satine.org

by Charles Ying

SquirrelFish Extreme: Fastest JavaScript Engine Yet

September 19th, 2008

After 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:

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)
  • 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

    • The Windows benchmarks ran on different test hardware from the Mac OS X and engine benchmarks.

    Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , ,

104 Responses to “SquirrelFish Extreme: Fastest JavaScript Engine Yet”

  1. Surfin’ Safari - Blog Archive » Introducing SquirrelFish Extreme Says:

    [...] UPDATE: For the curious, here are some comparisons of SFX to other leading JavaScript engines. Charles Ying has comparisons on a few more benchmarks. [...]

  2. Damian Cugley Says:

    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…

  3. oliver Says:

    Who cares for JS speed as long as the browser can be crashed by Flash content.

  4. ethana2 Says:

    Yay progress!

  5. Charles Ying Says:

    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.

  6. coolfactor Says:

    @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.

  7. Andy Says:

    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.

  8. Jon Says:

    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.

  9. WebKit Team Introduces SquirrelFish Extreme | FarukAt.eş Says:

    [...] 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. [...]

  10. Enola Says:

    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.

  11. Another Jon Says:

    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.

  12. Featured Freeware: CinemaForge (DownloadExaminer.com) | Desktop | Shareware and Freeware News, Reviews, Articles and Photos. Says:

    [...] Ying also performed SunSpider tests that showed Squirrelfish beating Google’s V8 and Mozilla’s Tracemonkey on a 2.4GHz [...]

  13. SquirrelFish Extreme: Faster than SquirrelFish, Google Chrome and Firefox 3.1? Says:

    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!…

  14. Vincent Says:

    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.

  15. WebKit still in the lead at Kevin’s blog Says:

    [...] More charts! Courtesy of here. [...]

  16. Web browser race - Java scripting engine >> Fu4ny | Fun for You Says:

    [...] 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 [...]

  17. buddyglass Says:

    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

  18. Charles Ying Says:

    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.

  19. buddyglass Says:

    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.

  20. buddyglass Says:

    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)

  21. Experience: Firefox into turbo mode! - Performance improvements coming for Firefox 3.1 - India Broadband Forum Says:

    [...] 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 [...]

  22. SquirrelFish Extreme: WebKit’s new Javascript Engine « Rudimentary Art of Programming & Development Says:

    [...] Charles Ying compiles a few more comparisons [...]

  23. gt.grf » Blog Archive » webkit의 새로운 자바스크립트엔진 Says:

    [...] 따르면 safari3보다 3배이상 빠르다고 하는데 다른 사이트의 테스트에 의하면 구글크롬보다도 빠른 벤치마크를 기록했다고 [...]

  24. Chrome Javascript-engine dethroned - Security and the Net Says:

    [...] Ling adds a comparison to Chrome’s V8 engine as [...]

  25. Revamped WebKit JavaScript Engine Doubles In Speed « A Writer’s Diary Says:

    [...] 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 [...]

  26. buddyglass Says:

    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.

  27. buddyglass Says:

    Oh. Duh. They’re right there. I look like a moron now. :)

  28. Step aside, Chrome, for Squirrelfish Extreme (DownloadExaminer.com) | Desktop | Shareware and Freeware News, Reviews, Articles and Photos. Says:

    [...] Ying also performed SunSpider tests that showed Squirrelfish beating Google’s V8 and Mozilla’s Tracemonkey on a 2.4GHz [...]

  29. teamCue’s Official Blog » SquirrelFish Extreme increases JavaScript performance a LOT Says:

    [...] 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, [...]

  30. movie fan Says:

    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

  31. Links for 2008-09-19 [del.icio.us] - Technology Info Says:

    [...] inside looking out » Blog Archive » SquirrelFish Extreme: Fastest JavaScript Engine Yet [...]

  32. SFX (SquirrelFish Extreme) : Engine JavaScript Tercepat « BERITANET ::Informasi Teknologi Terkini :: Says:

    [...] membandingkan kinerja SFX dengan engine JavaScript lain, Charles Ying telah menguji SFX dengan V8 dan TraceMonkey melalui command line untuk memastikan hasil yang [...]

  33. DaVince Says:

    “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.

  34. pingooo Says:

    It would be nice to see the scores of each individual tests since different real world web applications use javascript differently.

  35. JavaScript performance: SquirrelFish Extreme « Fernando Correia’s Weblog Says:

    [...] SquirrelFish Extreme: Fastest JavaScript Engine Yet [...]

  36. gigi Says:

    And why they don’t test it vs Internet Explorer? I think IE it’s the fastest.

  37. More JavaScript Engine Benchmarks « Recycleosphere Says:

    [...] JavaScript Engine Benchmarks More JavaScript Engine Benchmarks: “Some interesting performance differences between Mac and Windows with the Dromaeo [...]

  38. Tony Arnold Says:

    @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.

  39. JavaScript for RIA gets yet another boost from WebKit SquirrelFish « Technology is Fascinating Says:

    [...] According certain other studies SquirrelFish is reported to have beaten Google’s V8 and Mozilla’s TraceMonkey on performance. Click here for that study. [...]

  40. implemented Says:

    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. ……

  41. Step aside, Chrome, for Squirrelfish Extreme Says:

    [...] Ying also performed SunSpider tests that showed Squirrelfish beating Google’s V8 and Mozilla’s Tracemonkey on a 2.4GHz [...]

  42. Squirrelfish Extreme | Continúa la carrera de navegadores más rápidos - Que 2.0 Says:

    [...] 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 [...]

