backtop


Print 36 comment(s) - last by overlandpark4m.. on Sep 5 at 1:56 PM


Opera installed quicker than Chrome, though its license agreement featured some curious limitations (no tablet PCs, for one thing)..

Opera 10.0 RC scored 1718 in PeaceKeeper...

... Chrome 4 scored over 1,000 points higher at 2,929 points.

Opera 10.0 manges to complete the CelticKane Javascript test suite in 274 ms...

... but Chrome 4 blows through it even faster in 195 ms.
Opera and Google's upcoming products square off

Opera shared its Opera 10.0 browser release candidate with the world Tuesday, as it advanced towards an important launch.  The third-party browser manufacturer's new offering is available for Mac, Linux, and Windows computers.  It refines many of the features that were introduced in the beta candidates of 10.0 release.

Namely, speed boost and Mail have continued to be refined and are now at the point where Opera is satisfied with them.  In testing by BetaNews, the Turbo mode now delivers 358 percent faster page loads than when in normal load when the turbo is turned up to x3 (BetaNews failed to mention what test they used).  This is 58 percent more than even Opera's advertised boost.  The compressed pages are delivered with JPGs at high compression rates, making some images more pixellated.

We did our own testing of Opera 10.0 RC and looked at how it squared up against another recent testing-phase browser -- Google Chrome 4.  We tested the two browsers using FutureMark's PeaceKeeper browser test, which is now out of beta.  We also used CelticKane's JavaScript test to look at script performance in a bit more detail.  All tests were ran in Windows Vista on a VAIO notebook with T8100 (2.1 GHz, 45 nm) processor and a NVIDIA 8400 GS graphics card.  For Opera the Build was 1733, and Presto was 2.2.15.  For Chrome, the version was 4.0.202.0.

In PeaceKeeper Opera scored 1718 points.  This seems a bit low, compared to Safari and Chrome, but its partly because of the slower processor on the testing laptop.  However, Chrome did score 2929 points, easily besting Opera's offering.  Part of this is because the PeaceKeeper test does not test or reward for special/experimental standards such as Nav Links, Web Forms 2.0,VoiceXML/X+V, or CSS Projection mode (all of which Opera supports, but Google does not).  Such standards are still rarely used, though, so this may be a fair omission.

Digging a bit deeper we ran the two browsers through CelticKane's Javascript test.  Opera scored a modest 274 ms -- pretty good compared to the results listed on the page (faster than Chrome 2 was in July).  Still Chrome 4 managed to once again show up the competitor in speed, coming in at a smoking 195 ms (Apple's Safari is still faster, according to CelticKane's page).

In short Opera does not have an answer to Chrome in script performance in 10.0 RC.  It does have one potential answer in the long run -- its new Carakan Javascript engine -- but unfortunately it won't be available at 10.0's release.  Opera spokesman, Thomas Ford describes, "It won't be ready for (Opera) 10 final, but rest assured that it will be impressive when it comes."

In the meantime, it's important to consider the browsers' other features (besides pure speed).  Both Chrome and Opera suffer from being minority players in the market, so some pages that are poorly coded may not be compatible fully with them (but are compatible with Firefox/IE).  In general both offer fairly robust ad-filtering, pop-up blocking, and script filtering.  Both also include anti-phishing technologies.  Overall, Chrome is a bit more secure as each tab is sandboxed separately.  However, in our experience Opera does a better job of blocking most ads then Chrome.

So in speed Chrome 4 wins, and in security its a virtual draw.  So let's move to the bonus round -- what really sticks out about the browser.  Looking at Chrome first, one great feature is the tab isolation, which means that if one tab crashes the whole browser doesn't go down.  The privacy mode (incognito) is also nice.  Downsides include a slightly less refined interface and no tabbed colorization (a nice feature in IE). 

Looking at Opera 10.0 RC one impressive aspect is its friendly user interface.  Speed dial is a great feature and is implemented arguably better than the knock-offs (Firefox add-ons, etc.) that have arisen, since it was first revealed.  For users with slow connections Opera is the best option hands down, thanks to its turbo mode.  Opera also installs much faster than Chrome.  After clicking through the dialogs, Opera installed on our machine in 58 sec., while Chrome took close to 4 minutes -- Chrome's installation speed will be quicker than this on faster connections, though.  Disappointments include its lack of a privacy mode, poor plug-in/add-on support (though improving), and no tabbed colorization by default.

Our conclusion is that when it comes to speed Chrome beats Opera handily.  However, when features and other considerations come into play, the browsers are much closer and which is best boils down to personal preference.  We suggest you try both.  Opera 10.0 RC can be found here and Google Chrome 4 can be found here.




Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

i know time is money...
By dome1234 on 8/27/2009 10:05:00 AM , Rating: 5
294-195 ms = 101 ms.

