opera > firefox (performance)

[yxz]

browser:

firefox - Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.3a1pre) Gecko/20090916 Minefield/3.7a1pre

opera - Opera/9.80 (Windows NT 6.1; U; en) Presto/2.2.15 Version/10.10

pageset:

3x neowin.net slashdot.org bing.com google.com imdb.com en.wikipedia.org digg.com

firefox

firefox with adblock plus (easylist)

opera

opera with urlfilter (fanboy)

[d_ralphie]

Ok... What am I supposed to be seeing here?

[Azusa]

Is this from fresh install of both?

[yxz]

yes

[Draconian Guppy]

Wait... your saying that opera performs better with actual numbers? :p Opera FTW.

...Jumps in flame-proof suit :p

[yxz]

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.3a1pre) Gecko/20090927 Minefield/3.7a1pre

Opera/9.80 (Windows NT 6.1; U; en) Presto/2.2.15 Version/10.10 - build 1799

2x neowin.net slashdot.org en.wikipedia.org imdb.com digg.com google.com bing.com

firefox

firefox with ABP

opera

opera with urlfilter

[petrossa]

Wait... your saying that opera performs better with actual numbers? :p Opera FTW.

...Jumps in flame-proof suit :p

Got a spare? This is going to turn ugly soon.?:laugh::

[yxz]

3 consecutive runs

pageset:

neowin.net slashdot.org en.wikipedia.org digg.com imdb.com bing.com google.com

neowin.net slashdot.org en.wikipedia.org digg.com imdb.com bing.com google.com

CPU = CPU time in seconds

RAM = Working Set in kilobytes

without adblocking

Name			ProductVersion  FileVersion				 CPU			 RAM
----			--------------  -----------				 ---			 ---
firefox		 3.7a1pre		1.9.3a1pre			7,7688498		  101612
firefox		 3.7a1pre		1.9.3a1pre			7,3476471		  101600
firefox		 3.7a1pre		1.9.3a1pre			7,1604459		  115360

OPERA		   10.10		   1799 (1)			  5,6472362		  111032
OPERA		   10.10		   1799 (1)			  5,6004359		  106612
OPERA		   10.10		   1799 (1)			  5,2728338		  104492

with adblocking (firefox ABP, opera urlfilter)

Name			ProductVersion  FileVersion				 CPU			 RAM
----			--------------  -----------				 ---			 ---
firefox		 3.7a1pre		1.9.3a1pre			8,1432522		  104352
firefox		 3.7a1pre		1.9.3a1pre			8,1588523		  104900
firefox		 3.7a1pre		1.9.3a1pre			7,7064494		  104320

OPERA		   10.10		   1799 (1)			  5,0076321		   90304
OPERA		   10.10		   1799 (1)			  4,6176296		   85052
OPERA		   10.10		   1799 (1)			  4,5084289		   82388

Edited September 28, 2009 by yxz

[soldier1st]

numbers don't tell the whole story, only use them as a reference or as a base to start off from..

[Neoauld]

yup

at work i use opera because and its crazy fast

at home id never touch it, as it doesnt include many features i want

[caerma]

firefox sucks... too much resources.

[hdood]

Funny. I don't touch Opera because it tries to be too much. I just want a browser. I don't want an IRC or Bittorrent client or anything else. This has always been the complaint I've heard about Opera (and Communicator for that matter).

[Neoauld]

Funny. I don't touch Opera because it tries to be too much. I just want a browser. I don't want an IRC or Bittorrent client or anything else. This has always been the complaint I've heard about Opera (and Communicator for that matter).

well they do a goodjob of keeping it basic, in terms of if you dont use its email client(which is awful), you dont have to, same with irc or BT(though you gotta disable the BT filetype handling)

For work its fine, cause it doesnt have any vulnerabilities that could get onto my work network

[lnmnky]

Funny. I don't touch Opera because it tries to be too much. I just want a browser. I don't want an IRC or Bittorrent client or anything else. This has always been the complaint I've heard about Opera (and Communicator for that matter).

They don't appear unless you enable them. In fact I can't even enable chat. My torrents open with Vuze automatically.

[Rudy]

I tried the OSX version and it seemed a lot slower than FF, I would love to see the same test done on OSX

[Growled Member]

Opera is fast, I'll give it that.

[buckboii]

opera is way faster then firefox in my opinion and it is more user friendly as well. the short cuts compared to firefox is incomparable.

[fhpuqrgrpgvirzhpujbj]

I still prefer Firefox :/

[ylcard]

Do these numbers mean anything ?

I use Chrome once in a while if Firefox refuses to load up a page but I couldn't care less about milliseconds..

[d_ralphie]

I still don't get the numbers. What are they supposed to show?

Funny. I don't touch Opera because it tries to be too much. I just want a browser. I don't want an IRC or Bittorrent client or anything else. This has always been the complaint I've heard about Opera (and Communicator for that matter).

So you don't touch Firefox either, because it has extensions, and you can install them to "do too much"? Just like Opera is a basic browser by default, but you can enable additional features that will otherwise remain inactive and out of the way?

[-KJ]

Ah, there he is ;)

I use Opera. I used to use FF2 on my old notebook. It would crap out after like 5 tabs. Much to my amazement, when Opera became 'free' (they still had advertisements within the browser for a while), I could open 10 pages without it slugging around. FF2 was a real RAM ######. And there wasn't much RAM to spread on that old sucker (512MB). So I started using Opera on there, and that's how I made the switch to Opera.

But I'm probably going to switch back to FF3 now for web dev, and I have a new notebook so RAM isn't really an issue. But Opera is a solid browser. Fast and light. People complain about how it has other features included, well yeah, I'd complain if it affected the performance noticeably -- but so far, nothing noticeable with each feature added since they went free.

[Yogurth]

But I'm probably going to switch back to FF3 now for web dev

I'm not into web developing, but Opera also has WebDev tools called Dragonfly. It is said that these are pretty powerful.

http://www.opera.com/dragonfly/

http://my.opera.com/dragonfly/blog/