# Post your JetStream 2 speeds!



## SchumannFrequency (Jul 31, 2022)

You can take the test on this page: https://browserbench.org/JetStream2.0/
I myself score a result of almost 94: https://i.ibb.co/FbFBvhX/Screenshot-2022-07-31-15-55-02.png

In itself this is not a particularly high result, but considering my hardware it is certainly decent. I use the following hardware:
*Intel i3-3240*_ + 4GB RAM @1600MHZ single channel + NVIDIA *GTX 650* 1GB + EVO 850 500GB_

I think FreeBSD scores well in JetStream 2 and this explains my result.
I am interested in what you get in this popular benchmark and please also mention the hardware and the operating system.


----------



## dnm_TX (Jul 31, 2022)

Here is mine:
Score: *100.8*
System: *Intel i7-2860QM + 16GB RAM @1333 Mhz(dual channel) + Nvidia GTX 1080 FTW(eGPU) + Samsung 850 PRO 256GB*
OS: *Windows 10 2016 LTSB + Slimjet (based on Chromium 101.0.4951.34) (64-bit) Browser*


----------



## dgianstefani (Jul 31, 2022)

Specs in my profile.


----------



## Easy Rhino (Jul 31, 2022)

143 which is surprising given my aging rig. But this is Fedora 36 and Brave browser so maybe that helps.


----------



## 1986nath (Jul 31, 2022)

ryzen 5800x


----------



## SchumannFrequency (Jul 31, 2022)

Easy Rhino said:


> 143 which is surprising given my aging rig. But this is Fedora 36 and Brave browser so maybe that helps.


You may potentially get even higher performance in other browsers: https://www.cloudwards.net/fastest-browser/
I think Brave used to be faster than it is in 2022. That's just what I think, I'm not sure about this.


----------



## oobymach (Jul 31, 2022)

My 5600x rig, Firefox browser w. 5mbit connection.


----------



## P4-630 (Jul 31, 2022)




----------



## claes (Jul 31, 2022)

For S&G, 105.12 with Safari on an iPhone XR


----------



## Dr. Dro (Jul 31, 2022)

Ooh, a browser benchmark, I haven't seen one of these in ages, ever since Futuremark phased out Peacekeeper 

Side by side, Firefox 104 beta 3 and Microsoft Edge 103, both browsers in a fresh state

Ryzen 9 5950X/64 GB DDR4-3600/GeForce RTX 3090 on Windows 11 Pro for Workstations version 22H2 (build 22621.317)






I'm a Firefox diehard, but it needs another "Quantum" release to bring it up to speed, no wonder Chromium based browsers won the browser wars, it's a bloodbath every time Firefox gets benchmarked


----------



## oobymach (Jul 31, 2022)

Dr. Dro said:


> Ooh, a browser benchmark, I haven't seen one of these in ages, ever since Futuremark phased out Peacekeeper
> 
> Side by side, Firefox 104 beta 3 and Microsoft Edge 103, both browsers in a fresh state
> 
> ...


Interesting, I ran test with Opera and my score jumped.


----------



## Dr. Dro (Jul 31, 2022)

oobymach said:


> Interesting, I ran test with Opera and my score jumped.



Yeah, the browser engine is arguably the biggest factor here, unless your hardware is underpowered (like OP's), Firefox is notorious for being a slug, it's a very functional and extensible browser but Chromium and its numerous forks are unbeatable for speed.


----------



## P4-630 (Jul 31, 2022)

Edge, windows 11


----------



## cvaldes (Jul 31, 2022)

Here are my results on my daily driver (not the build in my System Specs), Windows 10 21H2

Ryzen 7 3700X (PBO enabled), 32GB RAM 3200MHz, MSI MPG B550-I Gaming Wifi, EVGA RTX 3050 OC 8GB, Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus 1TB m.2

These results are with ungoogled Chromium (Marmaduke build):





Unsurprisingly Firefox is a total dog:


----------



## Sithaer (Jul 31, 2022)

With Opera and with the specs in my profile:





Also tried with Firefox which is my daily driver browser for most stuff but that only scored like 135.


----------



## SchumannFrequency (Aug 1, 2022)

Dr. Dro said:


> Yeah, the browser engine is arguably the biggest factor here, unless your hardware is underpowered (like OP's), Firefox is notorious for being a slug, it's a very functional and extensible browser but Chromium and its numerous forks are unbeatable for speed.


On my FreeBSD system, Firefox is even better than Chromium in terms of functionality and stability. But in terms of performance, it usually scores less than Chromium. Although I have to say that the difference in Speedometer 2.0 between these two browsers is only 10% and I think that's only because Chromium now uses PGO optimizations on FreeBSD by default. Suppose that Firefox would also get the PGO build by default, then they will be about the same speed in Speedometer 2.0.

There was a time when Firefox switched to a new engine (Quantum) and my observations are that it made Firefox slightly faster in Speedometer 2.0, but in most other benchmarks Quantum just made Firefox significantly slower than before.

However, there is one odd exception where Firefox is faster than Chromium and that is the WebXPRT 4 benchmark. Here, Firefox ranks higher than Chromium on FreeBSD. I think it will be the same on windows 11. I have other hardware (a Thinkcentre-M75 with Ryzen 5 Pro 3400G) and Edge gets a 130 result in WebXPRT 4. But when I boot my Clear Linux installation USB on the same PC I see that Firefox scores a result of 135. So my impression is that Firefox can also be faster than Edge on windows11 in the WebXPRT 4 benchmark. WebXPRT 4 is a benchmark that was released relatively recently, so it may be unreliable or have bugs.


