In an effort to answer that question, we're going to do something we usually don't: test a development browser. Next is the name of Opera's development branch, and a few weeks ago the company introduced its first Chromium-based version to the general public.
When we began testing, the version number was 15.0.1147.24. But as with any development channel, there are frequent updates, so don't be surprised if your copy of Opera Next is newer than what we're benchmarking. And remember, as we saw with the IE9 Developer Preview back in 2009, a stripped-down, feature-incomplete pre-release can often obliterate speed records, giving a false sense of the final product's true performance. Therefore, Opera Next is not eligible to win in this Grand Prix. We're merely checking to see where it stands amongst the usual suspects, especially in relation to Opera and Chrome.

The first page of the last Web Browser Grand Prix, entitled Possibly The Last "Top Four", caused quite a stir. With news that Opera was switching to a Chromium base, many wondered if the second-oldest Web browser was going to lose relevance. After all, there are plenty of second-string browsers out there based on the open source bits of Chrome, each with its own feature-based angle (like Comodo Dragon and security, along with RockMelt and social).
But before we find out what's happening with Opera, let's get caught up on the latest Web browser news and events. The last couple of months have been pretty busy, packed with announcements and, as always, plenty of drama. Here's the rundown:
Recent News And Events
03/08/13: Chrome OS Remains Undefeated At Pwnium 3
03/10/13: No Firefox For iOS, Says Mozilla's Product Head
03/25/13: Testers Say IE 11 Can Impersonate Firefox Via User Agent String
04/02/13: Firefox 20 Arrives With Per-Window Private Browsing, Download Manager
04/03/13: Blink! Google Is Forking WebKit
04/03/13: Opera Confirms It Will Follow Google and Ditch WebKit For Blink
04/04/13: Mozilla, Samsung Collaborating on New Browser Engine
04/05/13: WebKit Developers Discuss Removal of Google-Specific Code
04/12/13: Browser Choice May Affect Your Job Prospects
04/29/13: Former Opera Employee Sued for Giving Mozilla Trade Secrets
05/14/13: Firefox 21 Arrives
05/16/13: Ubuntu Developers Revisit Replacing Firefox With Chromium
05/21/13: Chrome 27 Is Out: 5% Faster Page Loads
05/28/13: Opera Releases Its First Chromium-Based Browser
06/05/13: Mozilla Plans Major Design Overhaul With Firefox 25 Release In October
06/11/13: Microsoft Boasts of Tiny Energy Saving With IE
06/22/13: Firefox advances Do-Not-Track Technology
06/26/13: IE 11 Getting WebGL, SPDY/3, New Dev Tool
06/26/13: Firefox 22 Launches, Supports Unreal Engine 3
Everyone get all of that? Google is creating a WebKit fork called Blink, making Chromium a combination of Blink/V8, and Opera plans to follow suit. And while Opera cozies up to its old rival Google, a new feud is brewing between the Norwegian browser-maker and Mozilla over an ex-Opera employee who allegedly divulged trade secrets to the non-profit. Meanwhile, Ubuntu is again considering ditching Firefox for Chromium as the distro's default Web browser, just as Firefox announces a major refresh that has the open source browser looking a whole lot like Chrome:
Firefox 25's New User Interface
And the best one? Microsoft's apparent one-eighty on WebGL, with support for the hardware acceleration spotted in IE11 on Windows 8.1.
Now, let's take a quick look at today's five contenders: Chrome 27, Firefox 22, IE10, Opera 12, and Opera Next!
Windows 8 Web Browser Grand Prix Competitors
Before we get started, let's go over the test setup and changes to the benchmark suite.
Our test hardware underwent some significant changes since Web Browser Grand Prix: Chrome 25, Firefox 19, And IE10. We're now on an Ivy Bridge-based Core i5 rig, upgraded from the equivalent Sandy Bridge parts. Our cable modem and ISP speeds are also better than last time. For now, the Web server and router remain the same, though both should be new by the next time we do one of these stories.
Our benchmark suite is also changing. First, that 40-tab workload in our memory tests is now timed using a stopwatch, and contributing to our overall wait time score (start-up and page load times).
