Web Browser Javascript Benchmark
How does your favorite browser’s Javascript engine speed compare to other popular browsers? The speed of your browser’s Javascript is becoming more and more important because of Web 2.0’s reliance on Ajax and complex Javascript libraries. I have written a benchmark test, which you can run on your machine at home, to compare the newest versions of Internet Explorer, Opera, Safari, and Firefox. How does your favorite browser stand up to the competition?
Preface
In 2006, I originally wrote a Javascript speed test that is a derivation of the test that I use today. The test gained quite a bit of attention, so I created a subsequent test to compare browsers that had been released after the first test (i.e. Safari for Windows). Due to popular demand in the form of a flurry of e-mails, I have decided to continue posting my test results with the newest versions of popular web browsers. All of my tests will be using the Javascript test script, which is available by scrolling down to the bottom of this page.
Test Results
2008 September 2
| Web Browser | Average Runtime | Relative |
|---|---|---|
| Safari 3.1.2 | 344 | 1x (fastest) |
| Opera 9.5.2 | 420 | 1.2x slower |
| Firefox 3.0.1 (with add-ons*) | 506 | 1.47x slower |
| Firefox 3.0.1 (no add-ons) | 538 | 1.56x slower |
| Google Chrome 0.2.149.27 | 557 | 1.62x slower |
| IE8 Beta 2 | 806 | 2.35x slower |
| *Firefox add-ons include Download Statusbar, Fission, Foxmarks Bookmark Synchronizer, Hide Menbar, and Tab Scope. | ||
| Commentary: I really expected Google Chrome, which was released today, to do much better than it fared in the test results. Then again, a lot of Google Chrome’s claim to fame isn’t really geared to a benchmark test like this — it’s more intended for security and live applications that require extensive garbage collection and utilizing non-linear loading of page elements. Regardless, Safari still holds the crown for the fastest Javascript engine, but almost all other browsers (with the exception of IE8 Beta 2) are very, very close behind — almost so close that it’s not really a practical difference (except for bragging rights). It’s going to be very interesting to see how the future versions of Google Chrome are able to compete with the more seasoned browsers. | ||
2008 March 28
| Web Browser | Average Runtime | Relative |
|---|---|---|
| Safari 3.1 (525.13) | 339 | 1x (fastest) |
| Firefox 3.0.pre beta (safe mode) | 501 | 1.5x slower |
| Opera 9.50 beta (9841) | 517 | 1.5x slower |
| Firefox 3.0.pre beta (extensions disabled) | 538 | 1.6x slower |
| Opera 9.26 (8835) | 657 | 1.9x slower |
| IE8 Beta 1 | 933 | 2.8x slower |
| IE7 | 1099 | 3.2x slower |
| Firefox 2.0.0.13 (no extensions) | 1256 | 3.7x slower |
| Firefox 2.0.0.13 (safe mode) | 1373 | 4.1x slower |
| Firefox 2.0.0.13 (with extensions*) | 2416 | 7.1x slower |
| *Because most Firefox users install extensions, I thought that it was only fair to include a test with my own typical extensions. The extensions I had installed for the test include: Adblock Plus 0.7.5.3, ColorZilla 1.0, Download Statusbar 0.9.6.1, Firebug 1.05, Fission 0.9.5, Foxmarks Bookmark Synchronizer 2.0.45, and Hide Menubar 1.0.20080310. I did not include a test with the Firefox beta using extensions because the extensions are not considered compatible with the beta yet.Beta versions of Firefox and Opera were downloaded from nightly builds that were available on 3/27/2008 | ||
| Commentary: In contrast to previous tests, Safari championed the fastest Javascript benchmark, overtaking Opera from its throne. Even more promising, the Firefox beta was considerably faster than its currently released version (2.0.0.13). This is the first test that has shown Firefox’s Javascript engine to be superior to the engines of Opera and Internet Explorer. | ||
2007 September 10
| Web Browser | Average Runtime | Relative |
|---|---|---|
| Opera 9.50a | 615 | 1x (fastest) |
| Opera 9.23 | 695 | 1.1x slower |
| Safari 3.0.3 | 790 | 1.3x slower |
| IE7 | 1077 | 1.8x slower |
| IE7 (no add-ons) | 1090 | 1.8x slower |
| Firefox 2.0.0.6 (safe mode) | 1385 | 2.3x slower |
| Firefox 2.0.0.6 | 2285 | 3.7x slower |
| Firefox 3.0.0.7a (safe mode) | 2465 | 4.0x slower |
| Firefox 3.0.0.7a | 2722 | 4.4x slower |
| For more information, see the 2007 benchmark test page. | ||
| Commentary: This test was done in response to Apple’s release of Safari for Windows. Similarly to the 2006 test, Firefox was considerably slower than Opera, Safari, and Internet Explorer. Note that the Firefox alpha version was slower than the stable version. | ||
2006 August 2
| Web Browser | Average Runtime | Relative |
|---|---|---|
| Opera 9.0 | 422 | 1x (fastest) |
| IE6 (SP2) | 1622 | 3.8x slower |
| Firefox 1.5 (safe mode) | 1752 | 4.2x slower |
| Firefox 1.5 | 1974 | 4.7x slower |
| For more information, see the 2006 benchmark test page. | ||
| Commentary: This test was one of the first, documented Javascript benchmarks to show the superiority of Opera over the more popular Firefox. | ||
Technical Notes
- The numerical score generated by this test is relative — that separate test results, run at different times or on different machines, cannot be directly compared to each other. You may only compare multiple browsers within the same test session with the same test environment.