----------



## AlwaysHope (Aug 1, 2022)

Was bored & sitting at one of my "light usage" desktops so decided to run this benchmark with Brave browser.


----------



## Dr. Dro (Aug 1, 2022)

SchumannFrequency said:


> On my FreeBSD system, Firefox is even better than Chromium in terms of functionality and stability. But in terms of performance, it usually scores less than Chromium. Although I have to say that the difference in Speedometer 2.0 between these two browsers is only 10% and I think that's only because Chromium now uses PGO optimizations on FreeBSD by default. Suppose that Firefox would also get the PGO build by default, then they will be about the same speed in Speedometer 2.0.
> 
> There was a time when Firefox switched to a new engine (Quantum) and my observations are that it made Firefox slightly faster in Speedometer 2.0, but in most other benchmarks Quantum just made Firefox significantly slower than before.
> 
> However, there is one odd exception where Firefox is faster than Chromium and that is the WebXPRT 4 benchmark. Here, Firefox ranks higher than Chromium on FreeBSD. I think it will be the same on windows 11. I have other hardware (a Thinkcentre-M75 with Ryzen 5 Pro 3400G) and Edge gets a 130 result in WebXPRT 4. But when I boot my Clear Linux installation USB on the same PC I see that Firefox scores a result of 135. So my impression is that Firefox can also be faster than Edge on windows11 in the WebXPRT 4 benchmark. WebXPRT 4 is a benchmark that was released relatively recently, so it may be unreliable or have bugs.



I've stuck to Firefox through thick and thin, I occasionally move to Chromium browsers when Firefox slows down too much but always come back to it, my general experience is that Quantum performed significantly better than the old engine, but then again, I am a Windows user and this is from the perspective of a Windows user. I don't know how using operating systems such a FreeBSD would affect it, as a gamer I have enough trouble with Linux adoption as is lol


----------



## P4-630 (Aug 1, 2022)

AlwaysHope said:


> Was bored & sitting at one of my "light usage" desktops so decided to run this benchmark with Brave browser.
> View attachment 256618



What does your  i7-11700K do?


----------



## freeagent (Aug 1, 2022)

My 5900X showing its age 

Edit:

Using Edge in 11.


----------



## SchumannFrequency (Aug 1, 2022)

Dr. Dro said:


> I've stuck to Firefox through thick and thin, I occasionally move to Chromium browsers when Firefox slows down too much but always come back to it, my general experience is that Quantum performed significantly better than the old engine, but then again, I am a Windows user and this is from the perspective of a Windows user. I don't know how using operating systems such a FreeBSD would affect it, as a gamer I have enough trouble with Linux adoption as is lol


I haven't benchmarked Firefox against windows11 yet, but I did against Clear Linux. My result was that they are extremely close in _most_ benchmarks. There were three exceptions, Clear Linux was much faster in Basemark Web 3.0 and in JetStream 2. FreeBSD was much faster in SilverBench.

Here you can see how fast Clear Linux is in Firefox compared to windows10:

WebXPRT: https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=1910084-AS-WINCLEAR401&sha=24b7b8c&p=2
Basemark: https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=1910084-AS-WINCLEAR401&sha=8ea372c&p=2
Jetstream: https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=1910084-AS-WINCLEAR401&sha=83082ec&p=2
CanvasMark: https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=1910084-AS-WINCLEAR401&sha=7b2e965&p=2
Speedometer: https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=1910084-AS-WINCLEAR401&sha=d2c045f&p=2
_This is a benchmark that was performed at the end of 2019._

The only more recent results I can find are from August 2021:
Ares-6: https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=2112211-TJ-MACWINLIN08&sha=9d32e41a0019&p=2
StyleBench: https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=2112211-TJ-MACWINLIN08&sha=5d51cd2033b9&p=2
JetStream 2: https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=2112211-TJ-MACWINLIN08&sha=d2e5cbf853a3&p=2
WASM imageConvolute: https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=2112211-TJ-MACWINLIN08&sha=cce71cc44ef0&p=2
Speedometer: https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=2112211-TJ-MACWINLIN08&sha=52183e034418&p=2


----------



## P4-630 (Aug 1, 2022)

Blaeza said:


> Brave browser and specs in my system specs.  Also had 16 tabs open, lol.
> 
> View attachment 256657



Try with edge, just 1 open tabs and close all background apps you have open.


----------



## birdie (Aug 1, 2022)

If people are _not_ going to use the _same browser and the same version_ all these results are worth shit. OS also matters but not so much.

If you post your results, could you spend like *three seconds* to click Help -> About and post the exact browser and its version? *Thank you*.

Many results above are from heavy overclockers yet their profiles don't indicate it which is just horrible.

OS: Linux 5.18.10
Google Chrome Version 103.0.5060.134 (Official Build) (64-bit)
CPU: Ryzen 7 5800X +50MHz overclock; tiny undervolt; curve optimizer by default
RAM: DDR4 3600MHz CL17

~256 points



Spoiler






SchumannFrequency said:


> We can occasionally mention the version so that people have an idea. Here you will find mainly Windows users. There are currently possibly even more windows7 users than windows11 users according to statistics.
> 
> People of any nationality can eventually participate in Techpowerup. You should also keep in mind that less than 50 percent of Russians currently use Windows. In China it is less than 80 percent. In South and North Korea you also have that people want to use Linux for government desktops. In India you also have people who use Linux. In the Linux world you have more fragmentation than before, Ubuntu is less dominant. You also have quite a few people using macOS, iOS, Android or ChromeOS.
> 
> Regarding Clear Linux, quite a few people have already asked me to post a detailed tutorial online on how to use it for gaming. Many people tell me that Clear Linux can become very popular with a little help.



