Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Web Browser Grand Prix: Chrome 20, Opera 12, Firefox 13
By ,
1. The Top Five Browsers, Tested And Ranked

This article marks our return to Windows 7. Believe it or not, more than nine months have passed since we last ran a completely Windows 7-based Web Browser Grand Prix. In the interim, we've switched venues to OS X (twice), Ubuntu, and even Windows XP. While all that OS-hopping provided a nice detour, Microsoft's current desktop operating system is most definitely the big show. This is also, then, the first Windows 7-based browser comparison employing the new scoring system introduced in Web Browser Grand Prix: Chrome 18, Firefox 11, Windows XP. Our Core i5 test system was upgraded from Intel's old Lynnfield design to a more modern Sandy Bridge-based chip, and the Radeon HD 4870 was recently replaced by a Radeon HD 7770. The benchmark suite also receives significant upgrades. We're removing five of the older benchmarks, adding ten new ones, and implementing composite scores for nearly every category of testing.

But before we get to the numbers, let's catch up on what happened in the world of Web browsers since our last installment of the Grand Prix.

Recent News And Events

04/24/12: Mozilla releases Firefox 12
04/25/12: Mozilla officially stops releasing updates for Firefox 3.6.
05/09/12: Apple updates Safari to version 5.1.7.
05/11/12: Mozilla blasts Microsoft for third-party browser lockout in Windows RT (Windows 8 for ARM).
05/11/12: Internet Explorer may be coming to XBox 360 Kinect.
05/16/12: Google releases Chrome 19
05/16/12: IE Drops Below 30% Market Share for First Time in 15 Years
05/22/12: Chrome overtakes IE in market share to become the world's most-used Web browser.
05/23/12: Microsoft claims that StatCounter's usage statistics for Google Chrome are bogus.
05/25/12: Yahoo! releases Axis, an iOS browser with add-ons for Chrome, Firefox, and Safari.
05/26/12: Rumors swirl that Facebook is looking to buy Opera Software.
06/01/12: Facebook suddenly stops listing Opera as a recommended Web browser.
06/02/12: Microsoft to enable Do Not Track in IE10 by default.
06/04/12: Mozilla releases Firefox 13
06/08/12: The Do Not Track fine print prevents browsers from enabling it without user consent.
06/10/12: Google promises a Metro version of Chrome for Windows 8 soon.
06/11/12: Apple releases a developer preview of Safari 6.
06/15/12: Mozilla updates Firefox to version 13.0.1
06/18/12: Opera 12 is finally released, with unfinished hardware acceleration.
06/19/12: StatCounter fires back at Microsoft, disputes Redmond's critique of its methodology.
06/20/12: Congress approves Do Not Track default opt-in for IE10.
06/27/12: Google releases Chrome 20

Now that we're all caught up, let's take a look at the contenders.

2. Chrome, Firefox, IE9, Opera, And Safari

Previous Web Browser Grand Prix Champions

Since the results of the Web Browser Grand Prix have always been very platform-dependent, we're splitting the list of champions to only include the current operating system; in this case, Windows 7.

Web Browser Grand Prix
Champion

Web Browser Grand Prix: The Top Five, Tested And Ranked



Web Browser Grand Prix 2: The Top Five Tested And Ranked



Web Browser Grand Prix 3:  IE9 Enters The Race


Web Browser Grand Prix 4: Firefox 4 Goes Final


Web Browser Grand Prix 5: Opera 11.50, Firefox 5, And Chrome 12


Web Browser Grand Prix VI: Firefox 6, Chrome 13, Mac OS X Lion


Web Browser Grand Prix 7: Firefox 7, Chrome 14, Opera 11.51


Web Browser Grand Prix VIII: Chrome 16, Firefox 9, And Mac OS X


Web Browser Grand Prix 9: Chrome 17, Firefox 10, And Ubuntu



Chrome also earned two wins under Ubuntu, Safari achieved two running in OS X, Opera saw success with Windows XP, and each remains the reigning champion for those platforms. Firefox is our most recent Windows 7 winner, but with three victories each, if either Firefox or Chrome pulls ahead today, we'll have a more distinguished reign.