Moving on to JavaScript, after we retired SunSpider from the test suite, WebKit updated the long-believed-abandoned JS performance test. We'll be running the newly-released SunSpider v1.0 to see if this benchmark's issues with Internet Explorer have been resolved.
KaizouMark makes a return now that IE9 is no longer in the mix, finally providing us with a long-overdue CSS3 performance test.
The final massive change to the benchmark line-up is in Hardware Acceleration. Both native HTML5 HWA and WebGL swapped out an old test for a newer one. First, we say goodbye to Psychedelic Browsing, and hello to CanvasMark 2013. Next, Airtight Interactive's WebGL Demo gets benched in favor of LUIC Cubes, a more intense metric that should be useful longer.
Test Setup And Benchmark Suite
Test System Specs | |
|---|---|
| Operating System | ![]() Microsoft Windows 8 Enterprise (64-bit) ![]() |
| Processor | Intel Core i5-3570K @ 4.2 GHz (quad-core) |
| Motherboard | Gigabyte GA-Z77X-UD5H (rev 1.0, F14 BIOS) |
| Memory | 16 GB Crucial DDR3 @ 1600 MT/s (4 x 4 GB) |
| Graphics | Gigabyte GeForce GTX 660 Ti 1 GB GDDR5 (PCIe 2.0 x16) |
| Storage | Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 500 GB SATA II 3Gb/s, 7200 RPM, 16 MB Cache |
| Optical | Asus DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS |
| Power Supply | Corsair TX750W (750 W max) |
| Case | Zalman MS-800 Plus |
| CPU Cooler | NZXT Kraken X60 (closed-loop liquid cooler) |
| Monitor | AOC E2752Vh 27-inch LED (1920x1080) |
| Keyboard | Logitech Wireless Keyboard K320 |
| Mouse | Logitech Wireless Trackball M570 |
Local Web Server Specs | |
| Operating System | Ubuntu 12.04 LTS Server Edition "Precise Pangolin" (32-bit) |
| Processor | Intel Pentium 4 @ 2.41 GHz |
| Motherboard | Biostar P4M80-M4 |
| Memory | 768 MB DDR @ 333 MT/s |
| Storage | Western Digital Caviar SE WD1600AAJD, 160 GB EIDE, 7200 RPM |
| Extra Packages | Apache2, MySQL Client, MySQL Server, PHP5, PHP-GD, PHP5-MySQL, PHPMyAdmin, SSH, Node.js, NPM |
Network Specs | |
| ISP Service | Cox Preferred (18 Mb/s down, 2 Mb/s up) |
| Modem | Cisco Telephony Modem DPQ3212 (DOCSIS 3) |
| Router | Linksys WRT54G2 V1 |
Benchmark Suite | |
| Startup Time | Cold Start Time (Google SERP, Cached) |
| Hot Start Time (Google SERP, Cached) | |
| Cold Start Time (Eight Tabs, Cached) | |
| Hot Start Time (Eight Tabs, Cached) | |
| Page Load Time | EEMBC BrowsingBench |
| 40-Tab Load Time (Top 40 Websites) | |
| JavaScript | RIABench JavaScript (Eight Tests) |
| Futuremark Peacekeeper v2.0 | |
| Rightware Browsermark v2.0 | |
| JSBench | |
| WebKit SunSpider v1.0 | |
| DOM | Mozilla Dromaeo DOM (Core) |
| HTML5 | Principled Technologies WebXPRT CP1 |
| Impact HTML5 Benchmark | |
| Hardware Acceleration | Facebook JSGameBench v0.4.1 |
| HTML5 HWA | WebVizBench |
| CanvasMark 2013 | |
| WebGL | LUIC Cubes |
| Scirra WebGL Performance Test | |
| Memory Efficiency | Memory Usage (Single Tab) |
| Memory Usage (40 Tabs) | |
| Memory Management (-39 Tabs) | |
| Reliability | Proper Page Loads |
| Security | Browserscope Security |
| Standards Conformance | HTML5Test.com |
| The CSS3 Test | |
| Ecmascript Language test262 | |
While applicable links are included in the table above, we also have a public delicious account dedicated to Web Browser Grand Prix benchmark links. Detailed methodologies are explained on the individual benchmark pages.
We've highlighted Opera Next in the charts to emphasize that it's still in development and not part of the usual WBGP line-up.
All start-up times are recorded using a stopwatch, and timing begins from the point the application is launched to the point that all tabs report fully-loaded content. The single-tab test page is a saved copy of the Google SERP for "Tom's Hardware", hosted from our local Web server. The eight-tab tests add the About page on barbeque beef brisket, a product page from Amazon, a random popular question on Ask, the "free stuff" listing for Los Angeles on craigslist, my LinkedIn profile, the Wikipedia page for Tom's Hardware, and the Yahoo! homepage. As with the Google SERP, all pages are saved and hosted from our local Web server.
We've combined the hot (newly-opened) and cold (re-opened) browser times into one chart each for single- and eight-tab starts.