1. Occasionally mention the version? You're not joking? Chrome in version 91 sped up the V8 JS engine in same cases by 25% if not more. In version 99 another major speed up. Do you really believe Chromium is stuck in time and doesn't evolve? There are like 10K software engineers in Google working on it.
2. More Windows 7 users than Windows 11? The hell it matters if browser performance is barely affected by Windows version?
3. Your estimate of Russians using Linux to this extent is grossly crazily off the mark: https://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/all/russian-federation Linux ~1%.
4. People game on Windows, period. I don't give a flying **** about Linux which is _not_ even an OS per se (I'm writing this under Fedora Linux 36 mind you).

Without the exact browser version and HW configuration along with specifying at least the major version of an OS the person is running this topic _makes exactly zero sense_. You may as well throw shit at the fan and enjoy the show.

"Linux has taken over Russia, people run Clear Linux [which is not even a complete Linux distro, more like a testbed for Intel], people game in Linux", what is this crap?

Lastly a similar topic has already existed for three years, no one here cares about this e-peen contest. God, I'm not participating in this thread any longer.


----------



## SchumannFrequency (Aug 1, 2022)

birdie said:


> If people are _not_ going to use the _same browser and the same version_ all these results are worth shit. OS also matters but not so much.
> 
> If you post your results, could you spend like *three seconds* to click Help -> About and post the exact browser and its version? *Thank you*.
> 
> ...


I think most people will keep their browsers up to date, and there are often no huge differences from one or two versions before. So I guess the browser version is something that shouldn't necessarily be mentioned. My browser version on FreeBSD is 103.0.5060.134 (Official Build) (64-bit).

In specific cases, the OS can be a _huge_ factor for browsing and networking benchmarks:
https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=1910084-AS-WINCLEAR401&sha=7b2e965&p=2
https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=1910084-AS-WINCLEAR401&sha=d2c045f&p=2
https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=2112211-TJ-MACWINLIN08&sha=5d51cd2033b9&p=2
https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=1903294-HV-LINUXWEB658&sha=83082ec&p=2
]https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=1903294-HV-LINUXWEB658&sha=2506d28&p=2


			https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=1903314-HV-WINDOWSLI86&sha=2506d28&p=2
		



			https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=2205127-NE-XEONLINUX78&sha=dfcd2fe2a651&p=2
		



			https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=1903314-HV-WINDOWSLI86&sha=5c4b988&p=2
		



			https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=1612062-TA-NETWORKLA06&sha=7654fc1&p=2
		



			https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=1612062-TA-NETWORKLA06&sha=982006d&p=2


----------



## lmille16 (Aug 1, 2022)

168.161 on my work laptop; Dell Latitude 5420 with an i5-1135G7 and 8 gigs of DDR4-3200. Chrome Version 103.0.5060.134


----------



## SchumannFrequency (Aug 1, 2022)

birdie said:


> So you presume this topic will exist for the whole day? A year from now how you will understand what version of a particular browser was used at a random time earlier?
> 
> OS is a non-factor, period. 99% of people here run bog-standard Windows 10 or 11. Among die-hard Linux fans maybe 0.01% run Clear Linux as their daily driver. Absolute most Linux users run pre-compiled distros including Ubuntu and its derivatives, Arch and Fedora. All the others barely register.


We can occasionally mention the version so that people have an idea. Here you will find mainly Windows users. There are currently possibly even more windows7 users than windows11 users according to statistics.

People of any nationality can eventually participate in Techpowerup. You should also keep in mind that less than 50 percent of Russians currently use Windows. In China it is less than 80 percent. In South and North Korea you also have that people want to use Linux for government desktops. In India you also have people who use Linux. In the Linux world you have more fragmentation than before, Ubuntu is less dominant. You also have quite a few people using macOS, iOS, Android or ChromeOS.

Regarding Clear Linux, quite a few people have already asked me to post a detailed tutorial online on how to use it for gaming. Many people tell me that Clear Linux can become very popular with a little help.


----------



## P4-630 (Aug 1, 2022)

SchumannFrequency said:


> People of any nationality can eventually participate in Techpowerup.


Most of them here are using Bill Gate$' software as far as I know...


----------



## AlwaysHope (Aug 2, 2022)

P4-630 said:


> What does your  i7-11700K do?


This, but with Edge.


----------



## R-T-B (Aug 2, 2022)

P4-630 said:


> Most of them here are using Bill Gate$' software as far as I know...


Considering the last thing I think he worked on was XP, I hope not.


----------



## cvaldes (Aug 2, 2022)

cvaldes said:


> Here are my results on my daily driver (not the build in my System Specs), Windows 10 21H2
> 
> Ryzen 7 3700X (PBO enabled), 32GB RAM 3200MHz, MSI MPG B550-I Gaming Wifi, EVGA RTX 3050 OC 8GB, Sabrent Rocket 4 Plus 1TB m.2
> 
> ...


And now a different machine:

Mac mini 2018 (Intel Core i7-8700B, 6 core/12 thread), 16GB RAM, 1TB SSD running macOS Monterey 12.4

Once again ungoogled Chromium (Marmaduke build)




and another result with Safari 15.5




which compares pretty favorably next to Chromium-based browsers.