But how much you can read in 101 ms?

you can save more time by disabling java to prevent those pesky flashes from running.




RE: i know time is money...
By rdeegvainl on 8/27/09, Rating: 0
RE: i know time is money...
By Smilin on 8/27/09, Rating: 0
RE: i know time is money...
By rdeegvainl on 8/27/09, Rating: 0
RE: i know time is money...
By on 8/27/09, Rating: -1
RE: i know time is money...
By JasonMick (blog) on 8/27/2009 10:16:48 AM , Rating: 5
I agree that in most cases security and the UI come before just speed.

Not all script performance is useless, though -- rich-content sites like Facebook rely heavily on JavaScript and when using them the difference is more noticable.

But I agree for the vast majority of browsing FF 3.6 alpha/Opera 10.0 RC/Chrome 4/Safari 4 are fast enough, and the speed is a moot point.

I still think Firefox has Chrome, Opera, and Safari beat with its great wealth of add-ons, but with every upside there's a downside -- that same add-on system hurts stability and security. Further, it's sort of a chicken-and-egg problem -- you can't have a huge add-on community without significant marketshare, yet lack of add-on's is a deterrent to gaining marketshare.

For base functionality, I think Opera comes out on top, though I'm impressed with Chrome's structure and its speed. Safari is fast, but I'm not a big fan of the UI and Apple tends to take its sweet time patching security flaws in Safari, which isn't very comforting.

IE 8 is slow, but is a solid choice when it comes to security -- and I like its tab colorization. It was also the first to introduce the privacy mode and arguably still the best.


RE: i know time is money...
By invidious on 8/27/2009 10:23:11 AM , Rating: 4
This comment is probably the most unbiased and reasonable thing I have ever seen you write. Your blogs should be more like this commment.


RE: i know time is money...
By zinfamous on 8/27/2009 12:32:12 PM , Rating: 2
Well, you said it yourself: "Blog"

If you're confusing blogging with journalism, then protests of bias really are pointless, no?


RE: i know time is money...
By Hieyeck on 8/27/2009 1:06:54 PM , Rating: 1
Just be happy they're in the right sections now. Seeing blogs in the news section (and occasionally vice versa) was mildly face-in-palm to say the least.


By overlandpark4me on 9/5/2009 1:56:53 PM , Rating: 2
The word blog should have the word bias in the definition anyway. The fact that newspapers and "journalist" use them for their sources is the reason that their business model is a dinosaur.


RE: i know time is money...
By Spivonious on 8/27/2009 11:03:40 AM , Rating: 4
Good comment, but did you need to put in the dig at IE8? It may be slower than the others, but in practice the speed difference is not noticeable.


RE: i know time is money...
By B3an on 8/29/2009 4:43:50 PM , Rating: 2
That was hardly a dig at IE8.
And the speed difference is easily noticeable with IE8 compared to something like Chrome, even on my 4GHz+ i7 system i can notice IE8 is slower than all other browsers i've tried.


RE: i know time is money...
By bug77 on 8/27/2009 1:28:10 PM , Rating: 2
It's a bit trickier than how much you can read. It's more like 3D acceleration in games. The faster the browser can download and render a page, the more freedom a developer has to add more content to the page.


RE: i know time is money...
By tpi2009 on 9/3/2009 10:53:26 AM , Rating: 2
hummm... I guess you're using one of those old Pentiums... hehehe

294-195 ms is not equal to 101 ms but 99 ms :D

I'm a Firefox user. I've tried Opera several times, but there is always one or two pages I visit regularly that wouldn't show properly. I have to admit I still haven't tried Chrome. It's very interesting to see all this development, but I now have an "establishment": Firefox all tuned with various plugins and a personalized row of button for quick acess to all my favourite sites and IE8 for when something doens't work right with Firefox (which is now rarer than ever).

To sum it up: until something revolutionary instead of just evolutionary comes along, I'm not going to alter my habits.


worthless futuremark benchmark
By invidious on 8/27/2009 10:21:02 AM , Rating: 5
Start up speed, memory usage, processor usage at idle, 64 bit support. All things that should be measured in a review/benchmark. And all of them more important to me than how fast a browser can complete a synthetic 5 minute browser race.

When is the last time you went on a clicking tangent seeing how long it took you to load 100 pages in succession without taking time to view the content on any of them? How is this benchmark supposed to relate to actual use?




RE: worthless futuremark benchmark
By LeviBeckerson (blog) on 8/27/2009 10:36:40 AM , Rating: 2
Benchmarks of any kind have rarely related to actual use.

I've been using Opera for years on and off and recently started using it again on my laptop (which has the same graphics unit but a much slower processor than what was used in Jason's comparison). I'm still using 10b4, but Opera is much quicker on the laptop for some reason. I highly doubt that it has anything to do with better javascript engines and the like.

