SquirrelFish Extreme: Fastest JavaScript Engine Yet
September 19th, 2008After reading the WebKit SquirrelFish Extreme announcement, I figured it’s time to revisit the JavaScript engine / web browser race once again.
In short: SquirrelFish Extreme is fastest by a whopping 35% over its nearest competitor, making WebKit the fastest browser once again. Let’s see how the numbers come out.
SunSpider Benchmark Comparison of JavaScript Engines
SunSpider running from the command line (to ensure the test is as pure as possible) was used for this test. My test system is a 2.4GHz iMac.
These graphs are shown in runs per minute for clarity. Longer bars are better.
The raw timings are:
Detailed timings are linked above.
Of course, browsers are not purely executing JavaScript – DOM and rendering speeds are performance considerations as well. For this, we turn to Mozilla’s Dromaeo benchmark.
Dromaeo on Windows
As you can see, Firefox and WebKit smoke Google Chrome on this benchmark. WebKit comes out slightly ahead, so we need another benchmark to clear things up. Once again, Dromaeo, but on OS X now.
The full timings for these benchmarks are here:
- Google Chrome Nightly Windows – 13478.20ms (Total)
- Mozilla Firefox Nightly Windows – 7779.40ms (Total)
- Safari WebKit Nightly Windows – 7586.80ms (Total)
Dromaeo on Mac OS X
Full timings for these benchmarks are here:
- Firefox Nightly on OS X – 6648.20ms (Total)
- WebKit Nightly on OS X – 4387.20ms (Total)
- The Windows benchmarks ran on different test hardware from the Mac OS X and engine benchmarks.
Winner: WebKit + SquirrelFish Extreme
SquirrelFish Extreme wins this evolutionary cycle. Stay tuned for more coverage as Google, WebKit and Mozilla prepare their next moves.
Running your own SunSpider tests
Download and build WebKit trunk, Firefox trunk, and V8 trunk:
Building SquirrelFish Extreme: from JavaScriptCore,
make release
Building V8: scons sample=shell
Building Tracemonkey: from js/src, run make -f Makefile.ref BUILD_OPT=1
Run the SunSpider harness from WebKitTools/SunSpider:
SquirrelFish Extreme:
./sunspider --shell=../../WebKit/WebKitBuild/Release/jsc
V8: ./sunspider --shell=../../v8-edge/shell --args=-expose-gc
TraceMonkey: ./sunspider --shell=../../tracemonkey/js/src/Darwin_OPT.OBJ/js --args="-j"
Notes
Technorati Tags: WebKit, SquirrelFish, Apple, Google Chrome, V8, TraceMonkey, Mozilla Firefox, JavaScript, Browsers
September 19th, 2008 at 12:59 am
[…] UPDATE: For the curious, here are some comparisons of SFX to other leading JavaScript engines. Charles Ying has comparisons on a few more benchmarks. […]
September 19th, 2008 at 4:22 am
Your charts show Safari Windows at 7.9 to and Safari on OS X at 13.7 — are these on the same hardware? On the face of it it looks like there is something surprisingly slow about the Windows version…
September 19th, 2008 at 5:59 am
Who cares for JS speed as long as the browser can be crashed by Flash content.
September 19th, 2008 at 6:02 am
Yay progress!
September 19th, 2008 at 7:46 am
Damian: Oops, no the Windows test system is on different (slower) hardware. I suppose I should try it on the same hardware, but I don’t have Bootcamp on this iMac. I’ll try a Parallels version soon and post the results here.
September 19th, 2008 at 8:10 am
@oliver
It sounds like you have a chip on your shoulder. There’s plenty that can contribute to an unstable browser. If you can point me to a flash file that will crash a given browser every time for everyone, then your point will stand. If it only affects your system, then you have somewhere to start to solve the problem.
Way to go WebKit Team! This is fantastic. 280slides.com runs amazingly well in the latest WebKit nightly.