Current Web Browser Grand Prix Contenders





Chrome
Vendor:
Google
Debut:
9/02/2008
Current Version:
20
Layout Engine:
WebKit
JavaScript Engine:
V8
Supported Platforms:
Windows, Mac, Linux, Android, iOS
HTML5 Hardware Acceleration:
Yes
WebGL:
Yes
Windows 7 WBGP Championships:
3
Total WBGP Championships:
5
Download Chrome!


Chrome 20 on Windows 7Chrome 20 on Windows 7




Firefox
Vendor:
Mozilla
Debut:
11/09/2004
Current Version:
13
Layout Engine:
Gecko 2.0
JavaScript Engine:
JaegerMonkey
Supported Platforms:
Windows, Mac, Linux, Android
HTML Hardware Acceleration:
Yes
WebGL:
Yes
Windows 7 WBGP Championships:
3
Total WBGP Championships:
3
Download Firefox!


Firefox 13.0.1 on Windows 7Firefox 13.0.1 on Windows 7



Internet Explorer
Vendor:
Microsoft
Debut:
8/16/1995
Current Version:
9
Layout Engine:
Trident
JavaScript Engine:
Chakra
Supported Platforms:
Windows (Vista and 7)
HTML5 Hardware Acceleration:
Yes
WebGL:
No
Windows 7 WBGP Championships:
2
Total WBGP Championships:
2
Download Internet Explorer!


Internet Explorer 9 on Windows 7Internet Explorer 9 on Windows 7





Opera
Vendor:
Opera Software
Debut:
12/09/1996
Current Version:
12.00
Layout Engine:
Presto
JavaScript Engine:
Carakan
Supported Platforms:
Windows, Mac, Linux, Android, iOS
HTML5 Hardware Acceleration:
No
WebGL:
No
Windows 7 WBGP Championships:
1
Total WBGP Championships:
2
Download Opera!


Opera 12 on Windows 7Opera 12 on Windows 7



Safari
Vendor:
Apple
Debut:
1/07/2003
Current Version:
5.1.7
Layout Engine:
WebKit 2
JavaScript Engine:
Nitro
Supported Platforms:
Windows, OS X, iOS
HTML5 Hardware Acceleration:
OS X-only
WebGL:
No
Windows 7 WBGP Championships:
0
Total WBGP Championships:
2
Download Safari!


Safari 5.1.7 on Windows 7Safari 5.1.7 on Windows 7

Now, let's take a look at the new test system.

3. Test System Specs And Software Setup

Hardware Setup

Test System Specs
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate (64-bit)
Processor
Intel Core i5-2500K @ 3.3 GHz (quad-core)
Motherboard
Gigabyte GA-Z68XP-UD3 (F10 BIOS)
Memory
8 GB Crucial DDR3 @ 1333 MT/s (2 x 4 GB)
Graphics
Asus Radeon HD 7770 1 GB GDDR5 (PCIe 2.0 x16)
Storage
Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 500 GB SATA 3Gb/s, 7200 RPM, 16 MB Cache
Optical
Asus DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS
Power Supply
Corsair TX750W (750 W max)
Case
Zalman MS-1000 HS2
CPU Cooler
Scythe Mugen 2 Revision B
Keyboard
Logitech Wireless Keyboard K320
Mouse
Logitech Wireless Trackball M570


The WBGP Test InstallationThe WBGP Test Installation

The following table contains the system specs of the local Web server used for our Startup and Page Load Time tests, as well as JSGameBench.

