Comparing Browser JavaScript Performance

Comparing Browser JavaScript Performance 134

Posted by kdawson on Thursday December 20, 2007 @01:45PM from the lining-'em-up dept.

Thwomp writes "Over at Coding Horror Jeff Atwood has an interesting writeup on JavaScript performance in the big four browsers. He used WebKit's newly announced SunSpider to produce the results. If a probable anomaly in the IE7 results is overlooked, Firefox 2 is the slowest of the bunch. Atwood has also benchmarked the latest Firefox Beta, and its performance seems to be improved significantly."

Comparing Browser JavaScript Performance

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Search 134 Comments Log In/Create an Account

Comments Filter:

Hmmm (Score:5, Funny)

by ubrgeek ( 679399 ) writes: on Thursday December 20, 2007 @01:49PM (#21766842)

> if a probable anomaly in the IE7 results is overlooked

Like what? It didn't crash the system or it actually launched ;)

Ooh ooh let me guess (Score:5, Funny)

by The MAZZTer ( 911996 ) writes: <(megazzt) (at) (gmail.com)> on Thursday December 20, 2007 @01:53PM (#21766892) Homepage

With NoScript, Firefox's performance easily soars above the rest?

Vista + ie7 took hours! (Score:5, Funny)

by mseidl ( 828824 ) * writes: on Thursday December 20, 2007 @01:54PM (#21766900) Homepage

<html> <body> <script type="text/javascript"> var i=0 for (i=0;i<=10;i++) { document.write.UAC("Cancel or Allow?"); document.prompt("Yes, No, Maybe?); } </script> </table> </body> </html>

lynx beats them all, 17 ms to pass test (Score:3, Funny)

by ls671 ( 1122017 ) writes: on Thursday December 20, 2007 @02:13PM (#21767192) Homepage

I tried the same benchmark with my browser and it seems to beat them all, only 17 ms to pass the test !!!

~$ time lynx -dump http://webkit.org/perf/sunspider-0.9/sunspider-driver.html [webkit.org]
SunSpider JavaScript Benchmark (In Progress...)

real 0m0.017s
user 0m0.001s
sys 0m0.004s
~$

Re:And the winner: Linux (Score:3, Funny)

by tcdk ( 173945 ) writes: on Thursday December 20, 2007 @03:35PM (#21768700) Homepage Journal

I only have opera running on my WinMobile Dell Axim v51x PDA and it's currently running, it seems to be 30-40 times slower than the desktop, so I'll not be waiting before I post...

Okay, it wasn't that bad - it finished in 317.8s. So 15-20 times slower. I was actually surpriced that it managed to run to the end.

Re:It's Flash (Score:4, Funny)

by cheater512 ( 783349 ) writes: <nick@nickstallman.net> on Thursday December 20, 2007 @04:53PM (#21770006) Homepage

Seamonkey + Flash on my old P3 laptop is fine.

If by fine you mean freaking bloody slow.
Flash designers wouldnt know speed if it slapped them with a large trout.

YouTube is good. It can handle a video pretty well (occasional frame dropping).
Ads and many other things will reduce the computer to a crawl instantly.

Re:Opera (Score:3, Funny)

by ed.markovich ( 1118143 ) writes: on Thursday December 20, 2007 @09:28PM (#21773978) Homepage

Looks like they are finally getting their javascript act together. After being a sore point for so many years, a working javascript in Opera will be welcome. I am just curious as to what you're talking about. I've been using Opera for a while now and have not noticed it having any JS issues.

There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.

Comparing Browser JavaScript Performance 134

Comparing Browser JavaScript Performance More Login

Comparing Browser JavaScript Performance

Hmmm (Score:5, Funny)

Ooh ooh let me guess (Score:5, Funny)

Vista + ie7 took hours! (Score:5, Funny)

lynx beats them all, 17 ms to pass test (Score:3, Funny)

Re:And the winner: Linux (Score:3, Funny)

Re:It's Flash (Score:4, Funny)

Re:Opera (Score:3, Funny)

Related Links Top of the: day, week, month.

Slashdot Top Deals

Slashdot