September 19th, 2008 at 8:38 am
Maybe Oliver’s point was that Adobe should pull their fingers out of their buts and do some optimisation of Flash on Mac OS X. It that wasn’t Oliver’s point, then it can be mine instead.
September 19th, 2008 at 10:37 am
Why don’t you include IE8 in these benchmarks? As a web developer I am loving the focus on javascript performance for the next generation of browsers, but IE is always a [limiting] factor in terms of knowing how far I can push the browser.
September 19th, 2008 at 11:53 am
[…] WebKit, with SquirrelFish Extreme, has jumped back in the lead among browsers and it’ll only be a matter of time before we see the next jump ahead. Some more benchmarks and comparisons to other browsers are available on Cameron Zwarich’s blog and on Charles Ying’s blog. […]
September 19th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Jon:
IE8 is ~ 10 times slower than the others. So it doesn’t really qualify for this benchmark.. It would only make the bar graph unreadable.
September 19th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
I think Oliver was talking about Chrome’s independent process model that lets Chrome survive Flash crashes, as well as any others for plugins. Which would be nice to see in Safari.
September 19th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
[…] Ying also performed SunSpider tests that showed Squirrelfish beating Google’s V8 and Mozilla’s Tracemonkey on a 2.4GHz […]
September 19th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
SquirrelFish Extreme: Faster than SquirrelFish, Google Chrome and Firefox 3.1?…
Speed is not everything and we are not suckers for browsing speed. We want functionality! We want tools that make our lives easier on the Net! Give us a super smart browser! That’s what we really want from you!…
September 19th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
It would indeed be nice to see a slower (e.g. IE) JS engine compared to it, even if its bar is so small it’s unreadable. It’d be a great demonstration of the amount of progress made in a small amount of time.
September 19th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
[…] More charts! Courtesy of here. […]
September 19th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
[…] Charles Ying’s Benchmark This entry was written by Fu4ny, posted on 20 September, 2008 at 6:22 am, filed under Post and tagged Chrome, Google, Mozzila, Tracemoney, Webkit. Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL. « Fu4ny@19/09 […]
September 19th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
I’m not sure what sort of system you used, but when I tested the three browsers on Windows XP running on a 2.4ghz P4, I found that Chrome totally smoked FF and Safari 4.0 (not using Squirrelfish Extreme) on Dromaeo.
FF was approximately twice as slow as Chrome, and Safari 4.0 was approximately 1.33x as slow as FF.
Chrome also performed ridiculously better on Google’s own V8 tuning benchmark:
http://code.google.com/apis/v8/run.html
September 19th, 2008 at 5:27 pm
buddyglass: Safari 4.0 (I assume you’re using 4.0 Developer Preview) is not the latest version of Safari + WebKit. The 3 browsers I’m comparing are using the latest nightly builds taken from last night, 2008-09-18. I’d be interested to see your comparison using the latest builds on your system.
September 19th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
True, the Safari 4.0 beta didn’t have the latest version of Squirrelfish. But I was using a nightly build of FF3.1 as of approximately 3 weeks ago, and testing vs. the initial release of Chrome. You have FF handily beating Chrome on Dromaeo, which was the reverse of what I saw. I’ll download nightlies of FF and Webkit, and test vs. the latest Chrome, on SunSpider, Dromeaeo and Google’s V8 tester.