With just a single homepage, Internet Explorer leads when it's launched for the first time after a fresh reboot. Firefox 22 isn't too far behind at just over four seconds. Meanwhile, the original Opera earns a close third-place finish. Opera Next and its new cousin Google Chrome take up fourth and fifth place, respectively.
When the browsers are re-opened, the placing changes to IE10, Opera Next, and Firefox rounding out the top three spots, with each browser taking just one second or less to launch. The old Opera is a distant fourth-place finisher, while Chrome takes more than three seconds to re-open, landing the planet's new favorite Web browser squarely in last place. Remember that this is gauging start-up time, so the difference between Opera Next and Chrome is probably due to a combination of Google services built into Chrome and the lack of a full feature set in Opera Next.

With a home group of eight tabs, Firefox 22 is the first-place finisher when we start it up cold, commanding a substantial lead over the second-place contender, the current version of Opera. Chrome comes in third, while Opera Next follows closely in fourth place. IE10 is the only browser to surpass the 10-second mark, placing last. Also, remember the original caveat to our start-up time testing: eight tabs is Internet Explorer's home group maximum. So, although IE10 is only about one second behind Opera Next, it also hits a limitation that the other browsers aren't confined to.
Started hot, IE10 takes the lead, opening all eight tabs in two seconds flat! Arch-rival Mozilla Firefox takes an extremely close second place. The remaining browsers fall quite a bit further behind, as the third-place finisher (Opera), takes just over four seconds. Its replacement takes nearly four and a half seconds. Meanwhile, Chrome places dead last, yet again.
Now let's see the average time it takes each browser to complete all four start-up scenarios.

Firefox commands an impressive lead at just under three seconds. That's an incredible performance, and a vast improvement over Mozilla's early rapid-release versions. IE10 places second, while the original Opera places third. Opera Next is close behind at five seconds. Chrome takes almost six seconds to start, on average. This is a terrible fall for the Web browser originally known for opening in a split second.
It seems that Opera Next is a minor downgrade from the current version, though it's not as slow as Chrome. Once again, we need to point out that this is a browser in development, so everything could very well change by the time it becomes Opera.
Moving on to page load time, we have EEMBC's BrowsingBench. This is one of the more real-world benchmarks in that it uses actual sample Web pages instead of test pages created for the purposes of benchmarking. Like our previous page load timer, BrowsingBench is run from our local Web server. Unlike our previous solution, though, BrowsingBench runs multiple iterations in each session, uses several different pages from the same site, and also tests foreign and mobile pages.