  43. BLOG::Nivaldo » Blog Archive » SquirrelFish extreme x V8 x TraceMonkey Says:

    [...] Fonte: http://webkit.org/blog/214/introducing-squirrelfish-extreme/ http://www.satine.org/archives/2008/09/19/squirrelfish-extreme-fastest-javascript-engine-yet/ [...]

  44. WebKit、新JavaScriptエンジン「SquirrelFish Extreme」発表でSafari高速化へ - PJNN今日のスーパーニュース速報 Says:

    [...] 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 % [...]

  45. Squirellfish diventa Extreme: sorpasso a Chrome e Firefox « marko’s weblog Says:

    [...] 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 [...]

  46. WebKit ponownie najszybszą przegladarką na rynku! tak, szybszą od Google Chrome | Says:

    [...] odczucie ma Charles Ying, który na blogu opublikował wyniki dwóch testów Dromaeo (Mozilla) i SunSupder (WebKit) dla SFX, Chromium V8, a [...]

  47. Most Fastester Browser in the World (Evar) | Machaxor.net Says:

    [...] promised us in the original SquirrelFish announcement to bring us SquirrelFish Extreme, by far the most fastester javascript engine in the world [...]

  48. Introducing SquirrelFish Extreme | Thetroubleshooting Blog Says:

    [...] UPDATE: For the curious, here are some comparisons of SFX to other leading JavaScript engines. Charles Ying has comparisons on a few more benchmarks. [...]

  49. Helmut-Blog » Blog Archive » Server Side v8 JavaScript Says:

    [...] 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 [...]

  50. JavaScript Wars - Clogged Tubes Says:

    [...] Now… SquirrelFish Extreme. Tacky name, but damn, does it look fast. [...]

  51. e-okul Says:

    Hi,

    Charles Ying compiles a few more comparisons

  52. free anti spam Says:

    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

  53. free anti spam Says:

    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

  54. Is It Just Me? - Page 417 - Tech Support Forums - TechIMO.com Says:

    [...] 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. [...]

  55. Jay Godse Says:

    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.

  56. Exteme Mobile Phone Spy Says:

    Firefox is approximately twice as slow as Chrome, and Safari 4.0 was approximately 1.33x as slow as FF.

  57. 金鳞鱼越游越快,极限版横空出世 « 七月佑安 Says:

    [...] 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。 [...]

  58. Who » Squirellfish diventa Extreme: sorpasso a Chrome e Firefox Says:

    [...] 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 [...]

  59. medyum Says:

    Ying also performed SunSpider tests that showed Squirrelfish beating Google’s V8 and Mozilla’s Tracemonkey on a 2.4GHz

  60. medyum Says:

    “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.

  61. şiir Says:

    SquirrelFish Extreme: Fastest JavaScript Engine Yet. thanks

  62. hikaye Says:

    thamks

  63. Carl Says:

    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.

  64. Carl Says:

    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.

  65. e-okul Says:

    Hi

    Wie Gehts dir

  66. samsun Says:

    Gut Bay Dir

  67. Bağlama Büyüsü Says:

    Hi

    Wie Gehts dir

  68. hikaye Says:

    SquirrelFish Extreme: Fastest JavaScript Engine Yet. thanks

  69. Point of Sale Says:

    Looks very interesting. Thanks for sharing..

    http://fashionshow99.spaces.live.com

  70. aöf Says:

    Very good, congratulations article

  71. cinsellik Says:

    I am grateful to you for this great content.

  72. radyo dinle Says:

    “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

  73. zerrin egeliler Says:

    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.

  74. göğüs estetiği Says:

    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.

  75. Bağlama Büyüsü Says:

    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.

  76. uşak haber Says:

    thanks sharing good article.

  77. Motor Javascript do WebKit é 35% mais rápido que o do Chrome » AKINFORMÁTICA Says:

    [...] O novo interpretador Javascript está disponível 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. [...]

  78. telefon dinleme Says:

    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

  79. Medyumlar Says:

    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

  80. Single Says:

    Your site doesn’t correctly work in Safari 4 in Mac OS X (4Version) :( Please help me How can I remove the problem?

  81. 网络推广 Says:

    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!

  82. nazar Says:

    thanks for all it is very nice blog

  83. ankara parke Says:

    thanks sharing good article.

  84. insaat Says:

    this true ı like this blog

  85. yazici Says:

    thank you everybody .This very important blog

  86. aşk büyüsü Says:

    thaks for admin wanderfull blog

  87. Harry Says:

    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!

  88. kapadokya Says:

    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

  89. medyum Says:

    thanks good work

  90. ehliyet sınav sonuçları Says:

    thnx for this good articles

  91. şömine Says:

    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.

  92. Henno Says:

    şömine, the problem with the bars would be that other bars would be so long that they would seem identical :)

  93. Dennis Swearingen Says:

    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

  94. Aşık Etme Büyüsü Says:

    the problem with the bars would be that other bars would be so long that they would seem identical :)

  95. Eryaman hali yikama Says:

    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…

  96. Rus-women.com Says:

    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?

  97. medyum Says:

    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

  98. tercüme büroları Says:

    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.

  99. çeviri büroları Says:

    An interesting approach to the topic, but I disagree.

  100. Nike Rift Says:

    Really wonderful piece of information and I appreciate it that you share something so useful with the readers of this blog

  101. Cell Phone Spy Reviews Says:

    Something is better than nothing, keep try to keep this “nothing” as well. Good Luck !!!

  102. Natural Treatments  Says:

    the best thing about IE8 is that it is quite stable than previous releases of Internet Explorer.;’

  103. ankara evden eve nakliye Says:

    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

  104. zafer Says:

    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.