----------



## Athlonite (Aug 2, 2022)

Vivaldi: 5.3.2679.70 (Stable channel) (64-bit)
Edition    Windows 11 Pro
Version    22H2
OS build    22621.290
Experience    Windows Feature Experience Pack 1000.22632.1000.0


----------



## P4-630 (Aug 2, 2022)

R-T-B said:


> Considering the last thing I think he worked on was XP, I hope not.



LOL, I mean in general "Windows"


----------



## Tatty_One (Aug 2, 2022)

dnm_TX said:


> @SchumannFrequency if you don't mind make this thread's posts editable.* I tried to add my browser version to my original post to no avail.*
> Thanks.


You can now.


----------



## oobymach (Aug 2, 2022)

AlwaysHope said:


> This, but with Edge.
> View attachment 256693


Here's my edge result, better than all my other browsers and comparable to your result.


----------



## lmille16 (Aug 2, 2022)

Just for kicks, I ran it on my Verizon iPhone 13 iOS 15.6 using Chrome and scored a 201.069. Safari scored a 201.437.


----------



## cvaldes (Aug 2, 2022)

lmille16 said:


> Just for kicks, I ran it on my Verizon iPhone 13 iOS 15.6 using Chrome and scored a 201.069. Safari scored a 201.437.


And here's my iPhone 12 mini (Apple A14 SoC, 2 performance cores + 4 efficiency cores, 2GB RAM) running iOS 15.6:




I expect other iPhone browsers will perform similarly since they are all required to use the WebKit engine on iOS.

It's even faster on my iPad mini 6th generation (Apple A15 SoC, 2 performance cores, 4 efficiency cores, 4 GB RAM):





From a performance-per-watt standpoint, my iOS devices destroy my PCs (Windows and Mac) in this benchmark.


----------



## Athlonite (Aug 3, 2022)

I just ran this again and watched Task managers CPU usage it seems it's not very CPU intensive and when it is it only uses 4~5 of the available 16 threads and only then it's lucky to be pushing 10.6% usage until the very end when it calculates the score where it hikes upto 76% for half a second. To me it just doesn't seem very multicore aware

@oobymach what sort of OC do you have on your R5 5600

Microsoft Edge Version: 103.0.1264.77 (Official build) (64-bit)





Hmmm seems Edge is quite a bit faster at this than Vivaldi I wonder why as they're both using the exact same version of chromium under the hood


----------



## SchumannFrequency (Aug 3, 2022)

Athlonite said:


> I just ran this again and watched Task managers CPU usage it seems it's not very CPU intensive and when it is it only uses 4~5 of the available 16 threads and only then it's lucky to be pushing 10.6% usage until the very end when it calculates the score where it hikes upto 76% for half a second. To me it just doesn't seem very multicore aware


It runs several test cases from real-world applications and libraries. In reality, your CPU will never go to 100% while browsing the internet, even if you have multiple websites open. However, this does not mean that it is not a good benchmark to measure your CPU performance while browsing the web. The most powerful AMD processors are only going to have 1% CPU usage when running Cyberpunk 2077. But that doesn't mean Cyberpunk 2077 is necessarily going to get the most FPS (the highest performance results) on a 64 core CPU.



Athlonite said:


> Hmmm seems Edge is quite a bit faster at this than Vivaldi I wonder why as they're both using the exact same version of chromium under the hood


Chrome and Edge use proprietary technology on top of this engine, so Chormium and Chrome, for example, have different performance in certain things.
A typical example as pointed out by a Google developer on Reddit is the rendering of PDFs, where Google uses a much faster proprietary product other than an open-sourced one. 
Due to this, some streaming sites are unavailable for Chromium but work with Google Chrome.


----------



## bonehead123 (Aug 3, 2022)

Here is mine, using the latest Chrome and the hardware in my specs, which I think is ok considering it's a few gens old:

