RSSIt's a three-way race: Opera preview clings to lead over Safari 4, Chrome 5
By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published February 2, 2010, 5:34 PM
This week marked Google's first release of a development build browser called Chrome 5, which contains some not-yet-fully-implemented features including the browser's first personalized security settings. In recent months, Chrome's dev build has been the standard-setter for performance in Windows, with scores in Betanews tests that rise by as much as one point -- one relative quantum of IE7/Vista horsepower -- per month.
Now that extensions are a formal part of Google's stable Chrome 4 browser, that trend is changing. And although it's not what anyone can call a complete Web browser (to do that, you really should avoid crashing randomly), the latest build of Opera's "pre-alpha" of version 10.5 continues to send signals that it will keep the afterburners fired up while it puts together a real contender. Despite the fact that you wouldn't want to use it yet as an everyday browser, the latest Opera 10.5 pre-alpha actually increased its lead over the latest Chrome dev build -- now just over two points -- in the latest Betanews tests on Windows 7.
Meanwhile, the latest Apple Safari test build with the development version of the WebKit engine remains neck-and-neck against the latest stable Chrome 4, slipping just behind it in today's count. The lower numbers for both browsers do indicate that both slowed down a hair, but also -- in all fairness -- that Internet Explorer 7 in Vista SP2 sped up, as a result of several security patches that appear to have restored much of IE7's lost performance.
Although it's not the latest Microsoft browser, IE7 is important to our tests because it helps us establish a benchmark against which browser performance can be judged, that's independent of the hardware. When we give Chrome 4 a 19.99 score, that means we believe that on any computer you choose to test, Chrome 4 on Windows 7 runs about twenty times faster and more productive than IE7 on Vista on the same machine. And by making use of that IE8 score of 1.38, you can easily come to this conclusion: Chrome 4 on Windows 7 should run 14.49 times faster and more productive (loading more text, calculating more formulas) than IE8 on Windows 7.
But with a score of 24.43 in our latest Windows 7 tests, the Opera 10.5 pre-alpha renders, crunches, and expedites content 17.7 times faster than IE8. We expect that number to decline a bit as Opera Software fixes this browser to at least "alpha" quality. Yet with a two-point gap over Chrome 5, Opera can actually afford to take it down a notch -- something we never thought we'd be saying just four months ago.
Strengths and weaknesses: The code bases for Google Chrome 4 and Chrome 5 should not differ all that much at this point. Indeed, their CSS rendering scores (10.81 and 10.82, respectively) indicate they may not differ at all. But in certain algorithms, Chrome 5 is clearly superior: for instance, in using the MD5 cryptographic hash algorithm, and in executing the "Genetic Salesman" problem -- finding the best highway route between randomly-generated points on a map. Chrome 5's SunSpider score is also vastly superior to Chrome 4's, and 5's handling of CSS selectors is improved as well.
Opera 10.5 also posts a high SunSpider score, but not as high as Chrome 5 -- its computational skills are competitive, but not superior yet. CSS rendering capability for 10.5 is improved, but not up to Chrome quite yet. It's in handling old-style Web pages that Opera blows the doors off of the competition, scoring an 11.15 in typical page rendering versus 6.93 for Chrome 5, 3.99 for Chrome 4, and 5.82 for the latest Safari 4 + WebKit nightly build. Stable Opera builds are also strong in this department, but the 10.5 preview tips the scales, and then pulls them down.
And in graphics rendering, the 10.5 preview is posting obscene numbers in the Canvas object test. Safari should be the leader here, with the preview build scoring 33.40 and the stable build posting 29.18 -- this compared to 29.11 for Chrome 4 and 26.34 for Chrome 5. Opera's score here is a mind-blowing 66.45; and this is a test that is so above-board that there's really no way to cheat. It's that fast.
Mozilla Firefox scores continue to improve, with the latest 3.7 Alpha daily build holding on to a 13.25 overall Windows 7 score -- roughly equivalent to its score from last December, but in the face of a faster relative IE7.
As an avid Mac user, I hope in the future even more positives from the Opera House to see.
Score: 0
|Scottie please... 2010... make the graph compared to IE8...
IE7? what's that? 24.43 against 22.34, doesn't matter. The difference is not big if truth is to be sought, so why inflate it artificially? it better be a more realistic and useful, say, 17 vs 18 but against IE8, the one everyone is comparing browsers against in their minds. I bet, even you. Let's have something that gives us some numbers. Let's make some sense...
Or, at the very least, make a second graphic based in IE8 too and write your article on the IE7 one just as you love.
Thanks, please consider.
Score: 1
|This is fascinating. Peacekeeper does not factor certain tests (like Complex Graphics) into its own final score, which is why Opera does not have a wider lead in Peacekeeper's overall scores. But if the above puts those numbers back in, that may have been the origin of 10.50's current lead.