- My results for each browser are averages — to get a browser’s score, I have run each test ten times, and taken the average score from all ten tests.
- Your raw numbers are not comparable to mine — because the raw numbers are relative, you can only compare one browser to another browser on your own machine. I have included the Javascript benchmark test below so that you can perform your own test. I encourage you to use it to generate your own comparative test, and even examine the Javascript code to examine the test itself.
- I have included alpha, beta, and released versions — I have included browser versions that are still in testing just for comparative purposes. Please realize that a browser’s beta performance does not necessarily reflect its future, release performance.
- Do your own testing - your results may vary! — I may have a different operating system, hardware configuration, and development environment than you, so your results may be different! I highly encourage you to do your own testing and see which browser is the best performer on within your own environment.
The Test
| Test Type | Runtime (ms) |
|---|---|
| Array object |
0
|
| Date object |
0
|
| Error handling |
0
|
| Math object |
0
|
| RegEx object |
0
|
| String object |
0
|
| DOM |
0
|
| Ajax declarations |
0
|
| Total Duration |
0
|
acer una comparativa con google chrome 1.0.154.36 final
heyy thanx man for helping me…….
to compare the web browsers
[...] Celtic Kane JavaScript: [...]
ran this test 10 times as you have with my own tweaks to Firefox v 3.0.9.
The average for my test in total was 340 ms so it beat safari by 1 point. Woo Hoo!
i gotta say this test of yours i like.
@ mike try to install Safari on your computer, or Google Chrome and run the tests again. The test result vary from one machine to another (because they have different computing power). good luck
omg, I run Chromium on Linux and the duration can be as low as 220!
OS: WinXP 32bit
Browser: Minefield Build 20090429041347
Hardware: C2Q 2.4Ghz
240ms
OS: WinXP 32bit
Browser: Iron 2.0.178.0 (15300)
Hardware: Intel Pentium M 1,6 GHz
350ms
Kozmo, compared to my old machine, there’s only one thing to say: your result sucks
wow… 182 ms !!!
Vista Home Premium 32bit
Minefild/3.0.10 (tete009 SSE2 PGO) private build 2009042818
Intel Core i7 920 @ 3,8GHz
nice
Sunrise on OSX 10.5 scores 85 ms… LOL
Safari 4 90 ms
Wow, seems mac rolls
edit: safari 80 ms
116, Safari 4 beta, Apple MacBook Alluminium, Core duo 2.4
Firefox 3.5b4 (new JS engine) - 207
Chrome 2 (beta) - 142
Safari 4 - 81
Windows XP SP3, C2D 3.0GHz
[...] performance on current browsers05.06.09 | Comment? Found this little test which gives an indicator as to Javascript performance in your [...]
Pues Safari 4 Beta, marca 120 ms. Además de pasar el Acidtest 3 con 100/100.
[...] a look and see if that 64 bit power was going to make a difference in my browsers, so I want to celtickane.com and ran a quick javascript speed test, comparing the different browsers I use for testing. I [...]
I just tried Google Chrome 2, and it was screamingly fast. Firefox was 750-770, but Chrome 2 was 340-370.