September 19th, 2008 at 6:51 pm
So I just finished testing, and my results match up more with yours than with what I remember from the last round of testing I did. Now that I think of it, though, I may have done my earlier tests on an iMac (Core 2 Duo) running XP inside a Parallels VM. Maybe Chrome takes better advantage of the two cores on that system? Or maybe I’m just on crack. Here are my results, with links:
Webkit: r36682 (9/20) + Safari 3.1.2 (525.21) Minefield: 3.1b1pre (9/20), JIT Enabled Chrome: 0.2.149.30
SunSpider: Webkit: 2814.0ms (http://tinyurl.com/4fwloh) Minefield: 2767.4ms (http://tinyurl.com/4z8gv4) Chrome: 3316.8ms (http://tinyurl.com/3osox2)
Dromaeo: Webkit: 11346.40ms (http://dromaeo.com/?id=43093) Minefield: 13321.00ms (http://dromaeo.com/?id=43094) Chrome: 16296.00ms (http://dromaeo.com/?id=43089)
V8 (higher is better): Webkit: approx. 480 (varies) Minefield: (fails) Chrome: approx. 880 (varies)
September 19th, 2008 at 7:13 pm
[…] coming for Firefox 3.1 hehe, ya saw that on a blog. also comparing to other engines: inside looking out Blog Archive SquirrelFish Extreme: Fastest JavaScript Engine Yet i wonder what will be the response of mozilla and google on this probably their own updated […]
September 19th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
[…] Charles Ying compiles a few more comparisons […]
September 19th, 2008 at 10:12 pm
[…] 따르면 safari3보다 3배이상 빠르다고 하는데 다른 사이트의 테스트에 의하면 구글크롬보다도 빠른 벤치마크를 기록했다고 […]
September 19th, 2008 at 11:59 pm
[…] Ling adds a comparison to Chrome’s V8 engine as […]
September 20th, 2008 at 7:07 am
[…] the new engine is around 35% faster than the V8 engine recently introduced in Google Chrome, and55% faster than Mozilla’s TraceMonkey.” Tagged with: computer, slashdot, software, technology « Peter Moore Talks […]
September 20th, 2008 at 10:25 am
Charles, I posted my numbers last night, but WordPress seems to have eaten the posts. Either that, or they were too long. Let me know if I should try to post them again.
September 20th, 2008 at 10:26 am
Oh. Duh. They’re right there. I look like a moron now. :)
September 20th, 2008 at 10:30 am
[…] Ying also performed SunSpider tests that showed Squirrelfish beating Google’s V8 and Mozilla’s Tracemonkey on a 2.4GHz […]
September 20th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
[…] According to a blog post from inside looking out, IE 8, being one of the next generation web browser, is about 10 times slower than others (Firefox, […]
September 20th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
it’s funny, the more i use Chrome (for windows), the more unstable it seems to get… crashes a lot more, can’t handle sites with flash, hangs every time i close a tab… all that to say, i’m switching back to Firefox
September 20th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
[…] inside looking out » Blog Archive » SquirrelFish Extreme: Fastest JavaScript Engine Yet […]
September 20th, 2008 at 3:23 pm
[…] membandingkan kinerja SFX dengan engine JavaScript lain, Charles Ying telah menguji SFX dengan V8 dan TraceMonkey melalui command line untuk memastikan hasil yang […]
September 20th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
“Speed is not everything and we are not suckers for browsing speed. We want functionality!”
In the case of JS, speed is functionality. You can make so much better and more complicated web apps if the underlying engine – JS, can handle so much more than before.
September 20th, 2008 at 10:51 pm
It would be nice to see the scores of each individual tests since different real world web applications use javascript differently.
September 21st, 2008 at 6:17 am
[…] SquirrelFish Extreme: Fastest JavaScript Engine Yet […]
September 21st, 2008 at 8:50 am
And why they don’t test it vs Internet Explorer? I think IE it’s the fastest.
September 21st, 2008 at 11:16 am
[…] JavaScript Engine Benchmarks More JavaScript Engine Benchmarks: “Some interesting performance differences between Mac and Windows with the Dromaeo […]
September 22nd, 2008 at 6:06 am
@gigi: I believe one of the links in the comments above mentions that IE is about 8 times slower for JS than the slowest implementation of the other major browsers. IE is (and probably always will be) a lumbering monster that seems incapable of keeping up with it’s competition.
