Browser Benchmark - Webpositive vs Arora vs BeZillaBrowser
Most tests found here for comparison:
http://www.favbrowser.com/chrome-vs-opera-vs-firefox-vs-internet-explore...
I benchmarked 3 browsers on Haiku.
BezillaBrowser (BZ) 2.0.0.22pre vs Arora 0.10.2 vs Webpositive r459
Each category below is ordered from best to worst. From the results you can see how poorly BeZillaBrowser 2.0.0.x performs against the other two web browsers. Webpositive does very well and Arora fairly good too. Very good reason why Haiku requires a better browser than BeZillaBrowser 2.0
I noticed that haiku-os.org did not display correct with Arora.
UPDATE 1: Adding in test results for Firefox 3.6.3, Chrome 4.1.x running on Windows 7 64bit.
UPDATE 2: PeaceKeeper Benchmarks updated
Acid3 Test
Chrome(W): 100/100
Webpositive: 98/100
Arora: 98/100
Firefox(W): 94/100
BZ: 52/100
html5test
Chrome(W): 118/160
Firefox(W): 101/160
Webpositive: 73/160
Arora: 58/160
BZ: Failed To Run
CSS Selectors Test
Webpositive: From the 43 selectors 41 have passed, 0 are buggy and 2 are unsupported (Passed 576 out of 578 tests)
Arora: From the 43 selectors 41 have passed, 0 are buggy and 2 are unsupported (Passed 574 out of 578 tests)
BZ: From the 43 selectors 26 have passed, 10 are buggy and 7 are unsupported (Passed 357 out of 578 tests)
V8 - Google's Javascript benchmark
Chrome(W): 3325
Webpositive: 537
Firefox(W): 435
Arora: 347
BZ: 50
Sunspider - Apple's Webkit Javascript benchmark
Chrome(W): 659.6ms +/- 5.1%
Firefox(W): 1165.2ms +/- 2.1%
Webpositive: 1753.8ms +/- 0.6%
Arora: 3270.8ms +/- 0.4%
BZ: 24588.2ms +/- 1.0%
CSS Rendering (onLoad)
Arora: 61 ms
Webpositive: 173 ms
Chrome(W): 195 ms
Firefox(W): 233 ms
BZ: 720 ms
Table Rendering
Webpositive: 272 ms
Chrome(W): 725 ms
Arora: 729 ms
Firefox(W): 730 ms
BZ: 2585 ms
PeaceKeeper Benchmark
Chrome(W): 3374
Firefox(W): 2873
Arora: 1630 (updated)
BZ: 252
Webpositive: N/A - does not finish
Comments
Re: Browser Benchmark - Webpositive vs Arora vs BeZillaBrowser
Looks good. I'm glad to see that WebPositive seems to be coming along very quickly. I have always disliked firefox, so this just goes to show. And, a native browser with full functionality is a great step towards making Haiku fully usable.
Re: Browser Benchmark - Webpositive vs Arora vs BeZillaBrowser
Yes, Webpositive is looking pretty good but better once complete. Firefox was bad with 2.0 releases which were criticized for being slow and bloated. The 3.5 was supposed to improve on speeed and remove unneccesary code. In terms of speed, from fastest to slowest it would be Chrome, Safari, Opera?, Firefox 3.5, IE 8. I use newer Firefox, 3.5.x and like it but never enjoyed 2.0 on any OS.
A native browser is step in right direction but even a fast, non-native browser would have been good. I have not used Arora enough to really judge but seems fairly good choice too - except that it is Qt based (not issue for me but maybe for others).
Firefox 2.0 is too sluggish and slow both from feel and benchmarks above support this too. From the Javascript results, you can see that Webpositive is about 2X faster than Arora and over 10X faster than Firefox. On rendering, Webpositive is about 4X faster CSS and 8X faster Table compared to Firefox. It makes a real big difference overall. Compared to Arora, not too big of difference with 2X to 3X which you won't notice or feel too much.
Re: Browser Benchmark - Webpositive vs Arora vs BeZillaBrowser
Comparisons against other operating systems on the same hardware would be even more interesting...
Webpositive is getting pretty good and I can almost get the atheroswifi driver to connect at school :-)
(The mac address tracking scheme seems not to like haiku or perhaps the driver is failing too much)
Re: Browser Benchmark - Webpositive vs Arora vs BeZillaBrowser
"Comparisons against other operating systems on the same hardware would be even more interesting..."
EDIT:
Added in scores for Firefox 3.6.3 and Chrome 4.1.x on Windows 7 64bit. Most tests were run but still have to add a couple more.
Javascript is somewhat faster on these browsers compared to Webpositive. Chrome's V8 score is crazy when compared to the others. So, not sure how real world accurate it is but can always go with Sunspider score instead.
Re: Browser Benchmark - Webpositive vs Arora vs BeZillaBrowser
Webpositive is getting pretty good +2
Thanks to Stippi
Thanks to Qt port team!
Re: Browser Benchmark - Webpositive vs Arora vs BeZillaBrowser
Comparisons against other operating systems on the same hardware would be even more interesting...
Webpositive is getting pretty good and I can almost get the atheroswifi driver to connect at school :-)
(The mac address tracking scheme seems not to like haiku or perhaps the driver is failing too much)
Is there already a bug report about this? After all it sounds like a good test case:)
Re: Browser Benchmark - Webpositive vs Arora vs BeZillaBrowser
Arora + libpng
Played with Arora some more and noticed the reason it displayed haiku-os site off was because it was compiled with older libpng library.
