Overclock.net › Forums › Software, Programming and Coding › Other Software › Waterfox 31.0: 28 July [Firefox 64-Bit]
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Waterfox 31.0: 28 July [Firefox 64-Bit] - Page 220

post #2191 of 6051
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by FTBBTF View Post

The installer doesn't have it. Get either, they do the same thing, but tcmalloc version should be faster.

Here are my results for Waterfox 12 (Installer). Link.

Adblock Plus + Flash + Tweaks

Score: 4866 on Google v8

tcmalloc version

Score: 4863 on Google v8

Here is the link for Dromaeo. Link.

Both do the same for me. No real difference between them.

 

I don't think it will affect JavaScript benchmarks very much. Have you tried Browsermark or peacekeeper?

Edit:

Now that I'm running benchmarks today, the scores seem to be even. I'm wondering why when I first tested them I got such different scores in the benchmarks.


Edited by MrAlex - 4/28/12 at 4:59am
    
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i7-4650U Intel HD Graphics 5000 Samsung 8GB DDR3 Samsung 512GB SSD 
OS
Macintosh OS X "Mavericks" 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i7-4650U Intel HD Graphics 5000 Samsung 8GB DDR3 Samsung 512GB SSD 
OS
Macintosh OS X "Mavericks" 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2192 of 6051
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrAlex View Post



I don't think it will affect JavaScript benchmarks very much. Have you tried Browsermark or peacekeeper?
Edit:
Now that I'm running benchmarks today, the scores seem to be even. I'm wondering why when I first tested them I got such different scores in the benchmarks.

Why are you using browsermark? :S It's for mobile phone's browsers and it's completely unreliable.
post #2193 of 6051
Quote:
Originally Posted by psxlover View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrAlex View Post



I don't think it will affect JavaScript benchmarks very much. Have you tried Browsermark or peacekeeper?
Edit:
Now that I'm running benchmarks today, the scores seem to be even. I'm wondering why when I first tested them I got such different scores in the benchmarks.

Why are you using browsermark? :S It's for mobile phone's browsers and it's completely unreliable.

Probably cause that's all there is and it's a reasonable benchmark for baseline comparisons? Maybe? Why, you got something better? eh-smiley.gif

~Ceadder smil3dbd4e4c2e742.gif
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T Crosshair IV Formula Sapphire Radeon HD 6870 Sapphire Radeon HD 6870 
RAMRAMHard DriveOptical Drive
G. Skill Ripjaws X G. Skill x2 HITACHI 1TB Deskstars 1TB RAID0 ASUS DRW-24B1ST  
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
EK Supreme High Flow EK Full Coverage Block PrimoChill 1/2"x3/4" tubing EK Black Nickel Compression Fitting 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Enzotech 45 Degree Rotary Fitting EK Dual DDC V2 top Swiftech Pump DDC-1T (2) Liquid Fusion V Double helix Reservoir 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
Koolance Black Nickel 2-3 VGA Bridge(temporaril... Yate Loon 120x20 (D12SM-12C) Medium Speed Silen... EK Supreme HF Classified Win7 64 bit Ultimate OEM 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Asus VH222H Black HDMI Widescreen Logitech the OCZ went buhbye adios. Don't know ... Corsair CMPSU HX 850w Modular HAF 932 
MouseMouse PadAudioOther
Logitech g9x COOLER MASTER Weapon of Choice: M4 Duramesh Pad Logitech X-240 2.1 speakers Sunbeam Rheosmart 3 
OtherOther
Creative X-Fi Microsoft Lifecam Cinema 
  hide details  
Reply
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
AMD Phenom II X6 1100T Crosshair IV Formula Sapphire Radeon HD 6870 Sapphire Radeon HD 6870 
RAMRAMHard DriveOptical Drive
G. Skill Ripjaws X G. Skill x2 HITACHI 1TB Deskstars 1TB RAID0 ASUS DRW-24B1ST  
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
EK Supreme High Flow EK Full Coverage Block PrimoChill 1/2"x3/4" tubing EK Black Nickel Compression Fitting 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Enzotech 45 Degree Rotary Fitting EK Dual DDC V2 top Swiftech Pump DDC-1T (2) Liquid Fusion V Double helix Reservoir 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
Koolance Black Nickel 2-3 VGA Bridge(temporaril... Yate Loon 120x20 (D12SM-12C) Medium Speed Silen... EK Supreme HF Classified Win7 64 bit Ultimate OEM 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Asus VH222H Black HDMI Widescreen Logitech the OCZ went buhbye adios. Don't know ... Corsair CMPSU HX 850w Modular HAF 932 
MouseMouse PadAudioOther
Logitech g9x COOLER MASTER Weapon of Choice: M4 Duramesh Pad Logitech X-240 2.1 speakers Sunbeam Rheosmart 3 
OtherOther
Creative X-Fi Microsoft Lifecam Cinema 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2194 of 6051
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrAlex View Post



I don't think it will affect JavaScript benchmarks very much. Have you tried Browsermark or peacekeeper?
Edit:
Now that I'm running benchmarks today, the scores seem to be even. I'm wondering why when I first tested them I got such different scores in the benchmarks.

