Peacekeeper: A Futuremark browser benchmark

[DaggerLite]

Go ahead and post your results for this test in this thread if you wish. Preferably screenshot the detailed score and upload it to an imagehost like ImageShack or imgur, but plain text is okay too. Please also post your CPU, GPU and Memory for the sake of this thread (exact tech details not too important). The scores are highly dependant on your system, and may vary slightly from run to run depending on what your system is using resources on. Don't try to run it while tabbed out of Mass Effect 2, for instance.

Run Peacekeeper here...

Note: For your score to be valid data for Futuremark, you need to do a system scan which requires you to install a small applet to run on your computer. If you do not wish to install this applet, simply click the Run without system scan link beneath the big button.


My scores

CPU: Intel Core2 Duo T7300 @ 2.00 GHz
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GS
Memory: 2 GB DDR2 RAM

[K7IA]

hmm, real man use chrome indeed  , its performance is definitely impressive

My score



My specs

CPU: Intel Core2 Duo E8400 @ 3.00 GHz
GPU: NVIDIA 8800GT
Memory: 2 GB DDR2 RAM
OS: XP SP3 32bit

[relic2279]

Chrome was specifically coded to pass artificial tests like these. The acid test specifically. They use tricks and workarounds to get to 99 percent or 100 percent pass without actually resolving the issue. Chrome is still a great, super fast browser, don't get me wrong. The new firefox 3.6 is right up there with them though. I'd use chrome if they had greasemonkey and more importantly, adblock plus. Chromes adblock just hides the ads. Firefox's is the only one who blocks them completely, therefor saving bandwidth and time.

[blubart]

to bad the benchmark isn't actually testing your browsers performance but only it's javascript implementations resource consumption in not-real life situations.

[relic2279]

The acid test is supposed to be the real browser benchmark, but I'm not into benchmarking so I could be wrong.

[fohfoh]

I'm surprised daggerlite's computer isn't dead if it's using an NVidia 8600 series video card.

[K7IA]

Most of the sites I frequently use doesn't even properly implement the latest technologies, so a benchmark comparing these features is obviously misleading.

But eventually every product needs marketing (even if they are free of charge) and there are performance obsessed users

I will stick with Firefox for now too, probably because of AdBlock Plus. Downloading and hiding is not enough for me, I don't want to waste bandwidth too.

[relic2279]

Downloading and hiding is not enough for me, I don't want to waste bandwidth too.

Downloading and hiding is also slower than not downloading at all, so pages will theoretically load up faster and your browser will be faster in real life situations.

Google is an ad based business. I highly doubt they will put forth a browser which blocks ads completely.

[DeadSpaceX]

2 main browsers i use
CPU: AMD Phenom 9600 black edition quad core @2.4ghz
GPU: nVidia 9600GSO by asus
RAM: 8GB DDR2 @800mhz

Probably have better scores with a more standard OS instead of server 2008 64 :/

[nstgc]

1872 Points

Phenom 945 @3.0
4 GB of DDR3 1600
nVidia GeForce 9600 GT

Firefox
Ubuntu 9.10

I really need to get an Intel.

I'm going to try this again in Win7.

[edit] The bowser is 3.5.7

Something is not working right. I'm not sure what it is, but I am sure something is seriously wrong with the software

[Takeshi]

Firefox(v3.6) Scored:

2409 Points
CPU: AMD Athlon 64
GPU: ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4530/4570
Internet Explorer(v8.0) Scored:

668 Points
CPU: AMD Athlon 64
GPU: ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4530/4570

Lol, big difference.. and that's why I use Firefox.

[Enzedder]

CPU: Intel CORE 2 Q6600 @ 2.4Ghz
GPU: ATI Radeon HD 4890
RAM: 4 GB DDR2 RAM

Windows 7 if anyone is interested.

Don't use any other browsers. Was considering updating to the 10.50 Beta. Looking at these tests I just might as long as no big problems.