Downloaded & installed older libpng into application /lib and now shows haiku-os & haikuware sites without any issues.
Re: Browser Benchmark - Webpositive vs Arora vs BeZillaBrowser
Updated PeaceKeeper Benchmark score.
Arora: 1630
Also, tested Firefox 3-Alpha on Haiku with score of 261.
Re: Browser Benchmark - Webpositive vs Arora vs BeZillaBrowser
@ColinG I will be sure to submit a bug report on Trac for the wifi Login bug... its just a plain open B/G network as far as I know with mac address blocking enabled
@tonestone57 the benchmarks are pretty impressive do they list exactly which components failed? I guess the fast table rendering is due to stippi's work integrating it well as a native app I wonder if it will hold up to IE 9 and FF4 when they are out since they will have hardware acceleration.
Re: Browser Benchmark - Webpositive vs Arora vs BeZillaBrowser
@ColinG I will be sure to submit a bug report on Trac for the wifi Login bug... its just a plain open B/G network as far as I know with mac address blocking enabled
@tonestone57 the benchmarks are pretty impressive do they list exactly which components failed? I guess the fast table rendering is due to stippi's work integrating it well as a native app I wonder if it will hold up to IE 9 and FF4 when they are out since they will have hardware acceleration.
Given the way that windows handle hardware acceleration, if it falls to the native video card driver it could actually slow the broswer down.
Re: Browser Benchmark - Webpositive vs Arora vs BeZillaBrowser
strange because I always get the feeling that WebPositive on Haiku is much slower than Firefox on Linux (on the same hardware). WebPositive is a much decent browser and I appreciate it, but I don't find it really responsive. Maybe it's something else on my system?
And I agree, Firefox 2 was really bad, I used Konqueror at that time. When FF 3 was out it was much better. And FF 4 is really faster than FF 3.
Re: Browser Benchmark - Webpositive vs Arora vs BeZillaBrowser
Probably networking stack. Linux should have quite an advantage there both in the OS and compared to WebPositives CURL backend.
Re: Browser Benchmark - Webpositive vs Arora vs BeZillaBrowser
by slow, I wasn't especially meaning slow to browse, but more "UI not very responsive", in particular when the page in heavy in graphics and javascript.
Re: Browser Benchmark - Webpositive vs Arora vs BeZillaBrowser
thats some pretty good performance. With more optimization it looks like webpositive could be a tour de force in browsers. is this all on comparable hardware ? I could run them myself since I have all of those broswers and native installs of XP/win7/haiku. I could add a Linux "which one will work with minimal effort"
We can compare on one machine with one hardware set and get some fiarly concrete data. when i get in later I will run all these benchamrks on my hardware and we can compare apples to apples and see where performance stacks up.
Re: Browser Benchmark - Webpositive vs Arora vs BeZillaBrowser
"by slow, I wasn't especially meaning slow to browse, but more "UI not very responsive"........."
Something you should ask Stephan (stippi). He has done a good amount of work on Webpositive. Also, tell him which pages you notice this on. You should first compare with Arora on Haiku and Safari on Windows because both of those use WebKit too (& same Javascript engine) to see if same issue or not. Could be Javascript or Webkit related. Rule that out before you blame the browser. ;-)
ie: Ikariam (www.ikariam.com) is a javascript game and runs real good on Opera and Chrome but so-so on Safari.
@stargatefan
yes, run on the same hardware except I think I was using one core with no HT (on Core i3) because was having issues with SMP back then. Sure, run them and see what you get. I expect results should be similar to mine for where the browsers place. You may get better overall numbers for the tests depending on your hardware.
If you do the tests, include QtWeb which is another browser available to Haiku. And Safari to compare to another WebKit browser on Windows to make it fair since FF & Chrome are not WebKit based.
I did these tests to kinda see how the browsers compare in Haiku and to Windows ones. WebPostive did very well performance wise except it still lacks support for some webpages.
I really should update this post with a newer set of benchmarks but cannot spend the time on it!!!
Re: Browser Benchmark - Webpositive vs Arora vs BeZillaBrowser
I can't test Safari because it wasn't ported to my OS. But Chrome/Chromium are using WebKit, that's the JS engine which is different.
For some example of slow websites, there are for example Facebook, haiku-os, http://www.lordofultima.com/en which are running slower than Firefox or Chromium, but maybe it's more noticeable when some data are loaded, that's true (or when data are loading within another tab)
Re: Browser Benchmark - Webpositive vs Arora vs BeZillaBrowser
Right you are farvardin. Chrome uses Webkit too. I was thinking about the JS engine. Sorry about that.
For instance, lord of ultima uses javascript for the game (I read this from their site). Fairly sure Facebook uses a good amount of javascript. This is why better to compare to another browser (ie: Safari) that uses same JS engine to Webpositive. You can disable Javascript in Chrome. Restart the browser. Then try those sites out again to see how affected they are with Javascript turned off.
File a bug and let Stephan look into it if you believe those sites work too slow with Webpositive. It could be the JS engine or Webpositive causing the slowdown - hard to say. I have used Safari with Ikariam (javascript game) and could see that it is way slower loading stuff.
Here are the Webpositive bugs currently filed:
http://dev.haiku-os.org/search?ticket=on&q=webpositive&page=1&noquickjump=1