Web browser benchmarks: Firefox vs. Waterfox vs. Pale Moon vs. Chromium vs. Chrome

Webbrowser_Benchmarks

I was curious how some browser perform and what kind of web browser benchmarks were available, so I ran Kraken, SunSpider, HTML5, JetStream, Octane 2.0 and Acid3 on Firefox, Waterfox, Pale Moon, Chromium and Chrome. Here are the results with my rig 2600k @ 4.4Ghz, 16GB RAM, Samsung 840 EVO SSD.

Kraken & Sunspider -> lower is better, in every other test bigger is better. I ran each test 5 times and calculated the average. I also made some Google docs sheet: Link .

Firefox 44 EME-free 64-bitWaterfox 43.0.4 64-bitPalemoon 26.0.2 64-bitChromium 50.0.2641.0 64-bitGoogle Chrome 48.0.2564.103 64-bitIron 48.0.2550.0 64-bitVivaldi 1.0.344.37 (Beta 2) (32-bit)Cyberfox 44.0.2 64-bitmidori 0.5.11 32-bitQupzilla 1.8.9 64-bitGNUIceCat 38.6.0 32-bit

Download

Kraken: 907.2ms ± 1.6%
SunSpider: 158.1ms ± 4.7%
HTML5 Test: 461 out of 555 points
JetStream: 177.13 ± 31.144
Octane 2.0: 32297
Acid3: 99/100

Download

Kraken: 919.4ms ± 2.3%
SunSpider: 171.4ms ± 4.4%
HTML5 Test: 484 out of 555 points
JetStream: 169.57 ± 10.506
Octane 2.0: 32038
Acid3: 99/100
Discussion on Reddit:
Link

Download

Kraken: 1223.4ms ± 1.8%
SunSpider: 127.4ms ± 1.5%
HTML5 Test: 406 out of 555 points
JetStream: Cannot complete. Hangs at CDJS.
Octane 2.0: 20655
Acid3: 100/100
Discussion on Reddit:
Link

Download

Kraken: 931.8ms ± 1.6%
SunSpider: 164.6ms ± 1.9%
HTML5 Test: 521 out of 555 points
JetStream: 199.29 ± 9.6596
Octane 2.0: 34251
Acid3: 100/100
Discussion on Reddit:
Link

Download

Kraken: 882.4ms ± 0.3%
SunSpider: 154.0ms ± 0.9%
HTML5 Test: 521 out of 555 points
JetStream: 205.56± 2.9199
Octane 2.0: 36138
Acid3: 100/100
Discussion on Reddit:
Link

Download

Kraken: 910.3ms ± 0.7%
SunSpider: 164.1ms ± 1.0%
HTML5 Test: 516 out of 555 points
JetStream: 200.94 ± 2.3313
Octane 2.0: 35116

Download

Kraken: 971.2ms ± 0.7%
SunSpider: 153.8ms ± 0.9%
HTML5 Test: 521 out of 555
JetStream: 208.40 ± 1.4020
Octane 2.0: 36184
CSS3 Test: Passed 805 tests out of 1555 total for 350 features.

Download

Kraken: 949.3ms ± 1.5%
SunSpider: 180.9ms ± 6.7%
HTML5 Test: 478 out of 555
JetStream: 179.28 ± 7.0070
Octane 2.0: 31586
CSS3 Test: Passed 838 tests out of 1555 total for 350 features.

Download

Kraken: Can’t pass.
SunSpider: 619.1ms ± 0.3%
HTML5 Test: 341 out of 555
JetStream: Can’t pass.
Octane 2.0: 4051
CSS3 Test: Passed 717 tests out of 1555 total for 350 features.

Download

Kraken: 19833.8ms ± 2.3%
SunSpider: 388.5ms ± 0.5%
HTML5 Test: 398 out of 555
JetStream: 43.569 ± 4.2478
Octane 2.0: 5570 (can’t run zlib)
CSS3 Test: Passed 725 tests out of 1555 total for 350 features.

Download

Kraken: 1003.0ms ± 1.2%
SunSpider: 141.0ms ± 1.1%
HTML5 Test: 437 out of 555
JetStream: 197.77 ± 16.982
Octane 2.0: 33946
CSS3 Test: Passed 800 tests out of 1555 total for 350 features.

It seems to me that Chromium, Waterfox and Firefox are head on head. However Chromium passes more HTML5 tests and on top of that the Kraken (931/919/907 ms) and SunSpider (164/171/158 ms) tests differ by mere milliseconds. So I’d say the overall winner out of these 3 is Chromium.

If we throw Google Chrome into the pool of candidates then the result is quite different: Google Chrome wins the crown even if its SunSpider result is a mite slower than Pale Moon’s! If you know any other good web browser benchmarks or if you want other browser benchmarked, let me know in the comments or via contact form!

That said, take this benchmark test with a grain of salt. There are just too many factors involved for it to be a real representative test about browser speeds. In my opinion though it’s a good starting point.

Edit 2016-02-06: As I’ve been made aware on Reddit, none of the browsers passed the Acid3 test, because no animation was smooth. Something I oversaw. Apologies!

Edit 2016-02-17: A few browser have been added after the publication of this post. They’re marked with a right caret.

5 thoughts on “Web browser benchmarks: Firefox vs. Waterfox vs. Pale Moon vs. Chromium vs. Chrome


  1. IMO chromiun, and even waterfox are pretty decent and probably better than Chrome or regular Firefox considering the additional things they offer out of the box.

    I think the results should include the speed of 32 bit versions, since those are the most common browsers, and also include the fact that even if chrome looks faster than chromium at first glance, it probably consumes more bandwidth from sending data to google, and that Waterfox manages to have a decent speed while respecting more the rights of the user.

    Is also worth mentioning that while variants of Firefox can be slower than chromium variants, are more stable at handing many tabs open at once than Chrome which tends to crash quite often in those situations.


  2. Just made the switch to Pale Moon at last, after hoping for the best as Firefox shed “classic” add on support… And ending up with a browser that literally crashed every time I opened it.

    I have to say, the add-on support has really ballooned for PM since when I last tried it. Before it still very much felt like an older version of Firefox… Whilst now I can sport an Australis-styled theme, with my add-ons still in the navigation toolbar (where I like them), get rid of the statusbar (how I like it) with tabs on top. It truly is a browser “How you want it”, and feels as modern as anything else out there.

    My only complaint is probably the lead developer seems a little snarky and arrogant. Every argument he has for reasons the browser will/won’t support certain things seems to revolve around stating how Mozilla’s features are inferior whilst having a superiority complex about why his design of the browser is better (not really keeping with having it how you want it!). Honestly, I never had a problem with the australis UI, nor did I have a problem with WebExtensions. My problem is simply that the old add-on systems have been thrown in the trash before the new API is feature-compatible. I don’t think saying “we will never support them” is a sensible approach… In fact it comes across as rather childish. In fact scrub that, the whole FAQs and everything else comes across as childish tbh. I have no sense of loyalty or wanting to contribute as I did with Mozilla, as the guy honestly comes across as a prick…


    1. I never really paid Palemoon any attention, if anything, then Waterfox because I was looking for a 64bit Firefox, when Mozilla hat none yet.


    1. I’m still using both Chromium and Firefox, because unfortunately when doing web dev stuff with CSS, JS and whatnot it’s not always properly rendered in one or the other browser. I gave up on Internet Explorer a long time ago.

C'mon, leave me a reply!