Chrome takes the lead in BrowsingBench, though predictably, Opera Next is right on Google's heels in second place. Switching to a non-Chromium browser, the original Opera is in third, just 400 points behind the leaders. IE10 is another 300 points behind in fourth place, with start-up champ Mozilla Firefox earning last place at nearly 1000 points behind the leaders.
As series regulars know, we load the top 40 Web pages in a single browser window in our memory efficiency and page load reliability testing. Some of you asked us to time this massive workload, so we did. Just like those two tests, all 40 tabs are pre-loaded so that the contents are in cache, and the browsers are started up (hot) before the command to open the 40 tabs is given. Times are taken using a stopwatch and timing begins from the point that the 40 bookmarks are opened to the point that all tabs stop loading.

And we have a winner, folks! It's Opera. Both of them. Opera Next takes an average of only 25 seconds to open the 40-tab workload, while the current version takes just 27 seconds. Internet Explorer 10 takes almost 35 seconds, though there's a caveat. IE still crashes when loading this number of tabs for the first time (uncached/cold) and takes several minutes to recover. Although we're not testing the uncached/cold scenario, none of the other browsers fall to pieces during the setup process for these tests.
Firefox 22 places fourth around the 45-second mark, while Chrome takes more than a minute to finish loading. We need to keep the reliability ratings in mind too, though. Although Firefox comes in behind IE10, Mozilla typically enjoys an edge in properly rendering all 40 of these pages, whereas Redmond's browser has earned some of the worst reliability ratings we've recorded over the years. What's amazing, however, is that Opera traditionally rivals Firefox in proper page loads, yet does so even faster than the less reliable browsers. Later on, we'll see if Opera Next loses or retains this uncanny mix of speed and correctness.
Wait Time Composite

With the wait time composite, we have our first category winner: Opera! While Opera Next earns the best composite score, as we have to keep reminding ourselves, it's still in development and ineligible for the win. As far as the current championship is concerned, the victory goes to the runner-up. Luckily for the folks at Opera, that still makes Opera the winner. Yes, folks, the current version of Opera offers the shortest wait times out of the top four Windows browsers. Firefox and IE10 take very close second- and third-place finishes. Meanwhile, despite rendering most single webpages faster than the competition, Chrome's slowing start-up times and the new heavy workload place the browser quite a bit further behind.
JavaScript
WebKit's iconic SunSpider JavaScript performance benchmark makes a return to the Web Browser Grand Prix today, having finally been updated after nearly four years of stagnation. Besides being dormant, the 0.9.1 version of this test showed IE9 to be far faster than any other browser, which is usually a complete reversal of the results generated by similar JS performance tests. Let's see if the big one-dot-oh changes things.

Although the placing of the other four browsers looks consistent, it appears that the WebKit developers didn't modify SunSpider v1.0 to account for Internet Explorer's incredulously low scores. Unfortunately, this means SunSpider returns to the bleachers, and these results won't be included in today's scoring.
Now let's move on to today's other fresh face: JSBench. Like BrowsingBench, and unlike most off-the-shelf Web browser benchmarks, this test could be considered real-world. JSBench uses actual snippets of JavaScript that appear on several of today's most-visited Web sites.

Chrome takes the lead, followed by Opera Next in second place and the current version of Opera in third. At 66 seconds, Firefox places fourth, with long-term rival Internet Explorer bringing up the rear.

RIABench places Chrome in a commanding lead and IE10 in a distant last place, with Opera Next, Opera, and Firefox in-between the two. This test basically has Opera doing a trade-off, with Opera Next showing lower timed results, but the current version having higher FPS scores.

Futuremark also has Chrome in first place, with Opera Next taking the second-place position and the current version in third. Firefox and IE10 bring up the rear. In this test, Opera Next appears to be a marked improvement over the current version of Opera.

