Opera 9981 beats Firefox 3.0pre in a Mozilla benchmark


Recommended Posts

The Linux performance of Opera is still a bit on the slower side, but the Windows version just speeds up with every new snapshot release.

And now the newest (and fastest) snapshot of Opera (build 9981) actually beats the newest (and fastest AFAIK) nightly of Firefox (2008051011) in the Mozilla javascript performance test, the Dromaeo benchmark.

Opera score :

http://dromaeo.com/?id=9707

Firefox score :

http://dromaeo.com/?id=9709

The latest Opera snapshot :

http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/2008/...d-optimizations

It's quite a feat when you consider that just more than a couple weeks ago Opera was behind Firefox by 1 whole second, and now they are ahead by 100ms, not to mention it's a test made by Mozilla :cool:

100 ms :| as if I care about it when I browse some web sites

well, it's a benchmark, and the total result is just around 2 second, so when you put it into perspective, from 1 second (50%) slower to 100ms (5%) faster in a couple of weeks is quite a feat ;)

Especially when Firefox made it sound like a huge thing by claiming itself to be the fastest browser when b5 was released, so it's fair game :p

Your result is in the 11 thousand range, the new Opera build is in the 2 thousand range ;)

Depends on the machine. My FFb5 is in the low 1000's http://dromaeo.com/?id=9815

Anywho, this is good. Faster browsers are better for us (the consumer). Yay for competition!

No doubt the latest Opera weekly is faster. However, my results tend to differ from yours:

Opera 9.5 beta build 9981: 1392

Minefield 2008051107: 1353

Firefox 2.0.0.14: 6992.6 (lol)

Webkit r33029: 1246.4

Results are too close to call for the latest Opera and Firefox previews. So let's just sit back and pat both on the back for speeding up their products. :yes:

Edit: Let's give Webkit some praise too.

Edited by rm20010
Ya in ms. big deal. Wait until your Opera becomes final. I have never heard of this test site. As far as I know it is meaningless.

well it's about as meaningless as how the Mozilla guys made it sound like a BIG DEAL when ff3b5 was released and claimed itself as the fastest browser for some synthetic javascript benchmark. And some dude here even posted a "Firefox beats everything" thread back then, so it's fair game :p

and obviously it's quite a big deal to them since they even made their own javascript benchmark, the Dromaeo, so yeah this test site is THE Mozilla javascript test, it's no wonder you haven't heard of it since Mozilla just made it after firefox3b5. If you have something against it, tell that to the Mozilla guys, and tell them to wait their Firefox becomes final instead of beta 5 :p

But then they both make some great progress in javascript performance lately, so kudos to both teams, and to the webkit for being very very fast all this time.

This is a generic browser test site that happened to have been made by a Mozilla (and jQuery) guy. Mozilla have taken it and are working with other browser guys to make the test better.

Not everything has to be a "us vs. them" thing.

This is a generic browser test site that happened to have been made by a Mozilla (and jQuery) guy. Mozilla have taken it and are working with other browser guys to make the test better.

Not everything has to be a "us vs. them" thing.

So? it doesn't change the fact that it is THE Mozilla javascript test. It's not a "us vs. them" thing, it's just a fair game after all those "Firefox 3b5 fastest browser" reports everywhere for the past month or so :p

I tried this in IE7 and it just froze and I had to end the process lol.

yea, IE7 freezes, IE8 beta 1 can pass the test, I guess that means the IE guys are also doing a good work lately (compared to themselves before that is) :p

I think the fact that when the flashing contest button on the NW frontpage was broken and used a full core on IE, and ~25%(50% of one core) on FF and what was it 5% or so on Opera shows wich browser handles scripts better :)

I still use Maxthon though, but I may change when 9.5 is final.

Ya in ms. big deal. Wait until your Opera becomes final. I have never heard of this test site. As far as I know it is meaningless.

Javascript performance isn't meaningless though, especially not in this day and age of Javascript-heavy AJAX sites.

So this is interesting, and I think there's no coincidence both Mozilla and Opera have been focusing a bit on this lately. Sites may widely be affected, regardless if it's about Gmail or e.g. Digg.

Well I did some benchmarks on my computer (x2 4800+ @2.64Ghz / WinXP) and it does seem to be speedy but Firefox 3.0pre 080512 (ayakawa's PGO build) had a slight edge over Opera 9981 in JavaScript when I tested. Overall both seem very fast and you probably wouldn't notice much of a difference between the two.

Opera Score 2278.20ms (Total)

http://dromaeo.com/?id=10000

Firefox Score 1987.60ms (Total)

http://dromaeo.com/?id=10004

JavaScript Performance Test

Firefox firefox30prewj4.png

Opera opera9981os3.png

DOM Core Performance Appending, Prepending, Inserting, Indexing, Removing

Firefox (avg. of 10 tests): 961.1ms

Opera (avg. of 10 tests): 511.1ms

DOM Core Performance Parsing

Firefox (avg. of 10 tests): 1359ms

Opera (avg. of 10 tests): 1467.7ms

hmm

if I add up the scores form the 3 tests you showed/listed I get

FF: 2585

Opera: 2330

Well if you add in the SunSpider Javascript benchmark in which Opera is about 2 seconds slower, then Firefox would take a considerable lead.