The new Opera will be in Beta on Mac and Linux when it reaches RC or Final on WIndows. That is the official word from the team, as much work is being done to better integrate and performance-tune Opera for the other platforms. 10.50 will soon look like any other native app on Mac or Linux systems, and the tuning for Linux is a priority to make "Opera for Devices" faster and more appealing.
The new script engine will eventually be tuned for ARM (and possibly other hardware), meaning Opera Mobile 11 (or thereabouts) should be as fast on smartphones as Opera 10.1 on PCs.
Score: 0
|I did some unscientific browser testing on Fedora 12 recently, between FF 3.5.7, Opera 10.1, Chrome 4, Midori 0.2, and Kazehakase something-or-other.
Chrome and Kaze crashed pretty quick, so they got thrown out. Chrome was blazing fast while it worked, though.
I liked a lot of things about Opera, but it was notably slower than any of the others and it didn't fit with my system theme (thin ice).
I'm still making up my mind wether I like FF or Midori better. Both have full functionality (for me anyway). Midori is actually about as fast as Chrome (blazing past FF), but the interface, while just as good, will take a bit of getting used to. I still use FF at the moment, but I see no reason I shouldn't go for the speed boost.
The main problem I have with Midori would just be that so much stuff that takes a proprietary plugin or something will only work on FF. But then again, there's no reason not to keep it around too.
Score: -1
|Opera 10.50 will not be Final on Linux when the Windows version comes out. This is because 10.50 will better integrate with Linux themes. 10.50 is already the fastest or second-fastest browser on Linux, but it's not finished yet. Comments regarding 10.1 are irrelevant to the future.
Score: 0
|it's Opera 10.50 we're talkin about moron! Besides, Linux versions are mostly a second thought, Windows' versions are always released first and get the most work and polish done.
Don't blame me!
Score: 0
|I didn't have 10.50 on the system. 10.1 was the obvious option, but I might go back and try 10.5 later.
Yes, Linux versions don't tend to be as good (look at Flash), but the platform (and dedicated software) is good enough I don't care.
Score: 0
|LoL. Opera is the PINK bar on graphicon.
Score: -2
|Google Chrome 4 is far from stable. Themes no longer work. May have to completely reinstall Chrome for that. Still fast, but not stable. 10.10 Opera is Stable and 10.5 is somewhat stable even if they haven't quite got the skin to work right.
Score: 0
|Opera is really capturing my attention. I'm actually using this new build more often - and the more I use it, the more I like it. I just don't trust Google Chrome. I really like Firefox, but since I am not prone to downloading add-ons, Firefox is just another browser. As for Safari, I love it. The only real problem I have with Safari is that it doesn't work well with my forum software (which means that if I want to visit my OWN site, I have to use another browser!).
This brings us to Opera. Everything about this build is pleasing to me. Little bugs that thwarted me in previous builds have now been fixed. Opera is very fast, and websites simply look spectacular in it. As more builds are released - as long as they don't do something stupid, Opera will be my new browser, replacing Firefox as my primary.
Score: 2
|I'll still take the *built-in* adaptability of Opera as a day-in-day-out over the others, no matter what the speed. I'm even starting to find pages that print correctly in Opera and not in FF and IE8, and that's a real turnabout.
Score: 2
|Oh. People actually use Opera? How quaint!
Score: -13
|Yes, and is probably the most safest out there...considering spyware Chrome, junkware Firefox and dangerware IE...
Score: 3
|and the only browser thats fairly effective at blocking ads. Albeit some ads are smarter than others. And still love the mouse gestures (which even with an addon FF can't handle properly.) and that darn forward button :)
Score: 0
|In the real world do people actually switch back and forth with their browsers based on which one is faster at this point?
Score: 1
|Personally, not based on which is faster, but based on functionality. I have IE8, FF, and Chrome all open ATM.
IE8 is up for access to vendor sites and our intranet.
FF is up for my daily browsing.
Chrome is up for Pandora.
Score: 0
|If you are using a netbook or if you are running fairly old hardware you may see a noticeable difference between one web browser and another.
Score: 1
|Anything with less than 1GB of RAM, it's pretty much only Opera. And fit-to-width is a blessing.
Score: 0
|Did anyone ever make one of these charts showing how Firefox 3.5 and 3.6 compare to each other?
Score: 0
|In the last major rundown of tests we conducted last December...
http://www.betanews.com/...-Windows-7/1261519843/2
...the daily builds of Firefox 3.6 were performing about two points, on our scale, better than the stable 3.5s at the time. FF 3.6 performance has been pretty stable since then, so there's no question upgraders have seen a performance lift.