*141.210
Score*

3d-cube-SP​294.744​156.250First344.828Worst475.240Average
3d-raytrace-SP​282.179​138.889First333.333Worst485.318Average
acorn-wtb​40.371​24.272First47.170Worst57.471Average
ai-astar​384.477​263.158First344.828Worst626.316Average
Air​322.319​131.579First285.714Worst890.719Average
async-fs​102.945​104.167First82.873Worst126.377Average
Babylon​428.004​147.059First416.667Worst1279.570Average
babylon-wtb​44.017​24.155First51.020Worst69.204Average
base64-SP​285.788​166.667First344.828Worst406.143Average
Basic​465.875​178.571First540.541Worst1047.535Average
bomb-workers​29.400​30.488First27.174Worst30.675Average
Box2D​213.522​54.945First232.558Worst761.844Average
cdjs​140.750​69.444First189.873Worst211.470Average
chai-wtb​84.322​64.103First92.593Worst101.010Average
coffeescript-wtb​31.612​24.155First30.864Worst42.373Average
crypto​813.443​357.143First952.381Worst1582.447Average
crypto-aes-SP​416.630​208.333First512.821Worst676.906Average
crypto-md5-SP​242.399​156.250First285.714Worst319.035Average
crypto-sha1-SP​278.930​138.889First357.143Worst437.500Average
date-format-tofte-SP​140.525​128.205First136.054Worst159.091Average
date-format-xparb-SP​145.908​142.857First130.719Worst166.341Average
delta-blue​872.409​172.414First1333.333Worst2888.350Average
earley-boyer​380.991​172.414First400Worst801.887Average
espree-wtb​25.385​19.455First26.316Worst31.949Average
first-inspector-code-load​148.596​156.250First135.135Worst155.393Average
FlightPlanner​509.148​250First571.429Worst923.913Average
float-mm.c​11.319​11.521First10.881Worst11.568Average
gaussian-blur​257.314​172.414First294.118Worst335.968Average
gbemu​75.223​32.051First74.906Worst177.294Average
gcc-loops-wasm​21.416​217.391Startup2.110Runtime
hash-map​435.091​200First476.190Worst864.826Average
HashSet-wasm​30.676​161.290Startup5.834Runtime
jshint-wtb​48.090​33.557First53.191Worst62.305Average
json-parse-inspector​149.169​147.059First144.928Worst155.738Average
json-stringify-inspector​124.422​156.250First87.719Worst140.533Average
lebab-wtb​45.633​27.473First51.020Worst67.797Average
mandreel​88.220​42.017First121.212Worst134.812Average
ML​72.645​49.020First86.957Worst89.939Average
multi-inspector-code-load​271.800​161.290First155.039Worst802.969Average
n-body-SP​808.558​500First952.381Worst1110.075Average
navier-stokes​585.132​200First833.333Worst1202.020Average
octane-code-load​904.165​833.333First833.333Worst1064.401Average
octane-zlib​20.571​12.563First25.974Worst26.677Average
OfflineAssembler​103.891​56.818First128.205Worst153.936Average
pdfjs​120.986​53.191First137.931Worst241.379Average
prepack-wtb​33.507​22.624First36.496Worst45.558Average
quicksort-wasm​279.946​454.545Startup172.414Runtime
raytrace​433.778​121.951First714.286Worst937.008Average
regex-dna-SP​431.769​416.667First400Worst482.955Average
regexp​316.862​277.778First294.118Worst389.398Average
richards​602.979​250First869.565Worst1008.475Average
richards-wasm​64.679​625Startup6.693Runtime
segmentation​38.776​33.113First38.071Worst46.247Average
splay​236.420​294.118First121.951Worst368.421Average
stanford-crypto-aes​317.800​142.857First444.444Worst505.523Average
stanford-crypto-pbkdf2​551.282​312.500First645.161Worst831.006Average
stanford-crypto-sha256​501.261​312.500First540.541Worst745.614Average
string-unpack-code-SP​552.364​384.615First540.541Worst810.627Average
tagcloud-SP​209.354​142.857First206.186Worst311.518Average
tsf-wasm​54.600​357.143Startup8.347Runtime
typescript​13.241​7.837First14.006Worst21.148Average
uglify-js-wtb​26.016​18.587First28.090Worst33.727Average
UniPoker​280.466​178.571First312.500Worst395.349Average
WSL​0.981​1.653Stdlib0.583MainRun


----------



## rethcirE (Aug 3, 2022)

Left Chrome - Version 103.0.5060.134 (Official Build) (64-bit)
Right Opera GX - LVL 4 (core: 89.0.4447.64)
OS - Windows 10 Pro 21H2 19044.1826

Detailed Specs in Signature

Curious how Edge would fare but not curious enough to actually install it. Banished that browser from my OS almost immediately.


----------



## SchumannFrequency (Sep 6, 2022)

I noticed today that Brave (via Linux compatibility) is (usually) faster than the native Chromium on FreeBSD:




My assumption is that with an Intel i7 12700K or an R7 5800X without overclocking I will end up above 300 anyway via FreeBSD and Brave.


----------



## bug (Sep 6, 2022)

Dr. Dro said:


> Ooh, a browser benchmark, I haven't seen one of these in ages, ever since Futuremark phased out Peacekeeper


It's different. Peacekeeper was mostly about HTML/CSS, this one seems to be more JS and WebAssembly focused (more like Octane, I'd say). Nothing inherently bad with either, given a choice I'd prefer we had both around.


----------



## SchumannFrequency (Sep 6, 2022)

bug said:


> It's different. Peacekeeper was mostly about HTML/CSS, this one seems to be more JS and WebAssembly focused (more like Octane, I'd say). Nothing inherently bad with either, given a choice I'd prefer we had both around.


If you are interested in CSS performance there is still StyleBench: https://perftest.netlify.app/stylebench/
You also have the Maze Solver benchmark for CSS: https://testdrive-archive.azurewebsites.net/Performance/MazeSolver/Default.html
I don't know of any benchmark that focuses solely on HTML, but CanvasMark also tests HTML performance to a large extent: http://www.kevs3d.co.uk/dev/canvasmark/

As everyone knows, JavaScript is not efficient for web apps that require more computing power. We will probably see a lot more heavier web apps in the future. For WebAssembly you have the following benchmarks:


			https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=2207047-NE-ALDERLAKE22&sha=5ad092f891fa&p=2
		



			https://openbenchmarking.org/embed.php?i=2207047-NE-ALDERLAKE22&sha=32e00d66d318&p=2


----------



## I hit the lottery (Sep 6, 2022)

i512600k @ 5.4
16 gig shit bird micron ddr5
6700xt
champ mindset.
and chrome.