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 MHz
Graphics
Nvidia GeForce FX 5500 128 MB DDR (AGP)
Storage
Western Digital Caviar SE WD1600AAJD, 160 GB EIDE, 7200 RPM
Optical 1
Hitachi-LG DVD GDR-8163B
Optical 2
Hitachi-LG CD-RW GCE-8483B
Extra PackagesApache2, MySQL Client, MySQL Server, PHP5, PHP-GD, PHP5-MySQL, PHPMyAdmin, SSH, Node.js, NPM


The table below holds additional information on the test network.

Network Specs
ISP Service
Cox Preferred (18 Mb/s down, 2 Mb/s up)
Modem
Motorola SURFboard SBS101U
Router
Linksys WRT54G2 V1


Motorola SURFboard SBS101UMotorola SURFboard SBS101U

Linksys WRT54G2Linksys WRT54G2

Software Setup

Both test installations were freshly installed and fully updated as of midnight on June 15th, 2012. Power management and automatic updates were disabled before testing.

All the software we installed, including the exact version number of the browsers tested, is listed in the table below.

Software
Version
Chrome
20.0.1132.43m
Firefox
13.0.1
Internet Explorer
9.0.8112.16421
Opera
12.00 (build 1467)
Safari
5.1.7 (7534.57.2)
Adobe Flash
11.3.300.257
AMD Catalyst
8.961-120405a-137813C-ATI
Microsoft Silverlight
5.5.10411.0
Oracle Java
7.0.50
4. Test Suite And Methodology

Big Changes

We replaced GUIMark 2 Flash, GUIMark Java, and Encog Silverlight with five tests from RIABench Flash, Java, and Silverlight. We also added RIABench JavaScript to our JS testing, a long overdue replacement for JSBenchmark and V8. While RIABench consists of ten separate tests, two of the tests aren't available for all four technologies, one is currently spitting up a 404 error, Safari has a problem with one, and IE9 has a problem with another.

We had to temporarily replace Dromaeo DOM with Acid3 due to the former having issues with the WebKit-based browsers under Windows.

Another CSS test was added to balance out the Maze Solver CSS3 benchmark.

The Mozilla Hardware Acceleration Stress Test was replaced with WebVizBench, which has no highest score limit.

We've added a general responsiveness observation to the 40-Tab Memory Usage test.

And finally, we found a security test that is still relevant and not passed by any of the contenders.

Our tests are no longer placed into the core, observation, dated, and quarantine groups. With the massive refresh to the benchmark suite and the introduction of composite scores to cover every category of testing, this is simply no longer necessary.

Web Browser Grand Prix Test Suite v11

The table below lists all 34 benchmarks (consisting of 66 individual tests) currently in our suite, along with the version number and link (where applicable), and the number of iterations performed.

Benchmark Name
Iterations Performed
Performance Benchmarks (24 Benchmarks, 56 Tests)
Cold Startup Time: Single Tab
3
Hot Startup Time: Single Tab3
Cold Startup Time: Eight Tabs3
Hot Startup Time: Eight Tabs
3
Uncached Page Load Times (8 Test Pages)
5
Cached Page Load Times (8 Test Pages)
5
RIABench JavaScript (5 Tests)
3
Mozilla Kraken v1.1
2
Google SunSpider v0.9.1 Mod2
FutureMark Peacekeeper 2.02
Acid3
5
Maze Solver5
CSS Stress Test and Performance Profiling - Tom's Hardware
2
GUIMark 2 HTML5 (3 Tests)
3
Asteroids HTML5 Canvas 2D And JavaScript2
HTML5 Canvas Performance Test
2
Facebook JSGameBench v4.12
Psychedelic Browsing2
WebVizBench
2
Mozilla WebGL FishIE2
WebGL Solar System2
RIABench Flash (5 Tests)
3
RIABench Java (5 Tests)
3
RIABench Silverlight (5 Tests)
3
Efficiency Benchmarks (4 Benchmarks/Tests)
Memory Usage: Single Tab
3
Memory Usage: 40 Tabs
3
Memory Management: -39 Tabs
3
Memory Management: -39 Tabs (extra 2 minutes)
3
Reliability Benchmarks (1 Test)
Proper Page Loads
3
Responsiveness Benchmarks (1 Test)
General Responsiveness Under Load
3
Security Benchmarks (1 Test)
BrowserScope Security
1
Conformance Benchmarks (3 Benchmarks/Tests)
Ecma test2621
Peacekeeper 2.0 HTML5 Capabilities1
HTML5Test.com1