I have to agree, invidious, there are many more important facets to a browser that make it the most desirable to use. However, these almost always boil down to personal preference due to the GUI or file handling or RSS feed handling or etc etc. So benchmarks are a handy way of seeing who can write the most lethal code, but maybe not the most usable browser.


RE: worthless futuremark benchmark
By Sazar on 8/28/2009 11:50:57 AM , Rating: 2
I've been using Opera with the new build almost exclusively for the past couple of days to see how it shakes out. I have had the beta on my system for a while so no big changes that I have seen thus far :)

Opera is probably the most customizable browser out there off of the default build and while it's widgets are not as well integrated as FireFox's, they are pretty neat :)

I have it currently setup like I have all my browsers, except IE8, with a chrome-like layout and an omni-bar style address bar.

The tab preview functionality and the speed-dial implementation are both awesome, the latter apparently is light-years ahead of anyone else, besides Chrome.

It's good, but not sure if I am going to use it exclusively :)


CRIPPLE FIGHT!
By Smilin on 8/27/2009 10:16:47 AM , Rating: 2
This should be entertaining for the IE and FF folks to watch. Popcorn anyone?




RE: CRIPPLE FIGHT!
By Mitch101 on 8/27/2009 1:53:37 PM , Rating: 2
Yup even if you throw out Microsoft on the article link below everyone should be using firefox over these two browsers.

IE 8 Found To Be Safest Web Browser In Studies Funded by Microsoft
http://hothardware.com/News/IE-8-Found-To-Be-Safes...


RE: CRIPPLE FIGHT!
By Smilin on 8/27/2009 2:06:20 PM , Rating: 2
hehe honestly I'm surprised I haven't been modded down to hell yet. My post was fairly blatant trolling and I deserve it. :P


RE: CRIPPLE FIGHT!
By wifiwolf on 8/27/2009 9:37:51 PM , Rating: 2
I don't. just not to give you that pleasure! :D


I'm sorry...
By BigToque on 8/27/2009 10:50:37 AM , Rating: 2
Where the hell did Chrome 4 come from? Where is chrome 1, 2 and 3?

I'll be honest when I say I haven't been paying too much attention, but I thought chrome was just released like a year ago and it wasn't even a 1.0 release.




RE: I'm sorry...
By UNCjigga on 8/27/2009 11:06:34 AM , Rating: 2
I believe the current release build of Chrome is 2.0.172.43--Chrome 3.x is the beta branch.


RE: I'm sorry...
By reactor on 8/27/2009 12:42:31 PM , Rating: 1
They're version numbers don't mean the same thing as other browsers. They don't really have milestone releases, they just push them out when they're ready.

Chrome 4 is the latest dev build: http://dev.chromium.org/getting-involved/dev-chann...


First pic comment
By ClownPuncher on 8/27/2009 12:13:27 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
Chrome, those its license agreement featured some curious limitations.


Though




RE: First pic comment
By eikelbijter on 8/27/2009 3:36:08 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
All tests were ran in Windows Vista...


All tests were RUN in Windows Vista....

Boy, the grammar and spelling are bad around here...


install time
By 4wardtristan on 8/27/2009 7:16:36 PM , Rating: 2
Worthy of a mention, but not a huge contributing factor, as you pretty much only install the browser once.




RE: install time
By PrinceGaz on 8/28/2009 7:46:21 AM , Rating: 2
Actually it is with Opera, because each "update" of Opera (even if it is just a small update to fix a security flaw) involves a full install of it over the existing version. Admittedly, Opera does not need to be updated very often (typically four or five times per year) but you will be doing a full install of it every time it is updated (unless you check the version history and decide the update is unnecessary, though it would probably have been quicker just to install the update anyway if you spend time doing that).


Google Chrome *4*?
By Ralos on 8/27/2009 8:17:33 PM , Rating: 2
I needed to have a look at the about dialog to learn that I had release 2 of Chrome. Thought this was still the first release, but version 4? Did I miss version 3 or did they skip one?

I use mostly FireFox and for awhile used both version 3 and 3.5 (at home and at work). Didn't felt the experience to be sensibly different between the 2, except the annoying toolbar bug in 3.5 that they still haven't fixed.

All of the browser makers have been promising The Next Big Thing (tm) in browser in their next big revision, that is, a browser that almost replace the OS and I'm still eagerly waiting to see this.




RE: Google Chrome *4*?
By Smilin on 8/28/2009 2:15:52 PM , Rating: 2
I'm still waiting on 1.0 to be finished.