----------



## Det0x (Sep 6, 2022)

5950x @ 24/7 settings
score = 275




Ill be back in ~1months with a 7950x


----------



## I hit the lottery (Sep 6, 2022)

yeah man.  Imma check out another i5 I think or MAYBE the i7... but the i5 13600 6+8 sounds pretty dank for 300$.. and it looks to be smoking the 12900k in all aspects....so... if I catch the chip lottery this time, imma be a problem for the higher paying folk, more so even than with this 12600k.. but yeah the 7950x is guna be dank...wish I could warrant shelling at 700-800 got it.. but the real world performance difference outside of benchmarks is like 5%... real talk ....between the i5 Ks and everything else...Im trying to ditch this 6700xt as good as it is... i need a 6900 or a 3090... this i5 is maxing out this 6700xt not even on kill.  smh....still jealous tho... im must admit lol..But a gpu serious upgrade would throw me so much more than the 7xxx series could get me above the i5s.. tbh.


----------



## Athlonite (Sep 7, 2022)

Vivaldi5.4.2753.47 (Stable channel) (64-bit) 





Looks like Vivaldi have been making improvements since the last time I ran this


----------



## SchumannFrequency (Sep 7, 2022)

bug said:


> It's different. Peacekeeper was mostly about HTML/CSS, this one seems to be more JS and WebAssembly focused (more like Octane, I'd say). Nothing inherently bad with either, given a choice I'd prefer we had both around.


I tested the CSS performance of my 10 year old cheap hardware today and was quite surprised at the result: 


You see here that the newer and more expensive *R9 5950X* doesn't get better results than *3.7* in Maze Solver.
Lower results are better in this benchmark.





						Firefox 95 vs. Chrome 97 Browser Performance On Linux - Phoronix
					






					www.phoronix.com
				




Brave is lightning fast on my old and cheap hardware. I think FreeBSD explains why it currently feels like a supercomputer and gives these sort of inexplicable results.


----------



## I hit the lottery (Sep 7, 2022)

SchumannFrequency said:


> I tested the CSS performance of my 10 year old cheap hardware today and was quite surprised at the result: View attachment 260924
> You see here that the newer and more expensive *R9 5950X* doesn't get better results than *3.7* in Maze Solver.
> Lower results are better in this benchmark.
> 
> ...


old hardware defeated.


----------



## SchumannFrequency (Sep 7, 2022)

I hit the lottery said:


> old hardware defeated.


We should be able to see the second digit after the decimal point to know this 

On the same page you can generate a second maze (by clicking on the circular arrow) 

Here I get sometimes 2.1, and sometimes 2.2, what is your result there?


----------



## Det0x (Sep 7, 2022)

SchumannFrequency said:


> You see here that the newer and more expensive *R9 5950X* doesn't get better results than *3.7* in Maze Solver.
> Lower results are better in this benchmark.
> 
> 
> ...


??
I'm getting 1.1 score in this benchmark with 24/7 settings
View attachment 260945


----------



## SchumannFrequency (Sep 7, 2022)

Det0x said:


> ??
> I'm getting 1.1 score in this benchmark with 24/7 settings
> View attachment 260945


This is because you are using a different maze. My screenshot and the Phoronix benchmarks use the first maze. I think you are using the third maze.

CSS performance is something that is still an important element to determine browser performance. Because *there are many websites where the CSS part is heavier than the JS part*. Why this is so is explained here.

Myth Busting: CSS Animations vs. JavaScript








						Myth Busting: CSS Animations vs. JavaScript | CSS-Tricks
					

The following is a guest post by Jack Doyle, author of the GreenSock Animation Platform (GSAP). Jack does a lot of work with animations in the browser and has




					css-tricks.com
				




Once upon a time, most developers used jQuery to animate things in the browser. Fade this, expand that; simple stuff. As interactive projects got more aggressive and mobile devices burst onto the scene, performance became increasingly important. Flash faded away and talented animators pressed HTML5 to do things it had never done before. They needed better tools for complex sequencing and top-notch performance. jQuery simply wasn’t designed for that. Browsers matured and started offering solutions.

*The most widely-acclaimed solution was CSS Animations (and Transitions)*. The darling of the industry for years now, CSS Animations have been talked about endlessly at conferences where phrases like “hardware accelerated” and “mobile-friendly” tickle the ears of the audience. *JavaScript-based animation was treated as if it was antiquated and “dirty”*.


----------



## Det0x (Sep 7, 2022)

SchumannFrequency said:


> This is because you are using a different maze. My screenshot and the Phoronix benchmarks use the first maze. I think you are using the third maze.


Also getting 3.5 seconds with that other maze after a restart..
Dont think this is a good benchmark for modern hardware, but atleast that 5950x minimum 3.7sec is not correct 

*edit*
And it seems like 40*40 grid is even faster? (~3.0 sec with lots of background running)
lol it seems to be random what maze your getting there also..


----------



## SchumannFrequency (Sep 7, 2022)

Det0x said:


> Also getting 3.5 seconds with that other maze after a restart..
> Dont think this is a good benchmark for modern hardware, but atleast that 5950x minimum 3.7sec is not correct


The benchmarks were on Linux and you are using Windows. It was an older browser he was using in the test, so it may be true that the 5950x was slower in January 2022.



Det0x said:


> lol it seems to be random what maze your getting there also..


The maze you get when you refresh the page is always exactly the same maze, it is used in the Phoronix tests.

As for how accurate this benchmark is to describe real-world performance, I'd say it's quite usefull.

Many systems with an SSD will perform about the same on certain parts of web browsing. Take my old dual core i3 3240 for example. When I look up things on Google, the search results come up instantly, I don't think my CPU is a bottleneck there in any way. Say I'm browsing The Guardian's website, that's just instant too, I click on something and it loads the entire webpage in about half a second.