While Chrome comes away with another win in Browsermark, Opera Next is a much closer second-place finisher this time. Firefox places third, with Opera in fourth, about 2500 points behind Opera Next. IE10 places last yet again.
DOM

Firefox manages a victory when we test the Document Object Model, with JavaScript-winner Chrome taking a respectable second place, nearly tying with Opera Next. Opera's current incarnation earns a very distant fourth-place finish. IE10 again falls to dead last, with just half of Opera 12's already-miserable score.
JS/DOM Composite Score

Chrome is the obvious winner, with Opera Next coming in second, Firefox placing third, Opera 12 in fourth, and IE10 clearly last. Opera Next appears to offer a healthy boost in JS/DOM performance over the current version.
HTML5
WebXPRT 2013 by Principled Technologies is now out of the consumer preview stage and officially live. This HTML5 benchmark is framed in the scenario of Web apps for productivity. Tests include photo effects and face detection to represent common tasks of an image editor, a stocks dashboard with tables and charts, and an offline notes app.

Add another win to the Firefox tally, though Chrome is so close that Mozilla nearly has a tie on its hands. IE10 and Opera Next are distant third- and fourth-place finishers (respectively), and Opera 12 is far behind the pack in last place. Once again, Opera Next appears to be taking the Norwegian browser in the right direction, posting nearly double the score of Opera 12.
This benchmark is a timedemo of the Impact HTML5 game, so it should be pretty indicative of casual, 2D HTML5-based titles.

IE10 pulls off an upset, achieving the highest score in Impact and beating Chrome by just 1100 points. Firefox places third, with the duo of Operas in tow. Next upstages the current version of Opera again, though not by nearly as much as in the productivity-oriented WebXPRT.
CSS3
Also returning to the WBGP is a CSS test. KaizouMark is a modern CSS3 benchmark that returns individual results for its five tests. The top set of bars is the sum of the five higher-is-better KaizouMark scores, while the remaining bars contain the individual test results.
Chrome takes the lead, with IE10 placing second. Firefox 22 winds up in third, Opera Next takes fourth, and Opera 12 isn't far behind in fifth.
HTML5/CSS3 Composite Score
Our HTML5/CSS3 composite score is made up of all three tests on this page.

Chrome 27 barely pulls ahead of second-place finisher Mozilla Firefox, with IE10 close behind in third. Trailing the pack is Opera Next in fourth place. Opera 12 falls to the bottom with a score of roughly half that of Chrome or Firefox.
Hardware acceleration is split into two main sections: native HTML5 HWA, and WebGL.
Native HTML5 Hardware Acceleration
While CanvasMark 2013 is a new addition to the WBGP, in actuality, it's an update to an old staple. This test is written by UK Web developer Kevin Roast, who also wrote the Asteroids HTML5 Canvas 2D & JavaScript Benchmark. In fact, CanvasMark includes many portions of the updated version of his Asteroids game.

Chrome takes a decisive lead in this test, scoring just over 20,000 points. Opera Next is the runner-up at just under 15,000 points. Firefox is another 5000 points behind in third, with IE10 and Opera 12 close behind in fourth and fifth place (respectively). Once again, the Chromium-based Opera Next shows a hefty advantage over the current Presto/Carakan-based Opera 12.
For this installment, we're ditching Psychedelic Browsing since we just received CanvasMark. We're retaining WebVizBench, but replacing the synthetic scores with FPS results.

IE10 still has the upper hand in this test. Chrome takes a second-place finish at 51 FPS, with Firefox in third. Opera Next places fourth, while Opera 12 only manages to earn an appropriate 12 FPS. Yet again, Next represents a significant step up, this time more than tripling the performance of Opera's current version.
WebGL
As of now, only Chrome and Firefox sport stable, default WebGL implementations. IE10 does not support WebGL at all. Microsoft had cited security concerns, though recent reports show that IE11 will get WebGL support. As a Chromium derivative, Opera Next also has WebGL support. While Opera 12 is capable of running WebGL content (by enabling WebGL; default is disabled), it doesn't properly support either of our current WebGL tests.
The Scirra WebGL performance test measures the number of 2D triangles represented onscreen when the animation reaches the 30 FPS threshold.

