Firefox 73 + Firefox 74 Beta Benchmarks On Ubuntu Linux

[Britoid]

Could you do a test testing Firefox on X11 vs Wayland (not through XWayland) ?

[xinorom]

FF 75 targeted... need to wait 2 months to solve a memory leak on one of the most visited sites...are you kidding me?

I experienced crazy memory usage when doing a speedtest or while watching long twitch streams, others found leaks on deezer... bugs were filed. 4 months later and still no word from Mozilla... what a joke.

Well that's what happens when you hire as many unskilled people as possible. No one at Mozilla even knows how to fix bugs any more. Hence the 4% (and falling) market share.

The same applies to Intel.

[royce]

Probably related to https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1610193 but the fix is not yet in 74.0b. Should be soon though.

I would wager it's in fact the lack of hardware accelerated video decoding, but that's also in the works at least in wayland.

[royce]

Personally i don't care about javascript that much, it is mostly used for advertisements (that i filter anyway).

Afraid not. You'd be amazed ad how many sites use frameworks like vue, react or angular, which render sites purely via javascript.

[TemplarGR]

Afraid not. You'd be amazed ad how many sites use frameworks like vue, react or angular, which render sites purely via javascript.

Yeah, i know, though i don't use such sites often. BUT, it is not like Firefox is so slow at rendering those sites that the experience is noticeably worse. Unless someone executes software/games inside the browser and/or runs on low powered hardware, i think the difference is minimal. I would rather not support an Internet Explorer 2.0 situation in the browser market just for a slightly faster javascript execution.

[royce]

Yes, it is fine. I'm a firefox user myself. It's also the only browser at the moment (other than gnome's) with native wayland support, so there's that too.

[randomizer]

A web page is not just pure Javascript code, you know.

These days it frequently is, though indirectly. Many sites have a very small initial HTML payload that does little more than start fetching JS bundles, which ultimately render the page using some JS framework.

[loganj]

are these benchmarks necessary? i can understand to post these kind of benchmarks when there is a noticeable difference (as big as how chrome looks compare to firefox). unless thats the case i can only find them useless.
don't take this as an offense, but this is already a routine for firefox.

[Danielsan]

Beside the fact that, as usual, most of those benchmarks are optimized for WebKit, it would be interesting to add for the next comparison also Chromium to see if performs as Chrome and better or worst of Firefox.

[Xsidm]

I would hope that one day, preferably soon, Firefox is able to perform on par or better than Chrome when it comes to Javascript. I use Firefox on all my systems and the performance disparity between Chromium/Chrome and Firefox on Linux systems is small. However, on Windows, it is massive.

You can feel it. If you still use Facebook, try counting the seconds between loading up the Javascript in the page, or opening the chat box, etc. You can do this on any Javascript heavy website (especially if they use bloated frameworks). These benchmarks just prove that Chrome has a lead in its Javascript engine still. The numbers are right there and it confirms what I had been suspecting the past several releases.