Kitz ADSL Broadband Information
adsl spacer  
Support this site
Home Broadband ISPs Tech Routers Wiki Forum
   Compare ISP   Rate your ISP
   Glossary   Glossary
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  


Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: Browser Benchmarks v 3- March 2013  (Read 9880 times)


  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 32500
  • Over the Rainbow Bridge
    • The ELRepo Project
Re: Browser Benchmarks v 3- March 2013
« Reply #15 on: March 18, 2013, 09:14:32 PM »

With a 64-bit OS on 64-bit hardware and a 64-bit version of Firefox, complete with a 64-bit Flash plugin, I consistently see 49 - 50 fps:-X
:cat:  100% Linux and, previously, Unix. Co-founder of the ELRepo Project.

Please consider making a donation to support the running of this site.


  • Kitizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 1314
Re: Browser Benchmarks v 3- March 2013
« Reply #16 on: March 18, 2013, 10:36:37 PM »

thanks guys

If I get IE10 64-Bit too work (which Iam working on) I will add that and Palemoon to the benchmarks.

I have edited the first post again to included a qoute from Mr. M.C. Straver (Palemoon's creator) about how benchmarks can only be used as an indicator and should not be used for 'overall performance' due to 'Tight-Loop Testing' etc and some of the tests may be biased or incomplete (which is true), he also explains why 64-Bit browsers will perform worse than 32-bit browsers in benchmarks - its a good read and I kinda see where he is coming from - be interested in hearing others thoughts on his comment's? (see the qoute on the end of the first post)
« Last Edit: March 18, 2013, 10:40:55 PM by snadge »
Zyxel VMG8924-B10A <-> PlusNET <-> Eci DSLAM
Sync: 64,000k <-> INP: ON <-> FTTP available :) 900Mbps +5G EE Mobile


  • Administrator
  • Senior Kitizen
  • *
  • Posts: 32683
  • Trinity: Most guys do.
Re: Browser Benchmarks v 3- March 2013
« Reply #17 on: March 18, 2013, 11:13:21 PM »

This is proving to be an interesting topic.   

Thank you for starting it and the time youve put into sharing the results and information.
Please do not PM me with queries for broadband help as I may not be able to respond.
How to get your router line stats :: ADSL Exchange Checker


  • Guest
Re: Browser Benchmarks - March 2013
« Reply #18 on: March 19, 2013, 02:51:21 PM »

My thoughts exactly, it doesnt seem to handle flash well at all and frequently crashes

If by "crashing" you mean FF becomes unresponsive when you leave a flash video site then it hasn't crashed. It can take 40-50 seconds to become responsive again but this appears to be because the flash plugin is "securely" deleting some content from the flash temp directory and has control of the main FF thread. IE9 does the same thing but will remain responsive because it wasn't a moron who coded the flash plugin handling.

Been way too many "releases" of FF in the last couple of years, time to stop rolling out more shiny stuff and fix the basics.


  • Guest
Re: Browser Benchmarks v 3- March 2013
« Reply #19 on: April 16, 2013, 03:12:47 PM »

Amusingly the latest build of FF seems to address the unresponsive flash module issue. Not well but it is an improvement.

Now if they could just lose the in-built pdf handler which is slower than a slow thing on a slow day and usually reports "this document may not be displayed correctly, would you like to open it in another application" that'd be nice. As would not trying to handle every goddamn extension internally.

Rant over. As always about:config will allow you to turn off the utter lunacy FF devs seem to think is necessary - like why do you think your browser should intercept and route DNS requests via your DNS even when you uncheck the boxes in security tab? Security my backside, tracking and selling user data is more likely IMHO.

About at the end of my tether with FF, only thing keeping me there now is noscript.
Pages: 1 [2]