WebGL Performance Benchmarks
Chrome's WebGL functionality is disabled in the Linux version, so only Firefox represents that operating environment in our WebGL testing.
WebGL FishIE Tank
In Windows 7, Chrome places first in Mozilla's WebGL version of Microsoft's FishIE Tank benchmark. Firefox takes a respectable second place finish, just two frames per second behind Chrome. In contrast, Firefox 10 only achieves 12 FPS in Ubuntu.
WebGL Solar System
Chrome again takes the lead over Firefox by two frames per second in Windows 7, but both scores fall below the 30 FPS mark. Firefox for Linux only manages to display five frames per second.
When the FPS results of both WebGL tests are averaged together, Chrome leads with 35.1 FPS, while Firefox displays 32.8 in Windows and only 8.5 in Ubuntu. Chrome is the overall winner here, if only by a small margin.
Current page: WebGL Performance BenchmarksPrev Page Hardware Acceleration Performance Benchmarks Next Page Memory Efficiency Benchmarks
Stay on the Cutting Edge
Join the experts who read Tom's Hardware for the inside track on enthusiast PC tech news — and have for over 25 years. We'll send breaking news and in-depth reviews of CPUs, GPUs, AI, maker hardware and more straight to your inbox.
just wondering if use of a DX11 capable GPU will change scores in some HTML5 and other benchmarks as the browsers use DX11 assisted rendering.Reply
Also, AMD driver support in linux is poor compared to Nvidia.
For future Linux articles, can you use a Dx11 based Nvidia GPU?
It does well in HTML5 benches but 99% of the websites use primarily CSS and JS and HTML3, in which Firefox does poorly.
Waiting for OPERA12. It keeps impressing me.Reply
Even without hardware acceleration, it keeps up with the competition,
When that beast launches, it will kill FF/IE and most probably chrome too.
Who wants to guess that the poor Linux Flash and WebGL results were because Flash and WebGL don't use hardware acceleration with that graphics card and driver? I would be thinking so.Reply
Firefox performance took a dive starting with version 4, where all hardware acceleration was disabled: before then, in version 3.6, XRENDER was used when available (it was 4/5th as fast as IE9 on the same PC) while it is now really slow - it's all software.Reply
Moreover, the only driver enabled for hardware acceleration on Linux is the Nvidia driver: according to Mozilla (and verified by yours truly on AMD and Intel hardware), most display drivers in Linux suck when it comes to 2D rendering - ouch. Note that Mozilla and Google could add shims to circumvent those bugs, but they don't -not worth the effort, especially when driver makers could fix their bugs rather easily, leaving the browsers broken yet again.
I use Chrome (19.0.1041.0 dev presently) the most on Linux (Ubuntu) and empirically I felt Chrome works very well. Now your tests confirm it.Reply
I find Opera 12 really nice too. It can run with Opera 11.61. Opera 12 has a silver icon & 11.61 has its classic red. I like Firefox & Epiphany too.
Its a shame Safari and IE are not truly cross-platform.
how many of those top 40 sites use HTML5?Reply
i think that the HTML5 scores should be weighed by a factor of the percent of top40 sites that use HTML5.
This way actual importance of HTML5 can be judged in real world.
It's a shame Apple does not pay enough attention to the Windows market and optimize their browser! On Mac Safari is king of the hill - personal opinion of course!Reply
On Windows I feel that IE9 works really well for me, although Chrome is the speed demon! FF 4+ lost their appeal for me.
The OSes that are used are 64 bits but the browsers are mostly (all?) 32bits on Windows, and probably 64bits on Linux.Reply
Internet Explorer has 64bits builds on Win7, and Firefox has "almost" a 64bits browser on Windows too: Waterfox, which is a semi-official Firefox for 64bits Windows. Waterfox in particular claims huge improvements over base 32bits install, I would like to see how that translates into real-world.
Not sure about availability of 64bits editions of other browsers on Windows.
Here are my wishes:
-clearly mention if the 32bits or 64bits version of the browser is used
-where applicable and relevant, test with both 32bits and 64bits variants. I would like to see IE and FF split into 32 and 64 variants on Win for example.
I personally migrated from FF to WF on my machines 3 weeks ago and find it noticeably faster in everyday use. WF is now my main browser.
As long as phones keep using Android, Chrome will be the most popular browser for a long while. Google have got it all sorted.Reply