September 22nd, 2008 at 9:26 am
[…] According certain other studies SquirrelFish is reported to have beaten Google’s V8 and Mozilla’s TraceMonkey on performance. Click here for that study. […]
September 22nd, 2008 at 11:49 am
Chrome Add-ons, JavaScript Performance, a Web 3.0 Conference and More [Best of September ’08 #3]…
SquirrelFish tops JavaScript performance. Add-ons and Greasemonkey for Google Chrome. Chrome updates with Dev Channel. Lively to open up to game developers. Teens gaming report. A Web 3.0 conference. ……
September 22nd, 2008 at 12:43 pm
[…] Ying also performed SunSpider tests that showed Squirrelfish beating Google’s V8 and Mozilla’s Tracemonkey on a 2.4GHz […]
September 22nd, 2008 at 1:54 pm
[…] los navegadores más populares, ya que promete (como muestra la siguiente gráfica publicada en Satine) dejar detrás inclusive al motor V8 presente en el Google Chrome y al tan esperado TraceMonkey de […]
September 23rd, 2008 at 6:27 am
[…] Fonte: http://webkit.org/blog/214/introducing-squirrelfish-extreme/ http://www.satine.org/archives/2008/09/19/squirrelfish-extreme-fastest-javascript-engine-yet/ […]
September 23rd, 2008 at 5:31 pm
[…] チャールズ・イン氏のブログ please wait…Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)人気度 » 7 % […]
September 24th, 2008 at 5:31 am
[…] nuovo motore JavaScript è già disponibile nelle nightly build di WebKit e, stando agli immancabili (parziali?) benchmark, sarebbe del 35% più veloce rispetto a V8 (Chrome) e del 55% rispetto a […]
September 25th, 2008 at 4:55 am
[…] odczucie ma Charles Ying, który na blogu opublikował wyniki dwóch testów Dromaeo (Mozilla) i SunSupder (WebKit) dla SFX, Chromium V8, a […]
September 26th, 2008 at 4:12 am
[…] promised us in the original SquirrelFish announcement to bring us SquirrelFish Extreme, by far the most fastester javascript engine in the world […]
September 27th, 2008 at 1:06 pm
[…] UPDATE: For the curious, here are some comparisons of SFX to other leading JavaScript engines. Charles Ying has comparisons on a few more benchmarks. […]
October 6th, 2008 at 4:49 pm
[…] native modules like SQLite are accessible. They base it on the new Tracemonkey engine, which has a good performance, and supports more JavaScript language features […]
November 3rd, 2008 at 9:01 am
[…] Now… SquirrelFish Extreme. Tacky name, but damn, does it look fast. […]
December 25th, 2008 at 2:58 am
Hi,
Charles Ying compiles a few more comparisons
January 18th, 2009 at 3:21 am
why not try Try SquirrelFish Extreme in IExplorer and it will be much more faster than in mozilla.It was base it on the new Tracemonkey engine, which has a good performance, and supports more JavaScript language features
January 18th, 2009 at 3:42 am
why not try Try SquirrelFish Extreme in IExplorer and it will be much more faster than in mozilla.It was base it on the new Tracemonkey engine, which has a good performance , and supports more JavaScript language features
January 22nd, 2009 at 5:58 pm
[…] Check out these pages: Surfin’ Safari – Blog Archive Introducing SquirrelFish Extreme satine.org SquirrelFish Extreme: Fastest JavaScript Engine Yet __________________ Robert Richmond | TechIMO Editor-in-Chief Infinite perceptions. One reality. […]
February 1st, 2009 at 10:38 pm
This is interesting because it shows how fast Javascript can go. All we need now is a good web framework similar to Rails or Django, but based on JS. Then server-side JS can take off.
One thing these tests don’t take into account is when you have multiple tabs open in FF or IE, memory does leak a lot, and one hung script can bring down all tabs. Just like Windows 3.1 or Windows 95 from 15 years ago. Because of this, I still prefer Google Chrome because of its one-process-per-tab model. However, many browsers will do the same within the next 18 months, and then JS speed will become the next performance factor.