Opera Next comes out of nowhere with a serious victory over both Chrome and Firefox, able to display nearly 50% more triangles than Chrome 27, and more than twice as many as Firefox 22.
Instead of triangles, LUIC, our new WebGL benchmark, continuously adds 3D cubes until the animation reaches 50 FPS.

Firefox 22 takes the lead here, with Opera Next in a very close second place. Meanwhile, Chrome 27 achieves just around half the score of the top two, placing dead last.
Hardware Acceleration
Moving on to general hardware acceleration testing, we have JSGameBench, which contains both native HTML5 and WebGL components.

Firefox 22 is victorious yet again, with a score nearly 30% higher than that of Chrome 27. IE10 takes up the middle ground, with Opera 12 earning the fourth-place position. Oddly, Opera Next places dead last.
We're not sure what's happening here. Both HTML5 HWA benchmarks place Opera Next above the Norwegian browser's current version, and the upcoming Chromium-based browser's stellar WebGL scores in both Scirra and LUIC tests seem to have no such sway in JSGameBench. In any event, with four contradictory metrics, we're sure that our HWA composite score will largely absorb this odd result.

And it does. Chrome 27 shows a small lead over Firefox 22, with Opera Next just 600 point behind Mozilla in third place. Due to sitting out the WebGL testing, IE10 and Opera 12 barely rate. Although both browsers also show sub-par HTML5 HWA scores, Microsoft's high score in the IE-friendly WebVizBench allows Redmond's Web browser to surpass Opera 12.
Testing memory efficiency is a multi-step process. First, we open each Web browser with one tab and record its memory usage. We then open 39 additional tabs and re-record the memory usage total. Next, we close those 39 tabs and record the memory total once more. We've removed the second reading after closing 39 tabs, and instead just wait for the big usage drop to occur for each browser, and record once.
All pages are opened in each browser before testing, so the memory tests are loading cached pages; the browsers are started hot. Memory usage totals are now taken using Chrome's built-in about:memory page instead of Windows Task Manager because it is far more accurate dealing with multi-process browsers such as Chrome, IE10, and Opera Next. We also combined our remaining three memory usage readings into a single chart.

IE10 takes the lead in single-tab usage at just 40 MB, followed by Opera Next at 75 MB. Opera 12 takes third place, with Firefox and Chrome placing fourth and fifth (respectively) at around 120 MB with a single tab open.
With a heavy-duty workload of 40 tabs, it's Firefox that uses the least amount of memory. Opera Next places a distant second with a tally of almost 1.2 GB. Close behind in third place is IE10. Chrome and Opera 12 practically tie for last place, with both browsers just over the 1.5 GB mark.
After decreasing the workload back down to a single tab, Opera Next takes the lead. Chrome is in second place at just under 200 MB, followed by IE10 and Firefox 22 in third and fourth place (respectively) at around 270 MB each. As usual, the current version of Opera ends up in last place, holding onto a whopping gigabyte of RAM.
It looks like Opera Next is a move in the right direction for all three memory usage scenarios.
Next, the Single Tab figure is subtracted from the 39 Tabs Closed number to see how much "bloat" remains after decreasing the workload (closing tabs).

