Today we're breaking out the Hackintosh for our first-ever Web Browser Grand Prix on Apple OS X 10.8 (Mountain Lion). How will Chrome 21, Firefox 15, Opera 12.02, and Safari 6 stack up against each other, and to IE9 and the rest of the Windows 7 browsers?

But before we find out, let's get everyone caught up on the latest happenings in the world of Web browsers.
Recent News And Events
07/17/12: MSFT Faces EU Probe Over Browser Ballot Compliance
07/25/12: Apple releases Safari 6 along with OS X 10.8 'Mountain Lion'
07/25/12: RockSalt Could Pave Way to Safe Native Apps in Browsers
07/26/12: Did Apple Just Kill Safari for Windows?
07/28/12: Firefox Add-ons Reach 3 Billion Downloads
07/31/12: Google releases Chrome 21
08/02/12: Mountain Lion: Three Million Downloads in Four Days
08/02/12: Opera updates to 12.01
08/06/12: Microsoft Finally Intros Its Own WebRTC Proposal
08/09/12: Microsoft Sticks to 'Do Not Track' Plans for IE in Windows 8
08/15/12: Mozilla's Firefox OS Ported to Raspberry Pi
08/16/12: Google Increases Rewards for Bug Catchers...Again
08/20/12: Break Google's Chrome, Get Up to $2 Million
08/20/12: Mozilla Rechallenges Google in Browser Speed Race
08/23/12: Google Introduces Octane Browser Benchmark
08/28/12: Mozilla releases Firefox 15
08/29/12: Mozilla Ports Full FPS Engine to WebGL; Playable Demo
08/27/12: Google Patents WYSIWYG Printing for Web Apps
09/02/12: Google's Chrome Browser is Now 4 Years Old
And Then There Were Four...
While the latest version of Safari for Windows (v5.1.7) is available for download on the Apple support pages, links to any mention of a Windows version have been completely removed from the Safari product pages on Apple's website. Notably, Apple no longer attempts to bundle Safari with the iTunes and QuickTime downloads either. And although Apple refuses to comment on Safari for Windows, the writing is on the wall.

I want to take a moment to relate our experience with Apple Safari, which unfortunately, never saw the light of day.
Web Browser Grand Prix 0: Safari's Finest Hour
In the months of preliminary testing and benchmark gathering, which eventually coalesced into the first Web Browser Grand Prix, Safari was the front-runner. Before Chrome 4 and Opera 10 came along, Safari dominated the Windows landscape in terms of performance. In fact, Safari 3 becoming available for Windows was the real catalyst for the browser speed wars we've seen over the past few years, and not the debut of Google Chrome, as most people seem to think.
Mere weeks before the first Web Browser Grand Prix published, Safari had a lock on the (then) purely speed-based test suite. It was looking like a landslide. In the end, though, it all came down to unfortunate timing for Apple, as Chrome 4 and Opera 10 emerged just before we began testing. In my mind, Safari 4 is the Champion of the Web Browser Grand Prix that never was.
If you're one of the few Windows users who loved Safari, our sincere regards. Even if you only liked the browser in order to hate on it, the loss of one of the five major players is a loss for all. The more competition between Web browsers, the better. The more browsers, the more fractured the market. The more fractured the market, the better and more important standards become. And when you have open, universally-recognized standards, new players can compete more readily, and any company looking to impose vendor lock-in on the Web will have a much harder time doing so.
Let us observe a quick non-denominational moment of silence in honor of Safari for Windows...
OK, that was enough. Let's ditch this funeral and hit the track!
- The Top Four Browsers, Tested And Ranked
- Chrome, Firefox, IE9, Opera, Safari
- Test System Specs And Software Setup
- Test Suite And Methodology
- Start Time
- Page Load Time
- JavaScript Performance
- DOM And CSS Performance
- HTML5 Performance
- Hardware Acceleration Performance
- Plug-In Performance: Flash, Java, Silverlight
- Memory Efficiency
- Reliability, Responsiveness, And Security
- Standards Conformance
- Test Analysis
- OS X And Windows 7 Winners' Circle
When we have more [official] stable 64-bit browsers, I'll definitely do a 64-bit WBGP - including versus their 32-bit counterparts.
Nearly every performance benchmark there is points in that direction. This probably has a lot to do with how much time developers spend optimizing for Windows - after all, Windows holds 90+% of the desktop user base. However, it is interesting that the rift between Windows and OS X is far greater than between Windows and Linux for the core stuff like JS, CSS, DOM, page loads, etc. Plug-ins are another story, they're always much better on Windows than the other two platforms.
(The nice popular ones like ABP, Lazarus, Greasemonkey all have equivalents; some lesser-used plugins like Rikaichan also have ports by now. Only a matter of time!)
as always, a great read.
All versions of Chrome hold up incredibly well cross-platform, if you look back at the two Linux WBGPs, it won there, too. Thanks for reading!
Absolutely, a Windows 8-based WBGP is already in the cards for October.
When we have more [official] stable 64-bit browsers, I'll definitely do a 64-bit WBGP - including versus their 32-bit counterparts.
Testing these browsers at stock doesn't reveal even an eighth of the picture.
btw great work adamovera keep it up man
Interesting idea, so basically a tweaked-out edition of the WBGP, where we use all the tools available to each browser for performance gains... That could work, but I gotta warn you that the next three WBGPs are already decided, so it would probably be real late in the year, or even next year before I could get to it.
Nearly every performance benchmark there is points in that direction. This probably has a lot to do with how much time developers spend optimizing for Windows - after all, Windows holds 90+% of the desktop user base. However, it is interesting that the rift between Windows and OS X is far greater than between Windows and Linux for the core stuff like JS, CSS, DOM, page loads, etc. Plug-ins are another story, they're always much better on Windows than the other two platforms.
The big problem with including the dev channel browsers is the amount of time it takes to produce the article (testing/charts/writing/editing/translating), combined with the tendency of the dev channel to constantly update. Before testing is even completed it's certain that something will update. TBH, the stable channels of Chrome and Firefox are a handful as it is. For example, for this article I had to test 8 browsers (4 on each OS), but I ended up testing 18+ due to OS X, Chrome, Firefox, Opera, Flash, and Java updates. Sorry, but I'm just not sure it's even doable in this format. Thanks for reading!
well I wanted to include it in my comment myself but I forgot I wanted to say if the timing allows
My computer is fast enough that it does not really mater what browser I choose.
In my case, ease of use means that I can see what is going on.
I decry the trend towards dumbing down the UI on every program I use.
(I also refuse to call software 'Apps', to me an app is a mini-program on a phone.)
I always turn on all menus, buttons and labels in WaterFox.
BTW: Good point.
Why don't you include WaterFox in your testing?
It is the 64 bit version of FireFox and I am sure that in your speed tests it may do a little better.