I should say that once I tried Pale Moon, I never looked back at Firefox again, but knowing that performance could be far better but isn't due to politically correct manufacturer balance isn't that great of an idea IMHO, but I do respect each person's views on the matter. Maybe some tab handling or add-on handling could be moved to other cores if available? Or maybe that AMD-64 (& Intel) optimized versions idea I seem to remember being talked about earlier in another thread!! (Wink-wink-nudge-nudge. I suppose that would be quite complicated, especially while remaining future compatible with Fx & add-ons. )īTW - would there be any chance that you, yourself, could work on multi-processing? Wishful thinking on my part. (I removed Fx completely from the 32-bit machines so I can't compare those anymore. Well - hopefully Waterfox will become faster as the Mozilla code cleanup propagates down to Pale Moon! Still like Pale Moon too much to give it up - and I'm pretty sure it's quite faster on my 32-bit WinXP machines. (Which is usually better than too-often.) I remember thinking "Well it's about damn fricken time for starting to speed things up!". And considering PM isn't updated as often. It always seem to pause when the page is loading.Ībout this - didn't Mozilla say they were working on cleaning up the code for faster response times? I thought I remember reading that a while ago - I think at the time when they introduced SPDY. I still need to remember to check how the interfaces respond with, say, scrolling and page while it firs loads - which has been a problem for quite a while in most of the Fx-based variants (including Fx). I also love PM's special staus-bar options. I tried to duplicate PM's smooth-scrolling settings in WFx14, but it just wasn't nice like in PM. However the way smooth scrolling is implemented in PM 12.3 makes it more worth it to me. It seems as if WFx (both version) could be a bit faster than PM 12.3 on loading many pages and even some user interface response times. On my Gateway's AMD A8-3500M 64-bit quad-core APU laptop. I've also been trying to make in-use comparisons between Pale Moon 12.3, Waterfox 13, and now 14.0.2. Unless of course you just want to have it out with Pale Moon. I've often seen Waterfox on my system benchmark as slower than Firefox (Same goes for 64bit Pale Moon) so it might just be a good idea to remove the benchmarking page altogether as it really doesn't highlight the true strengths of a 64bit Firefox. Or two sets of benchmarks one blank the other not across each browser, consistency is key to valid benchmarking.Īlthough by the looks of it the only other browser you could properly compare to is Pale Moon as that's the only 64bit Firefox browser that's not alpha code, which kind of defeats the purpose of benchmarking Waterfox really as Waterfox is meant to serve as an alternative to Firefox (which you can't benchmark against very well due to the reasons mentioned in the link above from Moonchild) The benchmark results should ideally be redone, over multiple systems with different specs for a good cross comparison either with blank profiles only Just FYI: 64bit browsers score lower in most benchmarks vs 32bit ones so comparing to Firefox 32bit with the typical benchmarks probably isn't a good idea, please read the following post from Moonchild the Pale Moon forums Here (32-bit versus 64-bit and tight loops) Were you testing 圆4 builds of Firefox? If so which version? My results should be higher than the i7 960 results as the 3570 is a faster CPU.Īlso, how is Fishbowl benchmarked in your results? The only two options I can see is selecting auto and have the browser give an upper limit of fish before it drops below 60FPS (~740 fish on my system with Waterfox) or you can benchmark a set number of fish and measure the FPS (2000 fish ~20FPS, 1750 Fish ~22 FPS) I also ran a blank Firefox profile on a Q9550 (default clock) with a Radeon HD5850 and scored 380611, so this really doesn't stack up with the results you have posted. I'm running an i7 3570K (default clock) with Intel HD 4000 and I can only get 424338 with a blank 32bit Firefox profile. MrAlex, how do you get a 500,000+ score on Browsermark with Firefox? And even more so, how do you achieve greater than 550,000 with Pale Moon and Waterfox?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |