Skip Navigation
Firefox @fedia.io Desistance @lemmy.world

Firefox now has speed parity with Chrome on the Speedometer benchmark [Win32]

Thought I'd never see the day when Firefox would match Chrome on Speedometer.

There's also a few other benchmarks got a sizable boost. https://arewefastyet.com/

22

You're viewing a single thread.

22 comments
  • @Desistance While that's always welcome to have at least parity with the fast competition, I never felt Firefox to be slower than Chromium based browsers. At least on my PC. Synthetic benchmarks are always that, just synthetic tests.

    • To be perfectly honest, you could just be less sensitive to it, or you're running on a machine that can brute force through it. Until very recently, Firefox was visibly under-performing compared to Chrome, especially for WebGL related tasks or when running on low powered laptops and mobile devices like my Surface Pro 7.

      It's been improving a lot recently though, so much so that I've switched back from Brave to Firefox, but to say that benchmarks are just synthetic tests is being dismissive about Firefox's performance issues. Benchmarks are the only way to quantifiably and scientifically measure performance improvements and regressions. Simply using a browser and declaring whether its fast or slow is inaccurate at best and misleading at worse, and what's okay performance wise for you may not be okay for others.

      It also depends highly on your browsing habits. If you're just reading news articles and watching videos, sure you probably won't notice the improvements that these benchmarks show. Nowadays, however, more and more sites are becoming full on applications that are doing way more Javascript operations in the background than a simple document and that's where these benchmark improvements really have an affect on everyday browsing.

      • @Molecular0079

        Benchmarks are the only way to quantifiably and scientifically measure performance improvements and regressions.

        I disagree with that. While your statement is correct in the sense you layed it out, it is not what I was saying. I am saying that benchmarks are testing what the benchmark is testing, not what the actual web usage of an individual is. And I am just speaking from my experience. Benchmarks do not represent reality. In example people have different configurations and addons, which has a huge impact on performance. Synthetic Benchmarks are often done with default configurations. I am not saying the results are wrong, they just don't hit the reality (sometimes they do).

        • But what is the actual web usage of an individual? How do you define that? The problem is you can't. People browse and read at different speeds, click on different things, open different numbers of tabs, visit different websites and webapps, etc. It is entirely subjective. I'd argue that this idea of the average web usage of an individual is actually even less representative of reality because of its subjectivity. Every one has their own personal experience, so which one of them is real? How do you even measure and compare these results?

          If you wanted to build a fast car, you would optimize every aspect of the car piecemeal. You isolate the engine by itself, improve its fuel efficiency, RPM, and horsepower. Similarly, you isolate the body and chassis of the car, optimize it for less drag and lighter weight. Eventually you do this for all the different components and they come together to make an objectively fast car. If you started with the idea of "an average driving experience", you'd end up with the typical use-case of going to the grocery store and picking up some food. Then EVERY car is considered fast. That IMHO is relatively meaningless.

          Likewise, benchmarks help breakdown the problem of making a fast browser into smaller problems that can be tackled in a meaningful way. A lot of these smaller problems being solved or made faster come together to craft a truly fast browsing experience.

          In example people have different configurations and addons, which has a huge impact on performance. Synthetic Benchmarks are often done with default configurations.

          Then the argument here is that benchmarks should INCLUDE different configuration and addon permutations in their testing, not that benchmarks are useless.

          • @Molecular0079 That's my point. You described why synthetic benchmarks are just that. I also didn't speak about average web usage. Which one of the personal experience is real? Each of them! How do I compare? We don't need to compare my experience to yours. What's important is, that we compare what we want to find out: Firefox vs Chromium. And that's what I do. I use both and in my experience Firefox wasn't slower than Chromium.

            Because browsers have many components that work much different under specific circumstances. Your car example is a perfect example of what I mean. Cars are different fast depending on the circumstances. Rally cars are optimized for Rally, tires are differently optimized for weather and street. Browsers are even more complex.

            May I remember you what I wrote "I never felt" and "At least on my PC". Do you feel a difference that Firefox is faster in usage than before? I bet you don't. And that's what I'm talking about. Synthetic benchmarks are only that, testing a specific use case. Don't forget, I did not deny that the results are wrong! I believe that the components they tested on this particular setup is as fast as Chromium. It just does not represent reality (in my experience).

22 comments