February 20th, 2009 at 5:14 am
Firefox is approximately twice as slow as Chrome, and Safari 4.0 was approximately 1.33x as slow as FF.
March 15th, 2009 at 5:56 am
[…] 更新：为了满足大家的好奇心，这里给出SFX和其他主要JavaScript引擎的对比。Charles Ying也在几个测试工具上进行了对比。 […]
March 17th, 2009 at 7:50 am
[…] nuovo motore JavaScript è già disponibile nelle nightly build di WebKit e, stando agli immancabili (parziali?) benchmark, sarebbe del 35% più veloce rispetto a V8 (Chrome) e del 55% rispetto a […]
April 30th, 2009 at 1:30 am
Ying also performed SunSpider tests that showed Squirrelfish beating Google’s V8 and Mozilla’s Tracemonkey on a 2.4GHz
April 30th, 2009 at 1:31 am
“Speed is not everything and we are not suckers for browsing speed. We want functionality!”
In the case of JS, speed is functionality. You can make so much better and more complicated web apps if the underlying engine – JS, can handle so much more than before.
June 4th, 2009 at 12:44 am
SquirrelFish Extreme: Fastest JavaScript Engine Yet. thanks
June 4th, 2009 at 12:46 am
thamks
June 7th, 2009 at 7:00 pm
FYI, I’m developing a Javascript-heavy Google Web Toolkit app (my first one) and Chrome is far, far faster than Opera, Firefox or IE8.
Case in point: When I initially wrote the code, I was using the (Java) split() method on a large string containing 180,000 delimiter-separated substrings to create a 180,000-element Javascript String array. Chrome completed that in less than a second, and Opera completed it more slowly, but still completed it. But Firefox and IE completely hung during the parsing of the string into that array. Their memory went up, up, up to about 1.5 GIGAbytes and then crashed downward to 50 MB. So, maybe they were doing some kind of dynamic array allocation (during the incremental construction of that array) which did not scale well, and that generated intermediate data that did not get cleaned up until the split() command had completed (and so, it never did complete, because the browser ran out of memory).
When I re-wrote the code to pre-allocate the entire array of strings, and then added my own code to parse the string into that pre-allocated array myself, all browsers were able to load it, although Chrome remained much faster than the others.
The speed increases on a page reload also seem greater than would be due solely to the caching of downloaded page content, and so it occurs to me that Chrome might be caching the intermediate Javascript objects somehow, in addition to the downloaded content of the page. Whatever it is doing, it is very impressive.
I would add as a Chrome user that there is nothing faster than Chrome that I have tried. I haven’t tried Squirrelfish yet, and perhaps never will, since my applications are aimed at the general public. But if I were developing something for internal use and could control the browsers that clients were using, or wanted to embed a browser in an application, then perhaps Squirrelfish would be a good choice.
June 8th, 2009 at 2:34 am
OK, excuse my ignorance, but I’m still not certain whether Squirrelfish is incorporated into the Safari 4 public beta. So, if it is, then, contrary to what I said above, of course I’ll be testing with it, since Safari’s market share is quite a bit larger than Chrome’s.
I will say that for my particular application, which has some very heavy Javascript processing as it indexes (on the client side) almost 180,000 words, Chrome runs the indexing (after the raw string data has been cached by the browser) in under one second, while Safari 4 takes almost 3 seconds. So, Chrome seems to be about three times as fast for this app, which is mostly Javascript processing.
The bottom line for developing public Web pages of course is to support every browser that has a substantial user base, so the issue of relative speed is somewhat academic. But, speaking academically, V8 seems to be a very good engine.