Methodology

We restart the computer and allow it to idle before benchmarking. Most of our final scores are an average of several iterations. More iterations are run for tests that have short durations, lower scales, and/or higher variance. Any obvious outliers (usually network hiccups) are removed and retested.

Individual detailed methodologies and information regarding composite scoring is described on the corresponding benchmark pages.

5. Startup Time

All startup times are tested both cold (browser newly opened after a fresh boot) and hot (browser already opened and closed) using a single tab and eight tabs.

Google.com serves as the test page for our single-tab tests, while the homepages of YouTube, Yahoo!, and The Huffington Post, as well as product pages from Amazon, Wikipedia, craigslist, and eBay round out the eight-tab measurement. All test pages are hosted on our local Web server and cached in each browser.

Composite Scoring

The startup time composite score is the average of hot and cold times for single-tab and eight-tab startups.

Opera continues to dominate startup times with version 12, posting a page load average of just over one and a half seconds. Chrome 20 takes second place at 1.7 seconds, with Firefox 13 close behind at 1.85 seconds. Far behind the top three is Internet Explorer 9 in fourth place at nearly four seconds, followed by Safari 5.1.7 at almost six seconds!

Drill Down

The charts below contain the results for the individual test pages, as well as the average time for both uncached and cached page load times.

Single TabSingle TabEight TabsEight Tabs

We can see that Opera wins this competition hands-down, earning the shortest times on all four startup tests. Opera's times are also very close together, with superb cold starts. Chrome has the slowest cold single-tab time, while fellow WebKit browser Apple Safari has the slowest eight-tab finishes. IE9 achieves solid times in all but the cold eight-tab test, bringing its average down significantly.

6. Page Load Time

The page load time tests are the same eight pages in our startup time tests: Google, YouTube, Yahoo!, Amazon, Wikipedia, craigslist, eBay, and Wikipedia.

Composite Scoring

Composite scores are achieved by averaging the uncached and cached page load times for all eight test pages.

IE9 takes the lead in page load time with an average of just 0.88 seconds. Close behind in second place is Apple Safari at just under 0.9 seconds. Chrome places third, with Firefox in tow at 0.95 seconds. Opera is the only browser to average more than one-second page loads, falling into last place.

Drill Down

The charts below contain the  average uncached and cached page load time for each test page.

UncachedUncachedCachedCached

Opera demonstrates a peculiar cached loading time for Amazon, which does not manifest when loading the page uncached. This, combined with its slow times for eBay and The Huffington Post cement its last-place finish. The WebKit duo, Google Chrome and Apple Safari, have the quickest average cached page loads, while IE9 has the best average uncached times.

7. JavaScript Performance

Composite Scoring

The JavaScript composite is achieved by averaging the results of the three "lower is better" tests (RIABench, Mozilla Kraken, and Google SunSpider) and the negative average of the "higher is better" Peacekeeper score to get a single "lower is better" average.

Chrome 20 is the only browser to end with a negative score, claiming the lead. Firefox 13 earns a second-place finish with just 19 points. Opera 12 is solidly in third place at just under 900. Safari 5 and IE9 are distant fourth- and fifth-place finishers.

Drill Down

The charts below contain the individual JavaScript benchmarks.

