
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.
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.
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! | ||
![]() | 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! | ||
![]() | 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 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! | ||
![]() | 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! | ||
Now, let's take a look at the new test system.
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 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 Packages | Apache2, 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 |
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 |
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 Tab | 3 |
| Cold Startup Time: Eight Tabs | 3 |
| 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 Mod | 2 |
| FutureMark Peacekeeper 2.0 | 2 |
| Acid3 | 5 |
| Maze Solver | 5 |
| CSS Stress Test and Performance Profiling - Tom's Hardware | 2 |
| GUIMark 2 HTML5 (3 Tests) | 3 |
| Asteroids HTML5 Canvas 2D And JavaScript | 2 |
| HTML5 Canvas Performance Test | 2 |
| Facebook JSGameBench v4.1 | 2 |
| Psychedelic Browsing | 2 |
| WebVizBench | 2 |
| Mozilla WebGL FishIE | 2 |
| WebGL Solar System | 2 |
| 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 test262 | 1 |
| Peacekeeper 2.0 HTML5 Capabilities | 1 |
| HTML5Test.com | 1 |
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 JavaScript
Mozilla Kraken v1.1
Google SunSpider v0.9.1
FutureMark 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.
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 Solver
CSS 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.
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 HTML5
Asteroids HTML5 Canvas 2D & JavaScript
HTML5 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.
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 Browsing
WebVizBench
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 Tank
WebGL 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.
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 Flash
RIABench Java
RIABench 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.
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.
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.
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.
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 test262
HTML5Test.com
Peacekeeper HTML5 Capabilities
Although HTML5 is definitely the deciding factor here, IE9 and Safari are behind the pack in JavaScript as well.
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...
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.


