By on 8/27/2009 9:08:45 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
http://www.bbcloth.com
http://www.bbcloth.com
(air jordan, air max, shox tn, rift, puma, dunk sb, adidas) nike jordan shoes 1-24 $32
lv, coach, chane bag $35
COOGI(jeans, tshirts, hoody, jacket) $30
christian audigier(jeans, tshirts, hoody) $13
edhardy(shoes, tshirts, jeans, caps, watche, handbag) $25
Armani(jeans, tshirts,) $24
AF(jeans, coat, hoody, sweater, tshirts)Abercrombie & Fitch $31
quote:
http://www.bbcloth.com
http://www.bbcloth.com




coogi DG edhardy gucci t-shirts $15;
By on 8/28/2009 10:07:48 PM , Rating: 2
HTTP://www.crispstyle.com

the website kicksquality :/ for many kinds of fashion shoes, like the

nike,jordan,prama,****, also including the jeans,shirts,bags,hat and the

decorations. All the products are free shipping, and the the price is competitive,

and also can accept the paypal payment.,after the payment, can ship within short

time.

free shipping
competitive price
any size available
accept the paypal

our price:
gstar coogi evisu true jeans $36;

coach chanel gucci LV handbags $32;

coogi DG edhardy gucci t-shirts $15;

CA edhardy vests.paul smith shoes $35;

jordan dunk af1 max gucci shoes $33;

EDhardy gucci ny New Era cap $15;

coach okely **** CHANEL DG Sunglass $16;

http://www.crispstyle.com/productlist.asp?id=s28 ( JORDAN SHOES )

http://www.crispstyle.com/productlist.asp?id=s1 ( Ed Hardy )

http://www.crispstyle.com/productlist.asp?id=s5 ( Bikini )

http://www.crispstyle.com/productlist.asp?id=s6 ( T-Shirt )

http://www.crispstyle.com/productlist.asp?id=s29 ( Nike_shox )

http://www.crispstyle.com/productlist.asp?id=s21 ( Air_max_man )

http://www.crispstyle.com/productlist.asp?id=s65 ( Handbag )

http://www.crispstyle.com/productlist.asp?id=s11 ( Jeans )

http://www.crispstyle.com/productlist.asp?id=s6 ( Polo tshirt )




By on 8/30/2009 9:40:33 AM , Rating: 2
http://www.crispstyle.com

bikini$25

(air jordan, air max, shox tn, rift, puma, dunk sb, adidas)

nike jordan shoes 1-24 $32

lv, coach, chane bag $35

COOGI(jeans, tshirts, hoody, jacket) $30

christian audigier(jeans, tshirts, hoody) $13

edhardy(shoes, tshirts, jeans, caps, watche, handbag) $25

Armani(jeans, tshirts,) $24

AF(jeans, coat, hoody, sweater, tshirts)Abercrombie & Fitch $31

http://www.crispstyle.com




By kensiko on 9/2/2009 8:58:10 AM , Rating: 2
I wish that one day I will be able to navigate with full fluidity. I'm zoomed at 150% and I was zoomed at 200% in a time and a lot of sites are sooo sloow to scroll! My computer is a Quad Core and Video is HD3850, so I think I have enough power to have a faster zoomed mode scrolling.

I tried the zoomed mode on the worst sites on many computers/browsers and it's always slow. I hope that the GPU will help someday.




Installed it just today . . .
By blueboy09 on 9/4/2009 8:15:00 PM , Rating: 2
and keep in mind that I have a CD2 with 4 gigs of ram and Firefox and IE8 as well, and I tried the update out, and while playing video from Hulu, it took a while for the video to even come up, and it even froze the whole browser up, even though I closed all the programs on the taskbar menu. It didn't make any sense to me, but then again, most things in this world don't make sense anyways.




By on 8/27/2009 11:20:59 PM , Rating: 1
http://www.ebuyings.com

the website wholesale for many kinds of fashion shoes, like the nike,jordan,prama,****, also including the jeans,shirts,bags,hat and the decorations. All the products are free shipping, and the the price is competitive, and also can accept the paypal payment.,after the payment, can ship within short time.

free shipping
competitive price
any size available
accept the paypal

our price:
gstar coogi evisu true jeans $36;
coach chanel gucci LV handbags $32;
coogi DG edhardy gucci t-shirts $15;
CA edhardy vests.paul smith shoes $35;
jordan dunk af1 max gucci shoes $33;
EDhardy gucci ny New Era cap $15;
coach okely **** CHANEL DG Sunglass $16;

http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s28 (JORDAN SHOES)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s1 (ED HARDY)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s11<... (JEANS)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s6 (TSHIRTS)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s5 (Bikini)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s65 (HANDBAGS)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s21 (Air_max_man)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s29 (Nike shox)
http://www.ebuyings.com/productlist.asp?id=s6 (Polo tshirt)




"It seems as though my state-funded math degree has failed me. Let the lashings commence." -- DailyTech Editor-in-Chief Kristopher Kubicki














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki