• On MovieTome: Why you didn't see Shatner in TREK
October 31, 2008 12:06 PM PDT

Third Chrome beta another notch faster

by Stephen Shankland
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 26 comments

On the SunSpider JavaScript peformance test, the new Google Chrome beta edges closer to TraceMonkey-enhanced Firefox. But the cutting-edge 'Minefield' version of Firefox edges ahead, too.

On the SunSpider JavaScript peformance test, the new Google Chrome beta edges closer to TraceMonkey-enhanced Firefox. But the cutting-edge 'Minefield' version of Firefox edges ahead, too.

(Credit: CNET News)

Google began updating Chrome users with the new beta version, and my performance tests show the company has ratcheted the browser's speed up another notch.

Google Chrome's latest version, 0.3.154.9, shows a 37 percent JavaScript performance improvement over the initial beta released two months ago.

JavaScript is a programming language used to add some pizazz to innumerable Web pages, but more importantly from Google's perspective, to power sophisticated Web applications such as Google Docs, Google Calendar, and Gmail. JavaScript is also up against Adobe Systems' Flash and Flex, Microsoft's Silverlight, and HTML 5, in the competition for what's the best foundation for Web applications.

Google has begun automatically updating all Chrome users to the new 0.3.154.9 beta version.

Google has begun automatically updating all Chrome users to the new 0.3.154.9 beta version.

(Credit: CNET News)

Using Google's JavaScript benchmark I pitted the newest Chrome beta, version 0.3.154.9, against both the initial beta from September and the more raw 0.3.154.3 developer release from mid-October. A higher number is better on this test, and the first beta scored 1,851, the 0.3.154.3 developer release 2,265, and the new 0.3.154.9 beta 2,546.

Google's tests aren't the only game in town; many use the SunSpider test. Here, too, the new Chrome got a notch faster, getting the test done in 2,546 milliseconds compared with 2,904 milliseconds for 0.3.154.3. (We couldn't test the first version because the testing site was down at the time.)

The new Chrome score catches closer to the 2,250 millisecond score of Firefox 3.1 beta 1 with its new TraceMonkey JavaScript engine enabled. (Tech-Recipes has useful instructions on how to enable TraceMonkey.)

On blogger Matt Asay's advice, I tested Minefield, the cutting-edge version of Firefox that's updated daily. (Minefield is downloadable from Mozilla's FTP site for those willing to use very untested software).

It had the best SunSpider score so far on my machine, 2,147 milliseconds. However, Firefox still lags on Google's speed test. Chrome's latest score of 2,546 is miles ahead of the 215 score from Minefield.

The latest beta version of Google Chrome is a notch faster on Google's JavaScript speed tests. The cutting-edge 'Minefield' version of Firefox takes a step back from the 3.1 beta 1.

The latest beta version of Google Chrome is a notch faster on Google's JavaScript speed tests, where a larger number is better. The cutting-edge 'Minefield' version of Firefox takes a step back from the the 3.1 beta 1 of Firefox, without the new TraceMonkey JavaScript engine enabled. All the Firefox versions trail Chrome on this test significantly.

(Credit: CNET News)

There could be something fishy going on here, though: Minefield, which has TraceMonkey turned on, actually is slower than Firefox 3.1 beta 1 with TraceMonkey turned off, which is hardly the result you'd expect for a JavaScript speed test. TraceMonkey-enabled Firefox 3.1 beta 1 couldn't run the test because of a bug, and though that bug was fixed in Minefield, there could be something else awry.

And again with the caveats: These tests were run on a dual-core Windows XP machine, and your mileage will undoubtedly vary. They're synthetic benchmarks that may not accurately represent all the particular JavaScript you have to run. And JavaScript isn't the sole measure of a browser's speed.