June 8th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
Hi
Wie Gehts dir
June 8th, 2009 at 2:27 pm
Gut Bay Dir
June 13th, 2009 at 1:30 am
Hi
Wie Gehts dir
July 4th, 2009 at 11:17 am
SquirrelFish Extreme: Fastest JavaScript Engine Yet. thanks
July 8th, 2009 at 1:51 am
Looks very interesting. Thanks for sharing..
http://fashionshow99.spaces.live.com
July 17th, 2009 at 12:25 pm
Very good, congratulations article
July 18th, 2009 at 5:41 am
I am grateful to you for this great content.
July 19th, 2009 at 5:52 am
“Speed is not everything and we are not suckers for browsing speed. We want functionality!”
In the case of JS, speed is functionality. You can make so much better and more complicated web apps if the underlying engine – JS, can handle so much more than before
July 23rd, 2009 at 8:21 am
OK, excuse my ignorance, but I’m still not certain whether Squirrelfish is incorporated into the Safari 4 public beta. So, if it is, then, contrary to what I said above, of course I’ll be testing with it, since Safari’s market share is quite a bit larger than Chrome’s.
I will say that for my particular application, which has some very heavy Javascript processing as it indexes (on the client side) almost 180,000 words, Chrome runs the indexing (after the raw string data has been cached by the browser) in under one second, while Safari 4 takes almost 3 seconds. So, Chrome seems to be about three times as fast for this app, which is mostly Javascript processing.
The bottom line for developing public Web pages of course is to support every browser that has a substantial user base, so the issue of relative speed is somewhat academic. But, speaking academically, V8 seems to be a very good engine.
August 19th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
When I re-wrote the code to pre-allocate the entire array of strings, and then added my own code to parse the string into that pre-allocated array myself, all browsers were able to load it, although Chrome remained much faster than the others.
August 21st, 2009 at 1:54 am
OK, excuse my ignorance, but I’m still not certain whether Squirrelfish is incorporated into the Safari 4 public beta. So, if it is, then, contrary to what I said above, of course I’ll be testing with it, since Safari’s market share is quite a bit larger than Chrome’s.
August 23rd, 2009 at 2:13 pm
thanks sharing good article.
August 28th, 2009 at 8:31 pm
[…] O novo interpretador Javascript está disponÃvel na última compilação Nightly do WebKit. Segundo alguns testes comparativos, a nova versão é cerca de 35% mais rápida do que o V8, recentemente utilizado pelo navegador do Google, o Chrome; e 55% mais rápido do que o TraceMonkey da Mozilla. […]
September 21st, 2009 at 4:24 pm
True, the Safari 4.0 beta didn’t have the latest version of Squirrelfish. But I was using a nightly build of FF3.1 as of approximately 3 weeks ago, and testing vs. the initial release of Chrome. You have FF handily beating Chrome on Dromaeo, which was the reverse of what I saw. I’ll download nightlies of FF and Webkit, and test vs. the latest Chrome, on SunSpider, Dromeaeo and Google’s V8 tester.
telefon dinleme
October 23rd, 2009 at 6:26 am
True, the Safari 4.0 beta didn’t have the latest version of Squirrelfish. But I was using a nightly build of FF3.1 as of approximately 3 weeks ago, and testing vs. the initial release of Chrome. You have FF handily beating Chrome on Dromaeo, which was the reverse of what I saw. I’ll download nightlies of FF and Webkit, and test vs. the latest Chrome, on SunSpider, Dromeaeo and Google’s V8 tester
November 20th, 2009 at 5:33 am
Your site doesn’t correctly work in Safari 4 in Mac OS X (4Version) :( Please help me How can I remove the problem?
November 21st, 2009 at 3:52 am
网站推广、网站SEO优化、网络宣传、网络炒作、博客炒作 我们的联系方式：QQ：781954265 打扰了！
December 7th, 2009 at 8:28 am
thanks for all it is very nice blog
December 19th, 2009 at 1:27 am
thanks sharing good article.