The championship-ineligible Opera Next gets closer to its original single-tab total than any other browser at a difference of just 65 MB. As you might expect, Chrome is close behind with a difference of 76 MB. Firefox 22, though it uses the least amount of memory under load, retains 165 MB more than before the 39 additional tabs were opened, placing third. Surprisingly, IE10 places fourth. Chrome's about:memory page is clearly much better at tallying Internet Explorer's multiple processes than Windows Task Manager. Opera 12 again winds up in last place, retaining nearly an entire gigabyte.
Reliability
During our three-phase memory testing, we have the opportunity to see not only how much memory a browser uses, but also how it behaves under heavy load. After launching the additional 39 pages, we have to check each tab to ensure that all 40 of them are fully and properly rendered. After all, blank pages lower a browser's memory usage total. So, we record each time that we have to reload a tab due to broken formatting or missing elements. Thus, the browser with the lowest number of reloads displays the highest number of pages properly.
While the 40 test pages are recorded cached and hot, naturally, we first had to load them uncached and cold. During this setup process, IE10 crashes and must re-open and reload all 40 tabs.

Although this isn't something we tested for specifically, we must make note of this behavior. No other browser since Safari 4.x (Windows version) has crashed under these conditions.

Somewhat surprisingly, Firefox 22 takes the lead over Opera 12 in this metric with just a single necessary reload. Again, that's a marked improvement over previous rapid-release versions. Opera 12 requires an average of four reloads to earn a relatively distant second place. IE10 places third, with twice the number of reloads, followed by Opera Next with nine. Chrome takes last place with more than a quarter of the test pages requiring a refresh.
This is one metric where Opera Next loses to the current version. Although it's just as fast as Opera 12, Opera Next is half as reliable. This is an attribute Opera's fans typically value, so it'll need to be addressed.
Security
BrowserScope's Security test remains our sole benchmark in this area. This test is more of a checklist, like the standards conformance tests, than an actual performance benchmark.

Chrome still holds the top spot in this test with 16 out of 17 tests passed. Opera Next takes second place, passing 15 of the security checkpoints. IE10 is in third place with a score of 14, followed by Firefox in fourth place with 13 tests passed. Opera 12 again comes up short, passing just 10 of the 17 security checks.
At least right now, Opera Next represents a more secure option than the browser's current version. However, there is always security in obscurity, and Chromium surely presents a much more attractive target for exploits than Opera 12, which no one even attempted to hack at this year's two major hacking competitions. So, only time can tell whether the move to Chromium is actually an upgrade in this respect.
Our Standards conformance section is made up of three tests: HTML5Test.com, The CSS3 Test, and Ecmascript's test262.
HTML5

Chrome still has the upper hand in this measure. Fellow Chromium-based Opera Next is in second place, about 20 points ahead of third-place finisher Firefox 22. Opera 12 places fourth, just a hair behind Firefox 22. Meanwhile, Internet Explorer remains noticeably behind the pack as usual.
While Opera Next scores higher than Opera 12, the current version has been a runner-up in HTML5 conformance for some time, so the gains aren't too dramatic here.
CSS3

The Chromium duo, Chrome and Opera Next, tie for first place in The CSS3 Test with scores of 571 points out of a possible 935. Firefox places a close second, with third- and fourth-place finishers Opera and IE10 far behind at 449 and 442 points, respectively.
It appears that Opera Next is a far bigger gain for the Norwegian browser in CSS3 than in HTML5.
JavaScript

Nearly all browsers achieve equally-high scores in this test. IE10 is the winner, with Chrome 27 and Opera 12 right behind in a tie for second place. Opera Next places third, one point shy of the browser's current version. Firefox is the only contender to dip below the 11,560 mark, finishing last with a score of just 11,369.
Conformance Composite
The Conformance Composite is derived by dividing a browser's score in each test by each test's maximum possible score, then converting to a percent, or "grade". The average of the three grades is then averaged together in the chart below:

Chrome is yet again the leader in standards conformance, earning a "B". Naturally, Opera Next achieves the same grade, though a slightly lower B. Firefox scores a strong C+, followed closely by the current version of Opera with a solid C. IE10 scores just 70%, earning a borderline C-.
Well, folks, this brings us to the end of another installment of the Web Browser Grand Prix. We're about to tally up our eight categories of testing. But first, let's have a look at the performance and non-performance breakdown.
Performance Index
The data in the chart below is a geometric mean of all four performance-based categories: Wait Times, JavaScript/DOM, HTML5/CSS3, and Hardware Acceleration.

