Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Firefox 109 vs. Chrome 109 Browser Benchmarks On Ubuntu Linux + Core i9 13900K

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #81
    Originally posted by CommunityMember View Post

    A problem with that test scenario is that a number of those sites dynamically generate content (and ads), which can easily result in a conclusion that is not related to the browser itself (and more what InstaBook is doing to you). Even Phoronix (if you are not a premium member, or are running various ad blockers) can end up serving a (not so) random set of ads trying to target you.
    Oh yeah-probably better to compare the number of connections made, number of ads displayed etc and not the sites in question. To be valid this would require starting with new browser profiles free of supercookies etc so the difference in what the sites got would be limited to browser differences. Might require multiple runs per site to average out random variations

    Comment


    • #82
      Originally posted by Luke View Post
      Would be interesting to run a "privacy benchmark" of both browsers with Wireshark running and logging all connections. Each browser would, with no extensions and a default configuration open a deliberately privacy unfriendly mix of Facebook, Instagram, Google, and a couple of porn sites. Then compare all connections made other than to the toplevel sites. Look for sites connected to by one and not the other.
      I guess the best reliable way to test browser privacy (beyond the connections it uses independent of what sites shit visit, for telemetry etc.) would be the test site of the EFF: https://coveryourtracks.eff.org/. That way you can check how far default and maxed settings of various browsers actually help making you less identifiable in cases where browser fingerprints are used instead of cookies. Because cookies can be auto deleted (maybe except of support cookies), the fingerprint can't be altered that easily.

      Comment


      • #83
        Originally posted by Artim View Post

        I doubt I will have that luxury when I'm going to buy my next laptop. I already have quite a list of requirements I expect my future device to fulfill, I can't even be sure that such a device will even exist.
        Like what? New 12th and 13th gen laptops are much more capable than any of the older models. You have totally unrealistic expectations.

        Comment


        • #84
          Originally posted by caligula View Post

          Like what? New 12th and 13th gen laptops are much more capable than any of the older models. You have totally unrealistic expectations.
          1. I want AMD, not Intel. I'm more for efficiency than the last bit of sheer power.
          2. I have expectations beyond the capabilities of the CPU. I want a convertible, in that category there are simply not that many devices available to begin with and usually their configurability is very limited. Also, I expect my laptop to last at least as long as my current one (which is 8 years old). And I simply don't trust that many companies to be able to fulfill this base requirement. This has nothing to do with unrealistic expectations, this should be the base requirement any electronic device should be required to fulfill to reduce unnecessary waste. Even if I should want to switch to a different device sooner (not that unlikely that ARM based machines with even much higher efficiency and similar performance become a more wide spread thing outside the Apple universe) the laptop should still be perfectly good to use so I can sell it to someone that simply doesn't need the newest device.

          Comment


          • #85
            Originally posted by Iiari View Post
            As someone mentioned, I would like to see power consumption numbers for Chrome vs Firefox, as my empiric sense is that Firefox uses battery faster, although I still prefer to use it anyway.
            Yes, power consumption would be nice to see--battery life is quite an important consideration, even old computers are fast enough for browsing in my opinion, so the speed bencmarks feel a bit irrelevant. The other metric I'd like to see is memory usage.

            Comment


            • #86
              There are also some Chromiums that use more aggressive compiler optimizations, such as RobRich999's Chromium, it would be more interesting to include them in the benchmark

              Comment


              • #87
                Power consumption is last on my list. If you need the speed, you pay with a bit more energy. Power is cheap anyway when it comes to 'home' computing.

                I use Firefox exclusively as it has always done what I needed to do. Don't notice any 'speed' problems at all. At work I do have to use IE 11 and Edge a bit on Windows as its the company choice ....

                Comment


                • #88
                  Originally posted by rclark View Post
                  I use Firefox exclusively as it has always done what I needed to do. Don't notice any 'speed' problems at all. At work I do have to use IE 11 and Edge a bit on Windows as its the company choice ....
                  damn, I get needing to use chrome because of company choice, but edge? that's just rough, as for IE11, well that applies to a lot of us still -_-

                  Comment


                  • #89
                    Most important test is missing. Vp9 4k@60Hz hardware accelerated YouTube.

                    Comment


                    • #90
                      Originally posted by Slartifartblast View Post
                      I'd rather use the slower browser that isn't going to nobble the ability of adblockers to work properly thanks.
                      brave web browser will still allow you to use ad blockers properly and it uses chromium.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X