SunSpider Result Firefox 3770.4ms

SunSpider Result Opera 5775.4ms

All said and done optimized Firefox 3.0pre builds are still faster with javascript then Opera and Opera is still faster rendering the other objects on the page other than javascript. If they stay neck and neck like this while continuing to improve, performance won't even be much of a factor when making a decision to use either Opera 9.50 or Firefox 3.0 once the final versions are released.

well, it seems Firefox managed to improve its score steadily in the past few days with each new build

http://dromaeo.com/?id=10161

Also I guess it depends a lot on the system, maybe that's what the PGO is about. It's faster on the Woodcrest system, but a bit slower on my old Thinkpad

http://dromaeo.com/?id=10162

http://dromaeo.com/?id=10164

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Glad these prices are starting to come down, but that is still crazy. I bought the 2TB 9100 Pro (slightly more expensive version with PCIe 5.0) last year for $240.
    • The 2TB Samsung 990 PRO NVMe SSD hits lowest price in over three months by Sayan Sen Yesterday, we covered a really good deal wherein you can get a 4TB TeamGroup T-FORCE G50 NVMe PCIe Gen4 SSD for a low price of just $400 with a special discount coupon. That's just $100 per TB, making it a very good offer during these hard times. The deal is still live, so you can check it out in its dedicated article here if you do not want to miss out. Meanwhile, if you don't have that kind of budget but still wish to buy an SSD for a good price, the 2TB variant of the TeamGroup SSD at $280 its lowest price in over three months. Meanwhile, those seeking 2TB but faster performance can check out Samsung's 990 PRO, which has hit the lowest price also in the last quarter or so, as it's on sale for $370 (purchase links under the specs table down below). Thus, you want a faster drive, get the 990 Pro, or you want more capacity, grab the TeamGroup 4TB linked in the first para. The 990 PRO is a PCIe Gen4 NVMe SSD and still one of the fastest drives available today for under $500. Speaking of fast, sequential reads and writes are rated at 7450 MB/s and 6900 MB/s, respectively. The random throughputs for reads and writes are 1400K IOPS and 1550K IOPS, respectively. The 990 PRO is based on Samsung's 7th Gen V-NAND flash, and it too is TLC. It packs 2 gigs of LPDDR4 DRAM cache, which helps the random performance. The endurance rating for this is 1200 TBW (terabytes written), which should be sufficient for most users. The Samsung 990 PRO is compatible with the PlayStation 5, but if you are going to use the 990 PRO on a PC, check out the Samsung Magician app that lets you track your drive's health, update its firmware, customize various settings, and more. The tech specs are given below: Specification TeamGroup T-FORCE G50 2TB Samsung 990 PRO 2TB Interface PCIe 4.0 x4, NVMe 1.4 PCIe Gen 4.0 x4, NVMe 2.0 Form Factor M.2 2280 M.2 2280 Controller InnoGrit Controller Samsung In-house Controller NAND Flash 3D TLC 3D TLC DRAM Cache None (HMB supported) 2GB LPDDR4 Sequential Read (Max) 5,000 MB/s 7,450 MB/s Sequential Write (Max) 4,500 MB/s 6,900 MB/s Random Read (4K) Up to 600,000 IOPS Up to 1,400,000 IOPS Random Write (4K) Up to 700,000 IOPS Up to 1,550,000 IOPS TBW (Endurance) 1,300 TBW 1,200 TBW MTBF 3,000,000 hours 1,500,000 hours Operating Temperature 0°C to 70°C 0°C to 70°C Storage Temperature -40°C to 85°C -40°C to 85°C Shock Resistance 1,500G / 0.5ms 1,500G / 0.5ms Heatsink Patented Graphene Heat Spreader No Get them at the links below: Samsung 990 PRO SSD 2TB (MZ-V9P2T0B/AM): $369.99 (Sold and Shipped by Amazon US) TEAMGROUP T-Force G50 2TB SSD (TM8FFE002T0C129): $279.99 (Sold by TeamGroup, Shipped by Amazon US) Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
    • If you can't spell a simple word that 2nd graders learn, your entire argument is suspect.
    • And here goes the "Won't someone think of the children" brigade. Get stuffed mate. This has NOTHING to do with making the internet safe. It's about tracking adults, spying on your online activity, and sending the boys around when they don't like something you post. Also, again, parliament have voted TWICE against this, and Starmer is going ahead anyway. THAT is anti-democratic bullsh**. They will use this law to track you, they will use this law to control you, and they will use this law to punish you if they don't like what you do, even if it's legal. And your data? Say bye bye to that. It'll be on the darkweb in weeks. I'm not some rando online. I've been an IT professional for 40 years, many of it in security. I know exactly what this means and what will happen to your data. I do not consent and I will not comply.
    • "...but it may not be Microsoft's fault" seems like a reasonable way to tease what is going on without leaving the user with a false impression that an update is the problem. A title isn't a summery, it is meant to entice the user to read the article. It should not contain a misleading premise; which this title does not. You could maybe complain that the first paragraph should have included that detail. The writing style popularized over 100 years ago in newspapers will cover the most important information as soon as possible with details and nuance added later; the idea being that with each new paragraph you have less of the reader's focus.
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      Jocimo earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      suprememobiles48 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Windows Guy earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      Prasann earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Prasann earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      520
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      174
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      90
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      81
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      70
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!