[DaggerLite]

For the one using Opera 10.10, I recommend upgrading(?) to 10.50 beta. It's a massive improvement, and I haven't really encountered any fatal bugs in it (yet). I came across this test on "A new era of browser speed" if you want to see a few other JS tests. Obviously slightly biased towards Opera, but I don't think unjustifiably so.

to bad the benchmark isn't actually testing your browsers performance but only it's javascript implementations resource consumption in not-real life situations.

This is a JavaScript benchmark, yes, but one that tests common methods that you'll see around the web. While it brings your browser to its limits of what you'll actually see in terms of complexity, it still provides a score of how fast it is compared to others. It is a good benchmark in my opinion, even though it doesn't test W3C conforms and such. There are other tests for that (I could've linked a dozen, but I thought this one was the coolest).

Acid effectively kills systems that don't pass it afaik (or at least fairly often).

I'm surprised daggerlite's computer isn't dead if it's using an NVidia 8600 series video card.

It has been dead, and they replaced it with the exact same motherboard. ;p *waits for it to go again*

[nstgc]

I reran the test in Windows 7. I ran it for IE (which ever version comes with 7) FF 3.6 and Chrome (what ever version is in the image below). IE did terribly. It was super slow. I ended up having to close out.




Again this is using a Phenom II 945 (at stock), 4 GB of DDR3 1600 RAM, an GeForce 9600 GT, in Windows 7.

[edit] Oh yeah, both operating systems are 64-bit versions.

[DaggerLite]

After I wrote my previous reply, I went over and did the Acid3 test. I first did it with my usual stuff open, and later on with everything closed but one browser and the one tab used to test. None of the browsers have any "addons" or modification except Opera, since that's what I use. I kept only the best result from each.

And the result...



Test notes: I had a few cases where Chrome stopped before reaching 100/100, spewing up 2 errors, but only for a few attempts. With Firefox, it sometimes got an error less (kungFuDeathGrip). Both Firefox and IE always failed. Opera didn't fail once, but sometimes stopped on page request (not part of the "test", probably a beta bug). I ran approx thirty tests with each browser, except IE which only got six chances.

You can try these too if you want, however these results are far less interesting to compare, as they will turn up just about the same each time.

[nstgc]

In linux (which has been fucked up since I tried to fix Amerok) I got 93/100 on acid3. I'll try it again in 7 when I get back. I need to get to class now.

[edit] In windows 7 Chrome gets 100%, Firefox 3.6 gets 94% and IE8 epic fails with 12%.

[vuzedome]

I was running it, then my Chrome broke it somehow, running in beta sure is fun.

[Viseroid]

CPU: Intel Q6600 @ 3.00
GPU: Nvidia 260 GTX
RAM: 4GB DDR2
Vista 64

I usually use FF and when things are being stupid I try running the site with Opera.

[Enzedder]

For the one using Opera 10.10, I recommend upgrading(?) to 10.50 beta. It's a massive improvement, and I haven't really encountered any fatal bugs in it (yet). I came across this test on "A new era of browser speed" if you want to see a few other JS tests. Obviously slightly biased towards Opera, but I don't think unjustifiably so.

No fatal bugs as yet however I do have one complaint... the dam completion bar says complete FAR before site has finished loading. I can imagine this getting on my nerves as I have grown accustomed to watching my completion bar finish.


EDIT: New stats show that my browser has apparently close to doubled in overall though. Still annoyed but it will be fixed by full release. It is just a beta.

[sapsa]

CPU: Intel Pentium Dual-Core processor E2180 (2Ghz)
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT (Palit 512MB)
OS: Windows 7 (x64) Prof

Firefox(v3.6) Scored: 2008 Points:

Rendering: 1525
Social networking: 1776
Complex graphics: 2963
Data: 4106
DOM operations: 1329
Text parsing: 2213

I got alot of thing in background but who cares