RIABench JavaScriptRIABench JavaScriptMozilla Kraken v1.1Mozilla Kraken v1.1

Google SunSpider v0.9.1Google SunSpider v0.9.1FutureMark Peacekeeper v2.0FutureMark Peacekeeper v2.0

Breaking down RIABench JavaScript, Safari appears to be particularly weak in primetest and MD5 hashing. Internet Explorer also falters in MD5 hashing. It and Firefox also demonstrate dismal run-length encoding results, too. Chrome has the worst score in the random number generator test, but pretty much rules the remaining RIABench tests.

RIABench, Kraken, and Peacekeeper favor Chrome, Firefox, and Opera, while SunSpider replaces Opera with IE9. Chrome 20 tops all four JavaScript benchmarks. Meanwhile, its WebKit relative Apple Safari scores universally poorly.

8. DOM And CSS Performance

DOM

Since Dromaeo is still not playing nicely with the WebKit-based browsers under Windows, we have to bring out Acid3. All five Web browsers pass this conformance test scoring 100%, so we're using the completion time as a stand-in performance test. If Dromeao begins to work with WebKit-based browsers on Windows again, we'll bring it back into the fold.

Safari takes the lead at a steady 0.31 seconds. IE9 earns a second-place finish, followed closely by Chrome. Firefox places fourth and Opera, which consistently dominates Mozilla's Dromaeo DOM test suite, finishes last.  

CSS

Composite Scoring

The CSS composite is the average of Microsoft's Maze Solver CSS3 benchmark and Andy Edinborough's CSS Stress Testing and Performance Profiling bookmarklet applied to a copy of the Tom's Hardware homepage hosted from our local Web server.

Safari steals the show, coming in first place at just 3.68 seconds. Chrome 20 is the second-place finisher, followed by IE9 in third place. Opera 12 places fourth, with Firefox 13 coming in last place with a time of more than 35 seconds.

Drill Down

The charts below contain the results of Maze Solver and CSS Stress Testing & Performance Profiling.

Microsoft Maze SolverMicrosoft Maze SolverCSS Stress Testing & Performance ProfilingCSS Stress Testing & Performance Profiling

As usual, Firefox does extremely poorly in Microsoft's Maze Solver CSS3 benchmark. But Firefox also snags the win with the CSS Stress Testing & Performance Profiling benchmark on every site we apply it to. Opera, which always earns high scores in Maze Solver, has the worst times in the CSS2 test. Only Safari exhibits superior performance in both metrics.

9. HTML5 Performance

Composite Scoring

The HTML5 composite is the average frames per second score from GUIMark 2 HTML5, Asteroids HTML5 Canvas 2D and JavaScript, and the HTML5 Canvas Performance Test.

Internet Explorer 9 sweeps the field with an average of 137 frames per second thanks to the additional canvas test. Firefox comes in second place, followed by Chrome in third. Safari is in fourth place and Opera brings up the rear with 51 FPS.

Drill Down

The charts below contain the results of the individual HTML5 benchmarks.

GUIMark 2 HTML5GUIMark 2 HTML5Asteroids HTML5 Canvas 2D & JavaScriptAsteroids HTML5 Canvas 2D & JavaScriptHTML5 Canvas Performance TestHTML5 Canvas Performance Test

The benchmarks indicate that IE9 is very strong in HTML5 canvas, while Opera 12 consistently performs behind the curve in all HTML5 testing.

10. Hardware Acceleration

Facebook JSGameBench v0.4.1

This HTML5 benchmark from Facebook also covers WebGL.

Firefox 13 takes the lead in overall hardware acceleration with just over 5000 points. Mozilla is followed by Google, as Chrome 20 scores nearly 3750 points to place second. IE9 falls to third place. Opera 12 only manages about 400 points to place fourth, followed closely by Safari 5.1.7 in fifth place.

HTML5 Hardware Acceleration

We dropped Mozilla's Hardware Acceleration Stress Test from the suite because the supported browsers all hit the maximum frame rate of 60 FPS. We replaced it with WebVizBench, which produces a four-digit score like Psychedelic Browsing.