December 22nd, 2009 at 12:19 pm
this true ı like this blog
January 16th, 2010 at 8:31 pm
thank you everybody .This very important blog
January 17th, 2010 at 11:16 am
thaks for admin wanderfull blog
January 19th, 2010 at 8:18 am
Thanks for sharing this, and here is a question. How did you enable the extreme version of SquirrelFish? My understanding is, checking out the nightly of webkit and building it by default will generate the old version SquirrelFish instead of SquirrelFish Extreme. I also followed your direction to build and test SquirrelFish Extreme vs. V8 with SunSpider. I was using a 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro, SquirrelFish (Extreme?) spent 448ms, and V8 spent 446ms. That’s another reason that I think that I was running the old SquirrelFish. Comments? Thanks!
January 22nd, 2010 at 6:00 am
True, the Safari 4.0 beta didn’t have the latest version of Squirrelfish. But I was using a nightly build of FF3.1 as of approximately 3 weeks ago, and testing vs. the initial release of Chrome. You have FF handily beating Chrome on Dromaeo, which was the reverse of what I saw. I’ll download nightlies of FF and Webkit, and test vs. the latest Chrome, on SunSpider, Dromeaeo and Google’s V8 tester
January 23rd, 2010 at 9:10 am
thanks good work
January 23rd, 2010 at 12:59 pm
thnx for this good articles
February 2nd, 2010 at 2:38 am
It would indeed be nice to see a slower (e.g. IE) JS engine compared to it, even if its bar is so small it’s unreadable.
February 12th, 2010 at 7:08 am
şömine, the problem with the bars would be that other bars would be so long that they would seem identical :)
February 15th, 2010 at 1:55 pm
Bin schon seit lngerem stiller leser deines blogs und finde deine artikel sehr gut.In den letzten Wochen ist mir aber aufgefallen, dass dein Seitenlayout im Firefox Internet Browser total zerrissen ist… Ich kann deinen blog nur mit dem Internet Explorer lesen. Wre toll wenn du das problem beheben knntest
May 5th, 2010 at 11:57 pm
the problem with the bars would be that other bars would be so long that they would seem identical :)
June 9th, 2010 at 3:13 am
Good info thanks for sharing with us.Nice information, valuable and excellent, as share good stuff with good ideas and concepts, lots of great information and inspiration, both of which we all need, thanks for all the enthusiasm to offer such helpful information here…
June 15th, 2010 at 2:58 am
Your charts show Safari Windows at 7.9 to and Safari on OS X at 13.7 — are these on the same hardware? Why don’t you include IE8 in these benchmarks?
July 10th, 2010 at 8:52 am
OK, excuse my ignorance, but I’m still not certain whether Squirrelfish is incorporated into the Safari 4 public beta. So, if it is, then, contrary to what I said above, of course I’ll be testing with it, since Safari’s market share is quite a bit larger than Chrome’s. Medyum Niyazi
July 17th, 2010 at 6:52 am
It would indeed be nice to see a slower (e.g. IE) JS engine compared to it, even if its bar is so small it’s unreadable.
August 31st, 2010 at 2:34 am
An interesting approach to the topic, but I disagree.
September 9th, 2010 at 11:37 pm
Really wonderful piece of information and I appreciate it that you share something so useful with the readers of this blog
October 7th, 2010 at 2:31 am
Something is better than nothing, keep try to keep this “nothing” as well. Good Luck !!!
October 19th, 2010 at 12:30 am
the best thing about IE8 is that it is quite stable than previous releases of Internet Explorer.;’
November 26th, 2010 at 11:11 am
only be a matter of time before we see the next jump ahead. Some more benchmarks and comparisons to other browsers are available on Cameron Zwarich’s blog and on Charles
November 30th, 2010 at 1:28 pm
OK, excuse my ignorance, but I’m still not certain whether Squirrelfish is incorporated into the Safari 4 public beta. So, if it is, then, contrary to what I said above, of course I’ll be testing with it, since Safari’s market share is quite a bit larger than Chrome’s.