Opera 9.5 Beats Firefox and IE7 As Fastest Browser 510
Abhinav Peddada writes "Ars Technica takes Opera 9.5, the latest from Opera's stable, for a test run and finds some interesting results, including it being a 'solid improvement to an already very strong browser.' On the performance front, Ars Technica reports 'Opera 9.5 scored slightly higher (281ms) than the previous released version, 9.23 (546ms). And Opera 9.x, let it be known, smacks silly the likes of Firefox and Internet Explorer, which tend to have results in the 900-1500ms range on this test machine (a 1.8 GHz Core 2 Duo with 2GB RAM). Opera was 50 percent faster on average than Firefox, and 100 percent faster than IE7 on Windows Vista, for instance.'"
ok, really? (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Wasn't that always the case? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Article is very misleading - JS benchmark only (Score:5, Informative)
Well, they didn't test it against WebKit/Safari/Konq, which blazes through Javascript tests. Firefox's Javascript engine (SpiderMonkey) leaves a lot to be desired, and well, Internet Exploder is just plain terrible at everything. Things will get better for Firefox once Mozilla figures out a way to integrate Tamarin, but this is still a while off.
Re:Wasn't that always the case? (Score:5, Informative)
If you're going to complain about something, please try and make it relevant.
Re:Those numbers mean nothing... (Score:2, Informative)
Forget the units, use the ratio.
Re:Article is very misleading - JS benchmark only (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Grade article: incomplete (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Resource-conservation, not speed (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Different market (Score:3, Informative)
Opera aims at different market -- small gadgets. This is where the speed is really critical. For IE and FF good enough is enough, since performance on modern desktops is not that critical.
Re:Article is very misleading - JS benchmark only (Score:5, Informative)
It may blaze through tests, but in real life Konq is considerably slower than Firefox. I have to deal with a number of javascript ladden juggernauts like the ex-PeopleSoft eBusieness suite on a daily basis and konq is visibly much slower than Firefox.
Re:Article is very misleading - JS benchmark only (Score:5, Informative)
The benchmark is at:
http://pentestmonkey.net/jsbm/index.html [pentestmonkey.net]
And i get the following results on a macbook pro 2.16ghz core2 duo running osx 10.4.10:
Safari (2.0.4):
MD5 Benchmark took 15.136 seconds for 3000 hashes (198 hashes/second)
MD4 Benchmark took 10.876 seconds for 2700 hashes (248 hashes/second)
SHA1 Benchmark took 19.052 seconds for 1900 hashes (100 hashes/second)
Camino (1.5.1):
MD5 Benchmark took 1.78 seconds for 3000 hashes (1685 hashes/second)
MD4 Benchmark took 1.271 seconds for 2700 hashes (2124 hashes/second)
SHA1 Benchmark took 1.931 seconds for 1900 hashes (984 hashes/second)
Firefox (latest nightly build):
MD5 Benchmark took 1.867 seconds for 3000 hashes (1607 hashes/second)
MD4 Benchmark took 1.299 seconds for 2700 hashes (2079 hashes/second)
SHA1 Benchmark took 2.077 seconds for 1900 hashes (915 hashes/second)
Firefox (2.0.5):
MD5 Benchmark took 2.628 seconds for 3000 hashes (1142 hashes/second)
MD4 Benchmark took 1.919 seconds for 2700 hashes (1407 hashes/second)
SHA1 Benchmark took 2.872 seconds for 1900 hashes (662 hashes/second)
Opera 9.23 (current stable):
MD5 Benchmark took 4.561 seconds for 3000 hashes (658 hashes/second)
MD4 Benchmark took 3.163 seconds for 2700 hashes (854 hashes/second)
SHA1 Benchmark took 4.812 seconds for 1900 hashes (395 hashes/second)
Opera 9.50 alpha (build 4404):
MD5 Benchmark took 1.446 seconds for 3000 hashes (2075 hashes/second)
MD4 Benchmark took 1.021 seconds for 2700 hashes (2644 hashes/second)
SHA1 Benchmark took 1.607 seconds for 1900 hashes (1182 hashes/second)
Quite impressive the improvements that have been made in the latest opera... Also, camino wasn't faster than the firefox nightlies last time i tried it (camino 1.0.4)...
I don't have access to msie or konqueror, i would assume konqueror performance would be similar to safari tho.
Re:ok, really? (Score:2, Informative)
and yet still no fundamental authentication.. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Article is very misleading - JS benchmark only (Score:5, Informative)
Prerelease builds:
Safari 3 Nightly 177ms
Opera 9.5 Alpha 278ms
Firefox 3 Nightly 823ms
Production builds:
Safari 2 423ms
Opera 9.2 684ms
Firefox 2 880ms
Looks like Safari wins this one.