Composite Scoring

The HTML5 Hardware Acceleration composite is the average of the WebVizBench and Psychedelic Browsing scores.

IE9 has a slight edge over Firefox 13 in HTML5 hardware acceleration, 7188 points to 6978. Chrome 20 places third. Opera 12 and Safari 5.1.7 are distant fourth- and fifth-place finishers.

Drill Down

The charts below are for Psychedelic Browsing and WebVizBench.

Microsoft Psychedelic BrowsingMicrosoft Psychedelic BrowsingWebVizBenchWebVizBench

Internet Explorer pulls ahead due to its high score in Psychedelic Browsing and a strong showing in WebVizBench. While Psychedelic Browsing shows Chrome to be solidly in third place, Google's browser manages the highest score in WebVizBench.

WebGL

Chrome and Firefox are still the only browsers with default WebGL implementations on Windows 7.

Composite Scoring

The WebGL composite is the average of the "higher is better" FPS results from Mozilla's WebGL FishIE Tank and WebGL Solar System from Chrome Experiments.

Firefox 13 takes the lead with an average 48 frames per second, followed Chrome 20 at 37 FPS.

Drill Down

The charts below contain the individual results for WebGL FishIE Tank and WebGL Solar System.

Mozilla WebGL FishIE TankMozilla WebGL FishIE TankWebGL Solar SystemWebGL Solar System

Both browsers do quite well in Mozilla's WebGL remix of Microsoft's FishIE Tank benchmark, while Chrome can't even manage 15 FPS in WebGL Solar System.

11. Plug-In Performance: Flash, Java, Silverlight

Composite Scoring

The Flash, Java, and Silverlight composites are achieved by averaging five RIABench tests for each plug-in: Primetest, Prime Factorization, MD5 Hashing, Random Key Generator, and Run-length Encoding. All five RIABench tests are scored in milliseconds.

Flash

Safari holds on to a slight lead with an average 185 ms while IE9, Firefox 13, and Opera 12 are in a practical tie for second place. Chrome once again earns a last-place in Flash performance.

Java

Opera takes a shaky lead in Java performance with a score of 253 milliseconds, followed closely by Firefox in second place. Chrome and IE9 share third place, tying at 262 milliseconds. Safari is the only browser breaking from the pack, taking almost 100 ms more and finishing in a distant last-place.

Silverlight

Opera again narrowly beats the competition at 115 ms, followed by IE9 in second place. Chrome and Firefox tie for third, while Safari again takes last place, though not as far behind as in the Java tests. The Silverlight scores are essentially a wash, with all browsers performing practically the same.

Drill Downs

The charts below contain the detailed view of each RIABench test for Flash, Java, and Silverlight.

RIABench FlashRIABench FlashRIABench JavaRIABench JavaRIABench SilverlightRIABench Silverlight

The Flash scores are all pretty close, with Chrome's built-in Flash player generally falling behind, and Safari pulling ahead in the Run-length Encoding test. With the exception of Safari's poor showing in Run-length Encoding, the Java scores are essentially the same between browsers. The Silverlight scores are all basically the same.

12. Memory Efficiency

Composite Scoring

Over the past couple of years, many of you asked us to de-emphasize (or completely remove) the memory usage tests from the Web Browser Grand Prix because memory is there to be used, after all. While we can't argue with that assertion, the fact remains that some browsers use far less memory than others in the exact same workload. But what we could not see on our modern test system was how the browsers scale their usage to the available hardware. In our last installment, we used a decade-old Windows XP test system. That scenario demonstrated that some of the worst memory hogs under Windows 7 dramatically scale back total memory usage on the older hardware, but still display the same content. So, memory usage is tied to the test system's available resources.