Firefox 22 pulls off an upset, replacing the long-time performance champion Google Chrome as the new speed king! Google doesn't lose by very much though. In fact, if we moved the decimal point and rounded, this would show up as a tie. Meanwhile, moving on to the next win-eligible browser, IE10 is far behind in third place, with less than half the performance score of Firefox 22 or Chrome 27. Opera 12 is in last place, lagging slightly behind IE10.
Opera Next technically lands the number-three spot with a score right below Chrome. Our performance index shows the browser to be nearly three times faster than its current version! In fact, the upcoming Chromium-based Norwegian Web browser only shows weakness in HTML5 and its native HWA.
Non-Performance Index
The data in the chart below is achieved through the geometric mean of all four non-performance categories: Memory Efficiency, Reliability, Security, and Standards Conformance.

Firefox manages to conquer this category thanks to a stellar finish in proper page loads as well as strong scores in all three remaining non-performance categories. Chrome 27 finds itself in a comparatively distant second place. Its terrible page load reliability, combined with tighter scoring in the other metrics, sink Google's chances. IE10 is around 15% behind Chrome in third, with Opera 12 landing in last place with a score of less than half that of Firefox 22.
With Opera Next in the mix, the placing order would change a bit. The upcoming version nearly doubles the non-performance score of the browser's current version, and even manages to top Chrome 27 by a slim margin. Yet another substantial gain for the Norwegian Web browser.
WBGP XVI Champion
Now we combine equal parts performance and non-performance metrics, stir, and taste...

With no apparent weaknesses and generally strong finishes all-around, combined with near-native start times, greatly-improved hardware acceleration scores, and almost-perfect reliability, the latest version of Firefox soundly wins this installment of the Web Browser Grand Prix.

While Chrome 27 is the leader in most categories, Firefox 22 is right on its heels in second place. So, with close second-place finishes in nearly all categories that Chrome wins, Mozilla really needed to exploit any weakness in Chrome. And it does just that. Chrome's extreme fall from grace in start-up time really hurt. With Firefox attaining top marks in that category, an extreme divide is created where we'd normally expect both browsers to pace each other. The same type of brutality is used against Chrome in reliability testing, where Firefox 22 almost pulls off a perfect score, while Chrome 27 has issues with more than 25% of the workload.
Although this is not the first time that Firefox has edged out Chrome, this is the most punishing margin of victory. It's as if Mozilla knew just where to strike. Now, the onus is on Google to either completely outpace Firefox in performance (as it once did), or focus on addressing Chrome's own weaknesses. Either way, Mozilla buys Firefox some time at the top.
Moving on to our third- and fourth-place finishers. At this point, IE10 is showing its age, unable to compete with either of the two rapid-release browsers. Opera 12, well...Opera started slipping in the ranking with version 11, and Opera 12 was a big enough disappointment for the Norwegian software house to switch to Chromium. Speaking of...
If You Can't Beat 'Em, Join 'Em
Opera Next technically places second, just a hair above Chrome 27, but still a ways away from Firefox 22. However, and we really can't stress these two points enough: 1) Opera Next is using using a newer version of Chromium than Chrome, and 2) Opera Next is not yet feature-complete. So, tack on a ton of features, as we've seen Opera do in the past, and the overhead increases. Or even simpler, when Opera Next goes stable, Chrome will have "caught-up" to the same version of Chromium, meaning the spread could narrow, or even reverse. But right now, Chrome and Opera Next are showing practically-equal scores, however, they both display strengths and weaknesses in different categories, so we're not ready to give Opera the big heave-ho quite yet. While we don't plan on checking in with Opera Next again until it goes stable, we'll definitely be testing the final product.