It is correct to say that a CPU is not a significant bottleneck in many everyday tasks. Software is often a bigger bottleneck than hardware. Take, for example, the boot time of Windows 10/11. Windows doesn't actually boot up completely, it does a form of hibernation because windows is too slow without this trick. This hibernation makes windows more prone to driver bugs. However, it will still boot slower than if you let Alpine Linux or Void Linux boot completely on the same hardware.

When I log into my FreeBSD system, it takes exactly one second in XFCE. While you can't make Windows 10/11 log in faster even with the most powerful CPUs. Suppose I am viewing photos with Viewnior or with Feh, the transition to the next photo is going to be faster than on the most powerful CPUs with Windows 10/11.

Let's say I open a file manager with XFCE, this takes about one second. It's as fast as the most powerful CPUs with Windows 10/11.

Suppose I open my email app (Claws Mail), this will load my emails faster than is possible in Windows 10/11.

Suppose I open Gnumeric, I am going to achieve higher performance in most tasks than what is possible in windows 10/11, and Gnumeric is a more advanced spreadsheet app than MS Excel.

The benchmark is appropriate to see how fast the CPU is if there is no major bottleneck. This is the situation for most of the day-to-day tasks that most people do.

Here's a benchmark that measures the bottlenecks in a specific situation: https://perftest.netlify.app/stylebench/

But the question is, in which situations do you encounter this bottleneck in reality. I can say that more than 90% of the websites on my systems are fully loaded within a _maximum_ of 2 seconds. One of the slower websites is Reddit which takes 4 seconds before it is completely loaded. I think this is because they switched from Lisp to Python which made Reddit very slow.
If they had made some changes to their Lisp code instead of switching to Python, they would have had a much faster platform.


----------



## I hit the lottery (Sep 7, 2022)

Det0x said:


> ??
> I'm getting 1.1 score in this benchmark with 24/7 settings
> View attachment 260945


Wrong Mr.schumann you're over thinking it . (Well I mean detox knows because hes trying to pull a fast one.

I see you bro. Lol.


----------



## Count von Schwalbe (Sep 7, 2022)

Det0x said:


> Dont think this is a good benchmark for modern hardware


Actually, it is. It is a good way to demonstrate the lack of difference between most hardware for basic tasks.


----------



## I hit the lottery (Sep 7, 2022)

Count von Schwalbe said:


> Actually, it is. It is a good way to demonstrate the lack of difference between most hardware for basic tasks.


EXACTLY, which is why i KNOW he used this method which i just made a video of demonstrating 1.1seconds....there is zero and i MEAN ZERO chance he did 2.4 s faster than my pc, which has been edging his on every actual bench in the past 2 weeks we've both posted on.. and discussed in one case..and those benches are actually designed to show small differences for us to tweak...This benchemark shows the very lack of differences between well tuned PCS.. Like The count said... Again... this is how he cheated a 1.1s https://rumble.com/v1j1yfv-yep.html , not to mention in all the benchmarks we've both hit these past 2 weeks, I've been edging his system out by 5-10%.....and now I get 3.5s and he gets 1.1? Now all the sudden you're blowing me out of the water by... whats the percentage difference there? 104%? xD cmon man.


----------



## HammerON (Sep 7, 2022)

This is not an official contest of any sort.  Please play nice or you will be thread banned. No bickering or arguing.


----------



## Canned Noodles (Sep 7, 2022)

M1 Air on Safari with 8GB RAM and 8-core GPU


----------



## SchumannFrequency (Sep 9, 2022)

Windows11 doesn't work that well I must say. I think the hardware of this system is something like *3x* more powerful than my hardware. If Google published a well-optimized build of Chrome for FreeBSD then my i3-3240 with slow single channel DDR3 RAM would be exactly as fast in JetStream 2 as this R5 Pro Mobile 3400G with fast DDR4 dual channel RAM. Is that still normal with this difference in hardware? https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/compare_cpu-amd_ryzen_5_pro_3400g-1262-vs-intel_core_i3_3240-391 When I have time I will test the Void Linux, FreeBSD and AlmaLinux OS scores on this specific R5 Pro 3400G so that we know exactly what the performance differences are.


----------



## SchumannFrequency (Sep 12, 2022)

I tested the same R5 Pro 3400G today with Linux and these were the results.
When JetStream 2 runs on Lubuntu or Fedora_ for the first time_, I got a result that fluctuated between 102 and 106:



On FreeBSD and windows11 the results stayed the same on the following attempts, but on Linux the second attempt immediately gives a higher result:



If you then delete the browser history completely, the result on Linux will go back between 102 and 106.
With Brave on FreeBSD I got a result above 99 on an i3 3240 very old dual core with slow single channel DDR3 memory so it seems FreeBSD with Brave is a lot faster than Ubuntu or Fedora for browsing (JavaScript and CSS)
I have to say that I'm a bit disappointed with the work of Canonical and Red Hat as they lose out to a system that is much less used for browsing.
If you want a Linux system that will browse as fast or faster as windows10/11 on the first try, you should probably use Clear Linux with Chrome, or a Linux distro almost as fast as Clear Linux, or FreeBSD with Brave.

Today JetStream 2.1 was released and this is my result:


----------



## wild0077 (Sep 12, 2022)

Considering the cpu age I guess it did good.