Therefore, memory usage is no longer being factored into the final scoring. However, the 40-tab test is still needed in order to achieve the memory management and page load reliability scores, and to get a general sense of browser responsiveness under load. Overall memory efficiency is now gauged by the difference between a browser's single-tab memory usage and -39-tab memory management total. The browser with the lowest score is able to return the most physical memory back to the operating system without actually closing the application itself, but simply by decreasing workload (closing tabs).

Chrome 20 keeps a tight grip on Google's memory efficiency lead, only hanging onto 94 MB more RAM than its pre-40-tab total. IE9 doesn't disappoint either, keeping just 117 MB to place second. Firefox 13 earns a very close third place, retaining far less memory than previous versions. Safari still holds onto 331 MB, placing it in fourth, while Opera 12 is in last place after closing 39 tabs..

Drill Down

The charts below contain the single-tab and 40-tab memory usage, as well as the -39-tab and -39-tab plus two-minute memory management tests.

Memory UsageMemory UsageMemory ManagementMemory Management

IE9 uses half as much memory as most of the competition with only one tab open. Firefox has always had the lowest 40-tab memory usage total, but version 13 takes its single-tab total down to just 61 MB, which is right in line with Safari and Opera. What the composite score does not show is the speed at which the different browsers return memory back to the operating system. Chrome is the only contender to do this instantaneously. While Firefox and IE9 drop usage totals a great deal, they can take a minute to do so.

13. Reliability, Responsiveness, And Security

Reliability

Our reliability test is conducted after loading 40 tabs. We open them all simultaneously and record how many pages require a reload due to broken formatting or missing elements. The best score a browser can achieve here is zero, and the worst is 40.

Once again, Opera exhibits solid reliability, only requiring one reload. The second-place finisher is Safari with five failures, followed closely by IE9 with six and Firefox with seven. Chrome suffers nine failures, putting it in last place.

Responsiveness

In the last Web Browser Grand Prix, our dusty old test system made it very easy for us to compare responsiveness. Although none of the browsers slowed to a crawl using our much more modern hardware platform, IE9 does regularly crash and restart itself. And because we have to wait for 40 tabs to finish loading before checking for failures in the reliability test, we noticed we don't wait very long when testing Opera. Firefox treats us to a short wait, too.

We're confident in calling Opera 12 the responsiveness winner. Firefox presents a strong case, while Chrome and Safari are both merely average. IE9 is dubbed weak in this discipline.

Security

BrowserScope Security is the first legitimate security test we've come across that the browsers haven't already beaten. It consists of 17 pass/fail tests, making 17 the maximum score.

Chrome 20 grabs first place with the high score of 16 tests passed, and is followed by fellow WebKit-based Apple Safari. Microsoft Internet Explorer 9 passes 13 tests to earn a third-place finish, beating arch-rival Mozilla Firefox. Opera 12 lands at the bottom, passing just ten out of the 17 tests.

14. Standards Conformance

Composite Scoring

Because standards conformance tests always have maximum and minimum possible scores, we can divide the result by the maximum score and multiply by 100 to get a percentage. This allows us to easily average the results of each conformance test to come up with a composite grade.

Chrome lands in first place with a solid A. Firefox takes second place followed by Opera, both achieving a B. Standards conformance falls dramatically from there, with IE9 and Safari both earning Fs to finish in distant fourth and fifth places.

Drill Down

The charts below are for the three standards conformance tests: Ecmascript test262, HTML5Test.com, and Peacekeeper v2.0 HTML5 Capabilities.

Ecmascript test262Ecmascript test262HTML5Test.comHTML5Test.comPeacekeeper HTML5 CapabilitiesPeacekeeper HTML5 Capabilities

Although HTML5 is definitely the deciding factor here, IE9 and Safari are behind the pack in JavaScript as well.