Stephen Shankland writes about a wide range of technology and products, but has a particular focus on browsers and digital photography. He joined CNET News in 1998 and since then also has covered Google, Yahoo, servers, supercomputing, Linux and open-source software, and science. E-mail Stephen, or follow him on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/stshank.
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (26 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
by B-Ri October 31, 2008 12:41 PM PDT
Now if they would only release the Mac client...
Reply to this comment
by jaybarrow October 31, 2008 1:07 PM PDT
According to Google's website, the Mac version is in development. Of course they've been saying that... but you can sign up for info regarding the Mac client at Google.
Reply to this comment
by markur69 October 31, 2008 1:45 PM PDT
why don't you add WebKit with SquirrelFish Extreme as its JavaScript interpreter. I think it might beat all these browsers. It will eventually become Safari 4.0. It's beta and is running very well on my Mac OS 10.5.5. Nightly builds are available. Please throw this one into the mix, especially if you are throwing Alpha and just released Beta's of Chrome. They use the same underprinings, as I understand it.

See http://webkit.org

regards

Mark Buckley
Reply to this comment
by Shankland November 1, 2008 7:06 AM PDT
Yes, I probably will next time around. I was shying away from the nightly builds, but was curious about Minefield so I could get around the Firefox 3.1b1 bug that blocked it from running Google's test. So next time, perhaps....
by googlerox October 31, 2008 4:41 PM PDT
Does anyone know the exact date that Google Chrome full browser will come out?
Reply to this comment
by askj113 November 1, 2008 11:10 PM PDT
It is out, really. It's just typical google to say its in beta. I mean, gmail's probably never going to come out of beta
by Major Kirtar October 31, 2008 6:12 PM PDT
O-P-E-R-A
Reply to this comment
by unknown unknown November 1, 2008 1:53 AM PDT
it sucks.
by Deekman October 31, 2008 6:24 PM PDT
Would someone PLEASE test Opera so the nerds will shut up? We all know it's slower; put in on a graph for pete's sake.
Reply to this comment
by AnthonyNYC October 31, 2008 7:50 PM PDT
OK so I see that IE is so much slower but it has cool features, mainly one I use all the time, scroll and zoom! and being able to zoom into pictures on the web to see details is so important to me. Chrome was lacking this basic feature so far, so because of that I will continue to use IE7.
:)
Reply to this comment
by imacpwr October 31, 2008 8:53 PM PDT
quote: "Chrome got a notch faster, getting the test done in 2,546 milliseconds compared with 2,904 milliseconds"

Oh yea... like the naked eye can really see the difference..?!?!
Reply to this comment
by IndieArmy November 1, 2008 6:47 AM PDT
After a few minutes of browsing, those milliseconds add up. So yes, you will be able to notice a difference.
by amwayorlando October 31, 2008 9:20 PM PDT
Sunspider Test Results.
Google Chrome 0.3.154.9---
============================================
RESULTS (means and 95% confidence intervals)
--------------------------------------------
Total: 1584.8ms +/- 5.4%
--------------------------------------------


Minefield---
============================================
RESULTS (means and 95% confidence intervals)
--------------------------------------------
Total: 1918.2ms +/- 4.8%
--------------------------------------------


Test Environment:
Intel T7500 2.2 G CPU.
3GB RAM
Windows Vista SP1
Reply to this comment
by Shankland November 1, 2008 7:07 AM PDT
Interesting. Like I say, your mileage may vary.
by OscarWeb November 1, 2008 2:14 AM PDT
SunSpider Results using Safari 4.0 (5528.1)
============================================
RESULTS (means and 95% confidence intervals)
--------------------------------------------
Total: 1764.4ms +/- 1.2%
--------------------------------------------

MacBook (early-2008) 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM, OS X 10.5.5
Reply to this comment
by rogerpack2005 November 1, 2008 8:05 PM PDT
I love chrome's speed--faster than FF3 on my machine...but recently I went to a friend's blog, ignored warnings that it had malware, and it subsequently downloaded and ran an executable [without prompting me] which installed "antispyware2009" and rebooted my computer. And now I can't seem to get rid of it. I am NOT using chrome until they have a stable version which hasn't shown any security glitches for a few months :)

Then I'll be back, google, don't you worry.
Reply to this comment
by askj113 November 1, 2008 11:12 PM PDT
Wait, if I read it right doesn't that sound more like user error then a security glitch?
by DragonRich November 2, 2008 5:09 PM PST
<ahem> "I went to a friend's blog, IGNORED WARNINGS THAT IT HAD MALWARE"

