Benchmark Analysis: Windows 7 And Ubuntu 11.10
The analysis tables contain categories for each type of benchmark. For example, Mozilla Dromaeo DOM is represented by the DOM category, while Peacekeeper, Kraken, and SunSpider are represented together under the JavaScript category.
Each category has four columns: winner, strong, acceptable, and weak. Winner is obviously the browser that achieves the highest scores in that category. The strong column is for those browsers exhibiting superior performance, but no victory. Acceptable is for browsers that perform neither spectacularly nor poorly, but merely adequately. For tests that measure frame rates, a score near the 30 FPS range gets that browser filed into the acceptable column. The weak column is for browsers that perform poorly or substantially lower than competing products.
In the event of a tie in the analysis tables, we go back to the individual benchmarks and look at the raw difference in scores.
The Windows 7-based standings for Chrome 17, Firefox 10, Internet Explorer 9, Opera 11.61, and Safari 5.1.2 are found in the table below.
Windows 7 Analysis Table
Winner | Strong | Acceptable | Weak | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Performance Benchmarks | ||||
Startup Time, Light | Safari | Chrome, Firefox, Opera | Internet Explorer | |
Startup Time, Heavy | Opera | Chrome | Firefox | Internet Explorer, Safari |
Page Load Time, Uncached | Safari | Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer, Opera | ||
Page Load Time, Cached | Safari | Chrome | Firefox, Internet Explorer, Opera | |
JavaScript | Chrome | Firefox | Opera | Internet Explorer, Safari |
DOM | Opera | Firefox | Internet Explorer | |
CSS | Chrome | Safari | Opera, Internet Explorer | Firefox |
Flash | Internet Explorer | Opera, Safari | Chrome, Firefox | |
Java | Firefox | Chrome, Internet Explorer, Opera, Safari | ||
Silverlight | Chrome | Opera | Firefox, Internet Explorer, Safari | |
HTML5 | Firefox | Internet Explorer | Chrome | Opera, Safari |
HTML5 Hardware Acceleration | Firefox | Internet Explorer | Chrome, Opera, Safari | |
WebGL | Chrome | Firefox | Internet Explorer, Opera, Safari | |
Efficiency Benchmarks | ||||
Memory Usage, Light | Internet Explorer | Chrome, Firefox, Opera, Safari | ||
Memory Usage, Heavy | Safari | Firefox | Opera, Chrome | Internet Explorer |
Memory Management | Internet Explorer | Chrome, Firefox | Opera, Safari | |
Reliability Benchmarks | ||||
Proper Page Loads | Opera | Firefox, Safari | Chrome | Internet Explorer |
Conformance Benchmarks | ||||
HTML5 | Chrome | Firefox | Opera | Internet Explorer, Safari |
JavaScript | Opera | Firefox, Chrome | Internet Explorer | Safari |
Now, let's take a look at how Chrome 17, Firefox 10, and Opera 11.61 perform in Ubuntu 11.10.
Ubuntu 11.10 (Oneiric Ocelot) Analysis Table
Winner | Strong | Acceptable | Weak | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Performance Benchmarks | ||||
Startup Time, Light | Firefox | Chrome, Opera | ||
Startup Time, Heavy | Opera | Chrome, Firefox | ||
Page Load Time, Uncached | Chrome | Opera | Firefox | |
Page Load Time, Cached | Chrome | Opera | Firefox | |
JavaScript | Chrome | Firefox | Opera | |
DOM | Opera | Chrome, Firefox | ||
CSS | Chrome | Opera | Firefox | |
Flash | Firefox | Chrome, Opera | ||
Java | Firefox | Chrome, Opera | ||
Silverlight | Chrome, Firefox, Opera | |||
HTML5 | Chrome | Opera | Firefox | |
HTML5 Hardware Acceleration | Chrome | Firefox, Opera | ||
WebGL | Firefox | Chrome, Opera | ||
Efficiency Benchmarks | ||||
Memory Usage, Light | Chrome | Firefox, Opera | ||
Memory Usage, Heavy | Firefox | Opera | Chrome | |
Memory Management | Chrome | Firefox | Opera | |
Reliability Benchmarks | ||||
Proper Page Loads | Opera | Chrome | Firefox | |
Conformance Benchmarks | ||||
HTML5 | Chrome | Firefox | Opera | |
JavaScript | Opera | Firefox, Chrome |