15. Test Analysis

Finishes

Each category of testing has four columns: Winner, Strong, Average, and Weak. The Winner is obviously the browser that achieves the highest scores in that category. The Strong column is for browsers exhibiting superior performance, but not achieving a first-place victory. Average is for browsers that perform adequately or in-line with a majority of their competitors. A Weak finish is assigned to browsers that perform poorly, or substantially lower than their competitors.

Brackets

In order to reflect how each category of testing affects the average end-user Web browsing experience, we need to create brackets (or levels of importance) to place the different categories of testing into.

Essential
CSS, DOM, JavaScript, Reliability, Standards Conformance
Important
Flash, HTML5, Memory Efficiency, Page Load Time, Responsiveness, Security, Startup Time
Nonessential
Java, Silverlight
Unimportant
HTML5 Hardware Acceleration, WebGL


The Essential bracket contains those categories of testing that are indispensable to rendering the vast majority of Web pages online today. The Important bracket is for categories not quite essential to browsing the Web, yet still affect the user experience to a great degree. The Nonessential bracket contains the popular plug-ins Java and Silverlight. While these plug-in technologies are nowhere near as ubiquitous as Flash, certain applications like corporate intranet apps and Netflix simply will not work without them. Finally, the Unimportant bracket is for emerging technologies, such as HTML5 Hardware Acceleration and WebGL, which still don't really exist outside of testing/demo sites.

Points

Now that the brackets are all sorted out, we can apply a numerical point system to the finishes of each bracket.


Winner
Strong
Average
Weak
Essential
2.5
2
1.5
-2
Important
2
1.5
1
-1.5
Nonessential
1.5
1
0.5
-1
Unimportant
1
0.5
0
-0.5


As you can see, we decided to apply negative point values to the Weak finishes and start the Average performances at zero for the Unimportant bracket. The Winner has also been de-emphasized over Strong finishes, with just a small tie-breaking bonus going to Winner.

Analysis Table


Winner
Strong
Average
Weak
Essential
CSS
Safari
Chrome
Internet Explorer, Opera
Firefox
DOM
Safari
Chrome, Internet Explorer
Firefox, Opera

JavaScript
Chrome
Firefox
Opera
Internet Explorer, Safari
Reliability
Opera

Firefox, Internet Explorer, Safari
Chrome
Standards Conformance
Chrome
Firefox, Opera

Internet Explorer, Safari
Important
Flash
Safari
Firefox, Internet Explorer, Opera
Chrome

HTML5
Internet Explorer
Firefox, Chrome
Opera, Safari

Memory Efficiency
Chrome
Internet Explorer, Firefox

Opera, Safari
Page Load Time
Internet Explorer
Chrome, Firefox, Safari
Opera
Responsiveness
Opera
Firefox
Chrome, Safari
Internet Explorer
Security
Chrome

Firefox, Internet Explorer, Safari
Opera
Startup Time
Opera
Chrome, Firefox
Internet Explorer
Safari
Nonessential
Java
Opera
Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer
Safari
Silverlight
Opera
Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer, Safari


Unimportant
HTML5 Hardware Acceleration
Internet Explorer
Firefox
Chrome
Opera, Safari
WebGL
Firefox
Chrome

Internet Explorer, Opera, Safari


And the winner is...

16. Crowning A Windows 7 WBGP Champion

Our new scoring system allows us to see the winner as well as a basic sense of scale between the browser's performances.

Placing
Web Browser
Point Score
1st
Chrome
19
2nd
Firefox
18.5
3rd
Opera
15.5
4th
Internet Explorer
11
5th
Safari
6


For the first time in a while, the slim margin of victory favors Chrome over Firefox. The addition of HTML5 hardware acceleration introduced in version 18 and continued high scores in performance testing allow Chrome 20 to regain the Windows 7 Web Browser Grand Prix Championship, making Chrome the most-winningest browser for this operating system once again. Congratulations, Google!

Stay tuned this summer, we'll be taking the series into completely new territory with mobile editions of the Web Browser Grand Prix for Android and iOS.

Follow Adam on Twitter.