_E5 1660V3 @ 4.5GHz (HT Disabled) + 32GB RAM @3200MHZ quad channel + RTX 3070 8GB + Patriot Burst 240GB_
Windows 10 Pro 21H2 19044.1899
Chrome 105.0.5195.102


----------



## SchumannFrequency (Sep 12, 2022)

wild0077 said:


> Considering the cpu age I guess it did good.
> 
> _E5 1660V3 @ 4.5GHz (HT Disabled) + 32GB RAM @3200MHZ quad channel + RTX 3070 8GB + Patriot Burst 240GB_
> Windows 10 Pro 21H2 19044.1899
> Chrome 105.0.5195.102


_*E5 1660V3 @ 4.5GHz* _That's why it still performs well. Browsers are well optimized for multi-threading and it has 8 cores.

The performance in the Brave browser on the first try.



The performance in the Brave browser on the second try.



I knew from my previous results that certain Linux systems will get faster browser results than windows11. Solus has a few of Clear Linux's optimizations, which is why it's already on par with Edge on w11 and faster than Chrome on w11. On the second try it is faster than probably all browsers on windows.
Interesting to know is that in my experiments Void Linux is slightly faster than Solus in Brave for Speedometer 2.0 so I suspect Void will also be faster in JetStream 2.0
I will also test AlmaLinux with Brave in the future, because it uses the p-state, which makes it close to Clear Linux in most wokloads. So it could theoretically be faster than Solus and Void.

I think the above performance of Solus gives a good idea of how the faster Linux systems perform. They are slightly faster than windows11. Clear Linux with Chrome/Brave is still 4% faster than Solus for browsing but there are no faster Linux systems than Clear Linux.

Today I tested GhostBSD's performance and these were my results. The performance in the Brave browser on the first try.



The performance in the Brave browser on the second try.



We can see that GhostBSD with Brave is faster than any windows or Linux system in JetStream 2. 

I ran three more benchmarks to see if this was a coincidence, or if FreeBSD is generally the fastest system for browsing.
In Octane 2.0 I got around 47 000, unsurprisingly it performed well here as this is similar to JetStream 2. These were the results of the last two benchmarks:



To put this Kraken 1.1 result in context: 








						AMD Ryzen 9 3950X review
					

The review today hardly will need an introduction, the monolith has arrived, the consumer, and not even HEDT, the sixteen-core processor in the Ryzen 3000 family, the Ryzen 9 3950X. It is fast, feist... Performance - Chrome Browser - Kraken - Jetstream




					www.guru3d.com
				











						Kraken Javascript Benchmark 1.1
					

https://krakenbenchmark.mozilla.org/  CPU: 8350k OS: Debian 10 Browser: Firefox  RESULTS (means and 95% confidence intervals)...




					forums.guru3d.com
				





			https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph12725/97962.png
		





To put this ARES-6 result in context:
Intel Core i9 9900K with ASUS PRIME Z390-A motherboard, 16GB RAM, Samsung 970 EVO 256GB NVMe SSD, and AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 graphics in the year 2019. 




__





						The Fastest Linux Distributions For Web Browsing - Firefox + Chrome Benchmarks On Eight Distros - Phoronix
					






					www.phoronix.com


----------



## RandallFlagg (Oct 26, 2022)

12700K MS Edge and Brave below that.







Brave browser :


----------



## Athlonite (Oct 26, 2022)

Hmm some more under the hood improvements from the Vivaldi team 

Vivaldi5.5.2805.38 (Stable channel) (64-bit)





Previous score was 245


----------



## Hyderz (Oct 26, 2022)

62.223
Firefox browser 
Laptop Spec i5 6200u, 8g ram, intel hd graphics and kingston ssd


----------



## Det0x (Oct 26, 2022)

Easymode testrun


----------



## SchumannFrequency (Oct 26, 2022)

Hyderz said:


> 62.223
> Firefox browser
> Laptop Spec i5 6200u, 8g ram, intel hd graphics and kingston ssd


Firefox is slow in this specific benchmark. You will score around 98 with a browser based on Chromium.

However, in WebXPRT, Firefox is faster than all Chromium-based browsers.


----------



## maxam (Nov 4, 2022)

MacBook Pro M2 8GB/256GB (base model 8c CPU / 10c GPU)
MacOS Ventura 13.0
Safari 16.1


----------



## sam_86314 (Nov 4, 2022)

Score: 151.580
Specs: R7 5800X, 32GB DDR4-3600 (dual-channel), RX 6800 XT, 1TB WD SN750
Software: Windows 10 LTSC 2021, Firefox 106.0.3

One tab was open, and all of my browser extensions were enabled.


----------



## SchumannFrequency (Dec 18, 2022)

Clear Linux and FreeBSD are two of the fastest systems for JavaScript, HTML5, CSS and WASM. 
In most benchmarks they score about exactly the same. 
FreeBSD (now) scores above 98 in this benchmark in Chromium, and I'm using Chrome for the above benchmark which is slightly faster than Chromium.
They have about the same CPU performance, but FreeBSD has more IOPS than Clear Linux, making apps launch faster. 

If you find a system that is generally faster than FreeBSD, I'd love to hear about it.


----------



## Athlonite (Dec 20, 2022)

Vivaldi seem to be on a run lately couple of more updates (6~7 actually) and more perf again


Vivaldi5.6.2867.46 (Stable channel) (64-bit)


----------



## Hugis (Dec 20, 2022)

Chrome Version 108.0.5359.125
Win10 22H2 19045.2364
Specs over there <--


----------



## Morgoth (Jan 3, 2023)




----------

