Benchmarking Firefox 83 Nightly With "Warp" Against Google Chrome On Linux

[BesiegedAce]

(The ramblings of a madman)

I think you're on the wrong forum. Seek help, your loved ones are worried about you.

...There is no big anti FOSS conspiracy here...

I agree with what you've said. To add in my two cents, there's only so many users that can be "bought" or whatever. Google simply had a better (as in, more appealing) product and advertised it much more. The average user gives 0 shits about privacy. If all the news, the Snowden and other leaks, all the privacy scandals, etc, failed to make the majority of users care at all about privacy, what's Mozilla going to do that will magically convince them? Mozilla should've done nothing but 1. work on the browser quality (speed, stability) with a secondary focus on (browser related) new features, and 2. focused on advertising it in a similar vein to how Google did with Chrome. Mozilla tried acting like Google, doing a thousand things unrelated to their main source of income, without the sheer resources Google has. It doesn't help that Google's apparently making their websites break on Firefox (I've heard about this before but I'm not sure about the current situation) and furthering the Blink/Chrom(ium) monoculture.

As a side, I mentioned this elsewhere, but I was disappointed when Microsoft announced they were switching to a chromium base, and away from their homegrown EdgeHTML architecture. Not out of any particular love for Microsoft, but simply that MS, with its own sizable pool of resources, could've chipped away at Google's marketshare with enough time. I hope at least that EdgeHTML gets open sourced, if only for historical/archival purposes.

This has been beat to death, but to be clear: Mozilla Foundation had, until the layoffs, 1,000 employees and their "Outreachy" diversity initiative covered 20 interns for six months per year. Since it's a public non-profit their demographics are public: 75% male, 75% white, and the percentage of men and whites in management is even higher. I don't think they publish "trans" demographics, but their percentage of employees in 2019 that identified as neither men nor women was 0.2%.

Mozilla leadership made lots of serious mistakes over the past twelve years, but blaming the browser's problems on their diversity programs is like claiming the Titanic sank because it had too many gay bartenders.

Thank you for saying this. While I have some skepticism about the various initiatives popping up (nothing against diversity in of itself), I am increasingly annoyed by the amount of reactionary rhetoric that people are saying. Its one thing to be skeptical about diversity initiatives, it's another to be homophobic/transphobic. It's frankly disgusting and only serves to makes anyone who is simply skeptical look bad by association.

[xnor]

Are you using Chrome?

No, when I tried to post the rest of my post I was using Firefox.

[xnor]

Mozilla leadership made lots of serious mistakes over the past twelve years, but blaming the browser's problems on their diversity programs is like claiming the Titanic sank because it had too many gay bartenders.

"Diversity programs" is just a symptom..

But the other benchmarks - Ares, Speedometer, MotionMark - don't measure those things either. It seems to me that "time to full page load", imperfect as that may be, is more useful than "runs a set of Javascript and DOM manipulations in a combination totally unrelated to sites human beings actually visit in a browser."

That's fallacious.
In my second point I wanted to explain this. All of these tested "features" are used in real-world websites, just less extensively. But finishing even the most simple tasks faster adds up .. to overall lower resource usage.
Yeah, I can throw 16 cores and plenty of gigs of memory at a website to render it faster, but that is actually the problem, because these resources are simply not there on weaker systems, or are taken from other processes, result in more heat, shorter battery life etc.

Back to your point: yeah, it doesn't measure responsiveness EITHER ... but that is exactly what you complained about with synthetic benchmarks. So you CANNOT judge responsiveness given EITHER benchmark.
I will make this point once more, a bit more concrete this time: a browser that takes 350ms to load a website in its entirety can feel a lot more responsive than another browser that takes only 200ms. How? Because the first browser might display most of the website after 50ms and let the user interact with it while the second one might now show anything for 200ms.

[pal666]

How bad is your web site compatibility compared to (Google) chromium locking up the OS when using Google Earth?

browser can't lock up os, it needs os' help for that. my os isn't locked up by google earth in chromium

The former can be solved by firing up Chromium, the latter by a hard reset

which should give you a hint it's not chromium's problem

[ferry]

browser can't lock up os, it needs os' help for that. my os isn't locked up by google earth in chromium
which should give you a hint it's not chromium's problem

In a perfect world this wouldn't happen. But in the real world there are bugs, in this case (and yes it was probably fixed a year ago or so) in the video driver I guess. And firefox didn't trigger that.

In other cases chromium just locks up my laptop (with 4GB ram only) when there are too many tabs open. FF doesn't do that.

[Chaython]

I tested firefox dev (w/ ublock) vs brave nightly and chromium edge (w/ublock) in windows.
Firefox was 5% faster.
Brave was 1% faster than edge.
In jet stream 2 and spedometer

Why firefox dev? It's my favorite branch.
Why Brave nightly? The other editions didn't have custom Adblocking rules
Why Chromium Edge Stable? Comes bundled with windows, still necessary for HD DRM content [Netflix], also can't currently uninstall it?
Why Ublock? Brave has a built in adblock and c'mon man, you know Ublock is necessary!