something that I couldn't get rid of.

Fortunately I haven't had a problem in this century.

When they ask me what to do, I give them a list of things to do. One of them is to always stop using Internet Explorer. Use Opera, Netscape, K-Meleon,

Mozilla, FireFox, whatever. But don't use Internet Explorer. And if you're thinking of upgrading, consider an AMD chip with NX (no execute feature) to thwart buffer overflow exploits (MS will support this in SP2).

if you know how to configure it, IE can be as good if not better than any other browser...security wise

[ABC]

What ever, security holes are bundled with any software that requires Internet activity.

People that have powerful system like mine, well they simply don't care about a half a second speed difference.

I'm an Avant Browser using because I can really set it to my liking. No thread like this one will makes me ditch it.

ABC and a half!

[mmoy]

if you know how to configure it, IE can be as good if not better than any other browser...security wise

With FireFox, you have the source code. You can put in any security stuff that you want to. If you want to block stuff during three hours of the day on Tuesday and Thursday, you can program that in, recompile and link and have your custom security.