I haven't tried them, but since you've tried Dromaeo I wanted to offer my feedback on both and I've ran Google v8 since it's a known test.
Honestly I see too many variations with browsers these days and the scores people post on the Internet are just out of my reach 100% of the time, unless they have a slower computer (I still have a Core 2 Duo T9300 @ 2.5Ghz and 4GB of RAM with Windows 7 Enterprise SP1 x64, so I'm on a pretty fast computer for 90% of the tasks).

I have noticed something though and it's a bit interesting: in Dromaeo I, by habit, minimized the browser, as to not bother me. The result: CPU usage went down from ~50% to ~35%. I had to redo the test, just to not have variations.

Either way, if you look at the Dromaeo results you will see that for each test they provide a margin of error. If you look at my tests, the results for tcmalloc version have a higher degree of error (+/- 25% in some cases), while for the installer version the degree of error is smaller -> more consistent results.

In the end, what really matters is the rendering speed for me. The times it takes to press the button -> page finished loading. All browsers are very fast and the differences are minimal these days. Even IE9 is plenty fast nowadays for what most people need. It's weird that Firefox 12 is not really faster than Firefox 10 even 9, while Chrome improved a little. It's time for a redesigned browser and x64 support from Mozilla, as to improve from an already optimized base.
post #2195 of 6051
I've got some results :

Peacekeeper

Firefox 12 stock : 1947 http://peacekeeper.futuremark.com/results?key=5LT7

Waterfox 12 w/o tcmalloc : 2035 http://peacekeeper.futuremark.com/results?key=5LTa

Waterfox 12 w/ tcmalloc : 2199 http://peacekeeper.futuremark.com/results?key=5LTL


SunSpider

Firefox 12 stock : 228ms

Waterfox 12 w/o tcmalloc : 218ms

Waterfox 12 w/ tcmalloc : 207ms
Edited by Xenthos - 4/28/12 at 4:48pm
post #2196 of 6051
i have some weird stuff going on with waterfox 12 auto triggering ctrl key when pages load (usually).

not sure if thats because i came from a waterfox 10 profile... (with nearly 150 tabs)

has anyone had similar experience?
post #2197 of 6051
Congratulations and many thanks for your nice project.

Does WF12 support background (silent) updates w/o UAC? I miss the checkbox "Use background service to install updates" in Tools/Options/Advanced/Update. Did I anything wrong during installation?
post #2198 of 6051
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xenthos View Post

I've got some results :
Peacekeeper
Firefox 12 stock : 1947 http://peacekeeper.futuremark.com/results?key=5LT7
Waterfox 12 w/o tcmalloc : 2035 http://peacekeeper.futuremark.com/results?key=5LTa
Waterfox 12 w/ tcmalloc : 2199 http://peacekeeper.futuremark.com/results?key=5LTL
SunSpider
Firefox 12 stock : 228ms
Waterfox 12 w/o tcmalloc : 218ms
Waterfox 12 w/ tcmalloc : 207ms

Try quoting yourself. You've got quite some long links there, lol...

Have you tried to redo the tests? For SunSpider the difference is not really real, minimal at best. But there is a difference which is more substantial between them in Peacekeeper. Interesting...
post #2199 of 6051
Quote:
Originally Posted by FTBBTF View Post

Try quoting yourself. You've got quite some long links there, lol...
Have you tried to redo the tests? For SunSpider the difference is not really real, minimal at best. But there is a difference which is more substantial between them in Peacekeeper. Interesting...

yeah, those SunSpider links are horrible, tried to cover them up with hyper-links.

I used SunSpider because I'm too inpatient to wait for a lengthy benchmark. biggrin.gif

Peacekeeper results are interesting indeed, although from real world experience I thought that waterfox w/o tcmalloc "felt" smoother.
post #2200 of 6051
I have been having an issue with waterfox on one of my computer where I end up with over 100 instances of firefox.exe (waterfox actually). I have tried to uninstall reboot then reinstall, but the issue still occurs. It only happens if I have waterfox running. I have also set IE as my default browser, but no extra instances of iexplore.exe show up.

Any thoughts on what I can do? All the processes really slow down computing and browsing experience.

Thanks!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Other Software
Overclock.net › Forums › Software, Programming and Coding › Other Software › Waterfox 31.0: 28 July [Firefox 64-Bit]