Testing Minefield (Firefox 3.6 build 20090526, javascript.options.jit.content enabled)
Core 2 Duo E7400 2.80GHz
Windows XP SP3
213-215ms
[...] lakukan pada situs http://celtickane.com/labs/web-browser-javascript-benchmark. Jika nilai total duration pada tes ini makin kecil maka browser yang digunakan makin baik. Google [...]
Firefox 3.0.10 = 220 ms
Chrome 2.0.181.1 beta = 98 ms
Safari 4.0 beta = 102 ms
Opera 9.63 = 106 ms
MS IE 7.0 = 609 ms
All features enabled in all browsers.
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 CPU o/c @ 3.35 GHz
Windows XP SP3 32-bit heavily tweaked
Comcast Cable broadband connection 20 Mbit/sec
Many thanks for the test, Celtic Kane!
MacBook 2.0Ghz, 2GB RAM
Mac OS X 10.5.7
Safari 4 (Beta): 108 ms
Firefox 3.0.10: 518 ms
Opera 9.64: 435 ms
Haha… Internet Explorer… what a joke…
PS - Compare your browsers using this page: http://acid3.acidtests.org/
WaSP Acid tests (1, 2 + 3) are compliance tests, not speed benchmarks.
List of browser tests [both compliance + speed]:
http://www.mdgx.com/html.htm#BTX
Cheers
[...] a look at this Javascript Benchmark, and see what results you get. Email your results to Mr. [...]
[...] support, however, is fully functional. While Chrome performed much better than Firefox on this cursory test, it still didn’t beat Safari 4 by a long shot. While only a beta, its performance is respectable [...]
[...] Speed test can be found at the link here. Safari still scores a point above the [...]
63 milliseconds.
Safari 4.0 r5530.17
Mac Pro, Dual Quad Core 3.2 Ghz and 10 GB RAM
Great page, great project. Safari 4 (final) was just released, and scores insanely well (109-134ms range, on my machine). You should add a more recent chart! Excellent work on this, btw.
Array object
4
Date object
3
Error handling
8
Math object
8
RegEx object
11
String object
5
DOM
11
Ajax declarations
15
Total Duration
65
Running Safari 4 full Release iMac Core 2 Duo 3.06ghz
Browser Testing and Benchmarking…. Preliminary…
After spending some time scouring the web, I have the group of tests I will be running the browsers through.
Giving results and images where possible and metion my likes and dislikes on each of the browers I have
installed.
I will be running th…
Wow, nice, on Safari I’m getting like 160!!!
Thanks for the test
Specs:
2.8Ghz Dual Core Pentium D
1 GB 533mhz Ram
Safari 3.1 = average 344ms
Firefox 3.5.1beta = average 452ms
IE6 = Failed to run the test.
i been using firefox as my main web explorer, but now with these results i been deceptionated about it…
[...] werden folgende Browsertests angewandt und ausgewertet: der HowToCreate.uk CSS Rendering Test, der Celtic Kane Basis Geschwindigkeits Vergleich, der Web Standards Project’s Acid3 standards compliance Test, un der SunSpider JavaScript [...]
[...] #mce_temp_url# [...]
[...] - did you play with javatest http://celtickane.com/labs/web-browser-javascript-benchmark/ - this is faster than [...]
[...] - Opera10 http://celtickane.com/labs/web-browser-javascript-benchmark/ = 496 Now that IS very fast, [...]
101 on Safari 4. First Gen Unibody Macbook.
Safari 4: 57ms
Firefox 3: 243ms
Opera: 156ms
IE7: 453ms
System: I7 920 oc 3.6ghz, 12gb, Vista Ultimate 64bit
Safari 4 (4.0.1): 146ms average
Opera 10.0 (10.00 beta): 420ms average
Opera 9.6 (9.64): 431ms average
Firefox 3 (3.0.11): 485ms average
IE7 (7.0.5730.13): 1432ms average*
*IE7 running on Windows XP under VirtualBox 2.2.4
system: late 2006 MacBook Pro, 2.33GHz Core2Duo, 3GB 667MHz RAM, MacOS X 10.5.7
52ms CHROME
sytem:Windows XP Service Pack 3 1 gb ram casper notebook
204 on Firefox 3.5
Safari 4.0: 130ms. On my laptop. Fast!
[...] Running this test: http://celtickane.com/labs/web-browser-javascript-benchmark/ [...]
just compared ie8 with firefox 3.5. I’m getting 550 or so for IE but 250 or so for ff 3.5. This is amusing.
169 with Safari 4 for Windows
Thanks for the test, very helpful in understanding why my Java scripts are slow in IE7.