What's the world's fastest browser?

Ashton Mills
07 September 2006, 6:54 AM


Guess, we dare you, before you click more. Could it be Internet Explorer, or Firefox, or perhaps the aptly-named Swiftfox for Linux? Read on, the results might surprise you.


Oh sure, the following tests aren't as scientific as putting all the browsers in a ring and seeing which one is left standing after the fight, but it's close.

Before we begin however, the new contender: Swiftfox.

Firefox, which we all know and love, has in recent times been accused of putting on weight and slipping back the bulky days of Mozilla, the very thing its birth was supposed to be an escape from. The draw cards of Firefox's first releases were speed and simplicity.

While I personally don't think Firefox has strayed far from this, there are those who feel otherwise -- like the chaps behind Swiftfox.

Swiftfox is Firefox with a few key differences -- it's compiled with optimised flags for various CPU architectures, and it drops some of the more recent bulk -- such as the depedencies on the Pango libraries (used in part for international font rendering).

It's only available for Linux, but as Firefox is open source, there's nothing stopping someone building a Swiftfox for Windows.

Swiftfox has gained a rapid following for being noticeably faster, so I was curious to see if this was the case. Armed with my Ubuntu install, and specialised 'benchmarking toolkit' (read: bag of chips, coke, and a stopwatch), I sat down to see if Swiftfox could live up to its moniker using the AMD64 optimised binary for Ubuntu on my AMD64 4400+ system.

If you want seriously hardcore Web standards benchmarking, throw your browser through the Acid2 test, which is really what it's all about. But here, we're looking for speed, and for this there's nothing better than Scragz' quick and dirty browser rendering benchmark. So, onto the results!
First, a baseline under Windows:

(32-bit) Internet Explorer 6: 3.76 seconds
(32-bit) 1.5.0.6 Firefox: 5.03
(32-bit) 9.01 Opera: 4.89

Well there's a nice surprise! Even the aging IE6 bundled with Windows XP is a fair bit faster at the testpage than Firefox and Opera. But lets see how things fare under 64-bit Ubuntu and if Swiftfox lives up to its name:

(64-bit) 1.5.0.6 Firefox: 4.75 seconds
(32-bit) 1.5.0.6 Firefox: 4.79
(32-bit) 1.5.0.6 Swiftfox: 4.67

Well, Swiftfox is indeed faster -- by about 1.7%. Not really that much to write home about, but your mileage may vary. And plausibly, the 64-bit version of Firefox is flea's sneeze faster than the 32-bit version. While we're here, what about the two default browsers for the KDE and Gnome desktops, common to most Linux distributions:

(64-bit) 3.5.2 Konqueror: 3.75 seconds
(64-bit) 2.4.1.1 Epiphany: 4.69

Now there's another surprise. Not only is the default (and often overlooked) Gnome browser Epiphany rendering almost as fast as Swiftfox, but Konqueror (KDE's default browser) blows them all away, running head to head with IE on Windows.

So there you go. You want speed, it's Konqueror or, yes, IE. And, to be fair, while Swiftfox wasn't exactly leaps ahead it does actually startup noticeably faster than Firefox, which is nice.

Do you notice rendering speed differences between browsers? And which is your preferred choice and why?

Screenshot-Firefox-small.jpg


Post your comment



Comments

RSS feed Email alert

Anonymous:

I only have two to test on the page: Konqueror and Firefox.

You would think that living in Canberra would give you fast internet...

25.5 Firefox
18.0 Konqueror

Wow.

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (5 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anonymous:

This on a p3 700mhz

links -g 2.368
Firefox 20.312




29 February 2008, 8:35 PM (5 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Luis:

Konqueror 13.018
Firefox 22.464

29 February 2008, 8:35 PM (5 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Anonymous:

I honestly don't know where these numbers come from. But I notice a tremendous amount of speed of rendering web pages. That was one of the things that held me back from installing ubuntu on my desktop machine, because I wanted a fast browser. Well here it is, I am totally stunned

29 February 2008, 8:29 PM (5 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

AnonymousUser:

I am running Swiftfox on a Pentium M. Great stuff. Got a 4.11 on the test.

29 February 2008, 8:36 PM (5 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

AnonymousCoward:

2.74 seconds running Swiftfox under Ubuntu Linux

Athlon 3500+

29 February 2008, 8:30 PM (5 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

dentonlt:

Hmm. I'm on Win XP Pro, Pentium III / 1.0 GHz ...

Scragz gave me 7.0, 6.3, 16.4 (?), 6.9 ...

Though I could throw out the random 16, I think it may be better to run this test with another benchmark. Or at least run it 100x.

Good content in general. I'm happy to see the references to some other browsers (Links, Konqueror). Good to qualify the process, though.

29 February 2008, 8:30 PM (5 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

yodogg:

2.608 with epiphany 2.16.2
5.266 on firefox 2

3.2ghz intel northwood

So you can see which browser i use :)
and in saying that epiphanys speed and features has greatly increased

29 February 2008, 8:42 PM (5 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Daniel Lucraft:

Well, since Swiftfox and Firefox presumably use the same rendering engine, that's exactly what you'd expect. The question is whether Swiftfox has removed enough cruft that it's faster for everything else. And I notice in one sentence towards the end you say that it starts up faster, so I suppose it is.

I'm so pissed off with Firefox's memory land grab that I'm currently evaluating Epiphany.

29 February 2008, 8:31 PM (5 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

Matthew:

I'm running Slackware 12 on a Pentium 4 and I'm finding the Opera a good bit faster than Firefox. Or at least it seems more responsive (haven't measured page load times) and isn't as bulky. Still miss the speed and simplicity of IE4-6 on Win9x, though.

29 February 2008, 8:31 PM (5 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

shadowsnipes:

It is important to remember that the more extensions you use in Firefox the slower it will be, ESPECIALLY in the start up time. I typically use at least 9 extensions and I notice a big difference in the speed when loading that many.

It is also important to be mindful of your cache when doing these tests. Tests should be done with a blank cache and with the cache to compare the results. Some browsers make better use of their cache than others.

All in all, on Linux there is no question that konqueror is the fastest and firefox 2.0 does seems slower than the older, lighter versions. However, I love the usability that my firefox extensions add and wouldn't trade them for a couple of seconds.


29 February 2008, 8:32 PM (5 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

robsku (New user):

I prefer Swiftfox (2.0.0.13pre) but I use opera for heavily scripted pages and flash content as it clearly does them running lighter and faster...

The test page with Opera gave me result of multiple times the result I got with Swiftfox but unfortunately my experience is that FireFox, specially the linux version, is way slower on even rendering, let alone running scripts - and it hogs insane amounts of memory to do it's job... This holds true even when using SwiftFox but I mostly still prefer it over Opera because FF suits me better anyway.

Note that these observations are specifically of FF/SwiftFox version 2.x and I have heard that version 3.x should already deal with most, if not all, of these problems - heard that they now even have faster script engine than chrome!

21 January 2009, 5:54 PM (4 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

GroundZero (New user):

what about IE 8?For it's the fastest browser...Or... CRAZY BROWSER (based in IE structure...).You Linux are in despair with Windows 7

GroundZero

13 January 2010, 10:21 PM (3 years ago)report abuse Send to a friend reply

anonymous user Anonymous user