Re:Those numbers mean nothing... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Grade article: incomplete (Score:4, Informative)
Re:its all about the addons (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I'm fed up with the anti-Opera crap here... (Score:5, Informative)
I tried Opera.
Good browser it may be, but I don't like it. It's better than IE, but then, so is Lynx.
I like Firefox not so much for its speed (I'll admit Opera is faster), but for the extensions.
And yes, some of the more often used extensions do come off as copies of stuff first introduced in Opera, which makes Opera a bit of the Apple of the browser world.
And JFTR: Opera fanboys (the few that I've encountered) are worse than Linux, Mac and Amiga fanboys combined.
Benchmarks be damned (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Benchmarks be damned (Score:5, Informative)
Re:its all about the addons (Score:3, Informative)
This is fantastic for privacy. I have FF to accept all cookies, but delete all except the ones I specify to keep when the browser is closed. This way all web sites work (some don't if you disable cookies) but all tracking cookies and other crap gets deleted at the end of every session.
Re:Different market (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Who cares? (Score:2, Informative)
APK
P.S.=> Some added "FYI" for those of you comparing FireFox/IE/Opera:
Opera security advisories @ SECUNIA (0% unpatched):
http://secunia.com/product/10615/?task=advisories [secunia.com]
FireFox security advisories @ SECUNIA (43% unpatched):
http://secunia.com/product/12434/ [secunia.com]
IE 7 security advisories @ SECUNIA (56% unpatched):
http://secunia.com/product/12366/ [secunia.com]
(As far as security related vulnerabilities remaining unpatched, Opera leads here (super-important in today's online world where security IS a concern))
---
Also, as far as speed comparisons? This is one that also extolls Opera's benefits over FF &/or IE here, & ON MULTIPLE OS PLATFORMS:
BROWSER SPEED COMPARISONS ON MANY TASKS & MULTIPLE OPERATING SYSTEM PLATFORMS:
http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/browserSpeed.html [howtocreate.co.uk]
And, especially on Win32 OS', the most used PC platform/OS there is...
---
(& the best part is, Opera has ALL of the features a body can need, WITHOUT using addons (though it has that via Opera widgets), & YET, Opera is LIGHTER ON MEMORY than FireFox &/or IE typically!)
You can check memory residency yourselves by loading FF, & Opera (& IE for Windows users) & test memory size occupancy via taskmgr.exe (or similar tools like Process Explorer) yourselves & see what I mean... I did so with FF 2.0.0.6, IE 7.x, & Opera 9.23.
---
Opera also passed the "ACID2" test, for standards compliance (it is not alone here, but is over IE & FF, & it was the 6th browser to do so):
http://it.slashdot.org/it/06/03/12/1416222.shtml [slashdot.org]
A descending chronological order in which browsers (and authoring tools) passed Acid2, per a tip I got from by rh0 (member 1110203) here on
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid2 [wikipedia.org]
Safari, Prince, Shiira, Konqueror, Opera, & iCab
(Firefox's Acid2 compliant branch has been merged into the trunk, thus, Firefox 3 will likely be Acid2 compliant, but currently FF & IE are not passers of this test.)
---
And, Opera had features (like tabbed browsing) that other browsers (major 2 others in IE/FF) copied from it:
FIREFOX MYTHS:
http://mywebpages.comcast.net/SupportCD/FirefoxMy
(Yes, Opera had tabbed browsing before IE &/or FF, & other features as well. Opera comes FULLY LOADED features-wise, with a built in email client, IRC client, RSS client, & more + yet eats less RAM than others, & addons only bloat IE &/or FF even more memory-occupancy-wise. (AND YES, Opera has addons as well in "opera widgets" (like
everytime I hear about Opera's amazing speed... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Does it have the equivalents of these extension (Score:4, Informative)
That sums it up: http://my.opera.com/Rijk/blog/2006/07/04/top-150-
Out of 113 most popular Fx extensions: 38 are built-in, 38 are not possible, rest can be added by tweaking/hacking/configuring something.
How Opera is Supported (Score:4, Informative)
They have deals with search engines, like Google and Yahoo, to get placement as the default engines in the toolbar, in Speed Dial, and in Opera Mini. (I think these days it's Yahoo in all 3.) Same kind of deal that Firefox has with Google, really.
Plus there are the versions for devices [opera.com] (Nintendo DS, etc.), which they still charge for, either directly or through licensing deals with device manufacturers and mobile carriers. So they pull in revenue from that.
This article is a year out of date, but still informative: Opera making big profits from free software [itwire.com.au].