Was there something you could have done to not get that unwanted installation; other than pay attention to the warnings? Is it CHROME or did you simply just ignore the warning? I'm thinking of installing this browser to see how it works on Vista. I love FIrefox but if this is faster....then I want it!
by bigmc6000 November 3, 2008 5:28 AM PST
warning or not the app shouldn't allow anything to install without permission and saying "ignore" is not the same as saying "install". Maybe he shouldn't have hit ignore but I'm sure he's been to his friend's blog many times using FF and nothing installed so he was basically lulled into a false sense of security from FF. Google needs to fix it - no downloading without explicit consent.
by strongpimphand November 3, 2008 7:02 AM PST
instead of complaining to CNET, you need to be complaining to your "friend" that his blog has malware....

.....or, quit pirating from untrusty blogs
by blahblahz November 3, 2008 12:42 PM PST
It probably exploited a security flaw in an out of date plugin (Flash, Quicktime, Java, etc). The warnings are warnings for a reason.
by The User November 3, 2008 6:02 AM PST
What's a point of Chrome again? IE and Safari are out of competition - they come pre-installed and most of the users will not bother exploring other avenues. FireFox - seems to be faster based on the tests, it has by far better UI and in the features department Chrome looks more of a "Ford Model A" comparing to a '09 Mercedes S-Class represented by FireFox. What's the point of Chrome again?
Reply to this comment
by bigmc6000 November 3, 2008 7:32 AM PST
*waves magic wand* Repeat after me - "I LOVE Google, I LOVE Google, I LOVE Google" ;)
by Sparky650 November 4, 2008 12:17 AM PST
Not really caring about Chrome at this point. I was fast but, very user unfriendly. I found no way to get back to my links page.
Reply to this comment
by Linearly November 5, 2008 7:38 PM PST
SunSpider Results using Chromium 0.3.155.0 Build 4705
============================================
RESULTS (means and 95% confidence intervals)
--------------------------------------------
Total: 990.4ms +/- 2.4%
--------------------------------------------

(link to results @ http://tinyurl.com/sunspider-chromeresult )

Core 2 e6600 @ 2.8GHz
4GB DDR2
Windows XP x64 Professional SP2

Unless i did something wrong, thats a rather fast run of SunSpider compared to other results ... i ran it a few more times and it was comparable in speed to that one
Reply to this comment
by Linearly November 5, 2008 8:06 PM PST
I was bored, so decided to run a few more tests, and i think something is wrong (10points if you can guess where they might be)

SunSpider Results using Chromium 0.3.155.0 Build 4705
============================================
RESULTS (means and 95% confidence intervals)
--------------------------------------------
Total: 963.2ms +/- 1.6%
--------------------------------------------

SunSpider Results using Internet Explorer 7.0.5730.13
============================================
RESULTS (means and 95% confidence intervals)
--------------------------------------------
Total: 22461.2ms +/- 0.5%
--------------------------------------------

SunSpider Results using Opera 9.62 Build 10467
============================================
RESULTS (means and 95% confidence intervals)
--------------------------------------------
Total: 3216.2ms +/- 1.0%
--------------------------------------------

SunSpider Results using FireFox 3.0.3
============================================
RESULTS (means and 95% confidence intervals)
--------------------------------------------
Total: 2516.4ms +/- 0.9%
--------------------------------------------

SunSpider Results using Safari 3.1.2 Build 525.21
============================================
RESULTS (means and 95% confidence intervals)
--------------------------------------------
Total: 3010.0ms +/- 1.1%
--------------------------------------------
(26 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement
Click Here

About Webware

Say No to boxed software! The future of applications is online delivery and access. Software is passé. Webware is the new way to get things done.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Webware topics

Inside the Apple, er, Microsoft Store

Although Redmond's foray into retail bears a big resemblance to Apple's approach, Microsoft has added some distinctive features to draw casual PC buyers and techies alike.

Big marketing budget drives Moto Droid sales

Verizon and Motorola are spending big bucks--$100 million--on marketing the new smartphone, and it looks like it will pay off with 1 million devices sold by year's end.

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right