Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 30th Oct 2009 22:42 UTC
Permalink for comment 392196
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.





Member since:
2005-07-24
I posted earlier about Firefox vs the new Webkit based Epiphany. But I neglected to provide any actual metrics.
So here we are. Epiphany 2.28 gets a 100 in ACID3 and looks right. Firefox 3.5.3 gets a 93 and doesn't.
And Epiphany 2.28 totally blows the doors off of Firefox 3.5.3 for javascript. Beats it by an overall factor of 5+. And blows it away in every category.
Opening the browser and going to google.com results in a 48 MB res - shared for Firefox, and 17 MB for the new Epiphany. All the claims of improvement, and Firefox is still a slovenly memory hog.
What is Mozilla Corp *doing* with that $70 million a year, or whatever, that they get from Google? Not building a better browser for Linux, obviously. I'd suggest doing without whatever extension is holding you back and throwing your weight behind a project that cares, for the greater good of Linux browsers.
TEST COMPARISON FROM TO DETAILS
====================================================================== =======
** TOTAL **: 5.14x as fast 1908.6ms +/- 2.1% 371.4ms +/- 0.8% significant
====================================================================== =======
3d: 4.36x as fast 221.6ms +/- 0.5% 50.8ms +/- 1.1% significant
cube: 6.11x as fast 74.6ms +/- 0.9% 12.2ms +/- 4.6% significant
morph: 3.13x as fast 77.0ms +/- 0.0% 24.6ms +/- 2.8% significant
raytrace: 5.00x as fast 70.0ms +/- 1.3% 14.0ms +/- 0.0% significant
access: 9.27x as fast 294.8ms +/- 4.6% 31.8ms +/- 1.7% significant
binary-trees: 7.95x as fast 31.8ms +/- 1.7% 4.0ms +/- 0.0% significant
fannkuch: 9.24x as fast 116.4ms +/- 4.1% 12.6ms +/- 5.4% significant
nbody: 12.5x as fast 112.2ms +/- 4.5% 9.0ms +/- 0.0% significant
nsieve: 5.55x as fast 34.4ms +/- 18.5% 6.2ms +/- 9.0% significant
bitops: 13.0x as fast 233.6ms +/- 4.8% 18.0ms +/- 4.9% significant
3bit-bits-in-byte: 12.5x as fast 30.0ms +/- 0.0% 2.4ms +/- 28.4% significant
bits-in-byte: 9.17x as fast 55.0ms +/- 0.0% 6.0ms +/- 0.0% significant
bitwise-and: 23.9x as fast 91.0ms +/- 12.0% 3.8ms +/- 14.6% significant
nsieve-bits: 9.93x as fast 57.6ms +/- 1.2% 5.8ms +/- 9.6% significant
controlflow: 9.29x as fast 26.0ms +/- 0.0% 2.8ms +/- 19.9% significant
recursive: 9.29x as fast 26.0ms +/- 0.0% 2.8ms +/- 19.9% significant
crypto: 6.15x as fast 108.2ms +/- 0.5% 17.6ms +/- 6.3% significant
aes: 4.45x as fast 43.6ms +/- 1.6% 9.8ms +/- 5.7% significant
md5: 7.38x as fast 31.0ms +/- 0.0% 4.2ms +/- 13.2% significant
sha1: 9.33x as fast 33.6ms +/- 2.0% 3.6ms +/- 18.9% significant
date: 2.26x as fast 153.4ms +/- 0.4% 67.8ms +/- 2.4% significant
format-tofte: 2.49x as fast 68.2ms +/- 1.5% 27.4ms +/- 4.1% significant
format-xparb: 2.11x as fast 85.2ms +/- 1.2% 40.4ms +/- 1.7% significant
math: 6.30x as fast 209.2ms +/- 1.4% 33.2ms +/- 4.1% significant
cordic: 10.2x as fast 77.4ms +/- 0.9% 7.6ms +/- 9.0% significant
partial-sums: 4.98x as fast 95.6ms +/- 3.5% 19.2ms +/- 2.9% significant
spectral-norm: 5.66x as fast 36.2ms +/- 1.5% 6.4ms +/- 10.6% significant
regexp: 13.4x as fast 206.0ms +/- 10.6% 15.4ms +/- 7.2% significant
dna: 13.4x as fast 206.0ms +/- 10.6% 15.4ms +/- 7.2% significant
string: 3.40x as fast 455.8ms +/- 1.4% 134.0ms +/- 1.3% significant
base64: 3.00x as fast 37.8ms +/- 2.8% 12.6ms +/- 5.4% significant
fasta: 3.83x as fast 97.4ms +/- 1.5% 25.4ms +/- 2.7% significant
tagcloud: 3.67x as fast 105.6ms +/- 2.4% 28.8ms +/- 1.9% significant
unpack-code: 3.74x as fast 154.0ms +/- 2.4% 41.2ms +/- 2.5% significant
validate-input: 2.35x as fast 61.0ms +/- 4.3% 26.0ms +/- 3.4% significant
Edited 2009-11-01 00:22 UTC