-SF3.6
Score: 0
|Just what we folk from Opera World have been telling you all along, but you just wouldn't be told would you ? Well now you know, Opera rocks dude. While I'm here, my Dell Latitude D400 has fallen foul of a duff bit of beta, keyboard will not work. When I fire up this old but venerable bit of gear I am unable to get past the welcome screen, unable to type in the password you see. Tried to re-install the O/S using an external device, the Dell does not see it. Other folk, in other forums also have problems getting the Dell to boot from a CD , any thoughts ?
Score: -8
|What's Opera? Never heard of it. ;)
Keyboard doesn't work...in Windows, or in general? Will it let you into the BIOS (F2 @ POST)?
As for getting it to boot from CD, if they keyboard ain't working at all, you're out of luck, but if it works @ POST, hitting F12 on most dells will give you a menu and you can choose what device you wish to boot from. Note that if this is a USB device, you need "USB Legacy" mode enabled in BIOS and it may take a boot or two (I've seen this on a few Dells) for it to give you the option to boot from the USB device.
Heh...haven't seen a D400 in ages... brings back a few memories...curse you. ;)
Score: -5
|Thanks for the advice, I'll have another bash at getting it back on its feet tonight.
Score: 0
|As usual son, you make little sense...
Score: -5
|internetworld7 "As usual son, you make little sense..."
Is that you dad ?
Score: 0
|Safari 4 on a Mac is even faster and these number would reflect it if we test Safari on a Mac instead of Windows. Safari + Glims & ClickToFlash plugins provide the best browsing experience possible. I have both Firefox and Chrome (Developer's build) loaded with extensions and their great browsers but I always keep coming back to Safari because of Glims and ClickToFlash.
Score: -4
|Then we cannot help you. 10.50 is nearly even with Safari on Mac, and the Dev team's official stance is that Mac optimization isn't even halfway as far as Windows optimization. Barring an upset, 10.50 Final (for Mac) should surpass Safari.
Score: 0
|I still feel this betanews test is BS. If IE7 is the base, then we can never truly know how much faster the other browsers actually are in the real world. I want to know how long it actually took IE in a test vrs Firefox and so on. I've said it b4, in real world testing surfing the net i notice very little if any actually performace difference in any of the browsers. The acid test is all nice and dandy, but all the browsers fully render any web page just fine. I wanna see real world scores. like how long each browser took to render MSNBC.com or whatever other website. Enough with this BS testing, Sure it makes the article appear legit cause it uses all these fancy testing platforms. But in the real world we just wanna know if a browser can render the page and render it fast. I'm not here to defend IE8, i just wanna see actually numbers that matter to me instead of this crap that we get force feed by betanews.
Score: -6
|Everything you say is fairly understandable tbh bigsexy, not sure why everyone's voting you down.
The tests above test extremely complex high performance stuff that very few websites use yet - if they did, their sites would be virtually unusable in slow browsers like IE and Firefox and developers need to cater to the majority of users, not the fastest users.
The point you're making is that being able to run 100m in 9.58seconds is not going to affect your stroll down to the local shop.
The significance of this is its potential - what web developers CAN do in Opera, not what they're currently doing in limited, restrictive, fairly useless browsers such as IE8.
As for your MSNBC example - you do know what the MS in MSNBC stands for right?
Score: 0
|One of the big sources of lag in IE7 and 8 is when opening a new process and attaching it to a new tab. Ctrl-T should be instantaneous.
Score: 0
|True - Chrome is quite slow in this regard as well as it's also multi-process, but none of these tests test tab-opening speed, so that wouldn't factor into IE7 and 8's poor scores.
Score: -1
|Score: 0
|I thought Opera had stopped working on 10.2 and focused all their attention on 10.5. Why show a browser that will never see the light of day?
In anycase, I've been very impressed with Opera 10.5 on Windows. It runs fairly well as Pre-Alpha, and the speed difference from Opera 10.10 is obvious. I hope if anything, as they continue with it, it will improve even more.
Opera 10.5 on Linux though; I'll get back to you... thing crashes on the Speeddial page. =P
Score: 1
|Good grief, IE is going to fall off the chart soon.
Score: 7
|Yeah, I knew it was slow, but I wasn't really expecting it to show up THAT slow...
Score: 0
|"Good grief, IE is going to fall off the chart soon"
Certainly not off the popularity charts - IE8 the most popular browser.
Score: 0
|Speed tests are for bean counters and companies to brag about whom have no idea
what you see is more important then test results.The real question is, "Does content appear to load faster?".
Score: 2
|Do you think that stuff being processed 24 and even up to 66 times faster may not "appear to load faster"? (grin)
Score: 2
|First of all, Safari 4 sucks for Windows. It uses way to much memory and over all just crap. Now that's out of the way, I enjoy using Opera 10.5 can't wait till it's final only wish it had great addon support like Firefox.
Score: 4
|