Internet Browser test mark

bulldog147

bulldog147

bulldog147

Soldato
Joined
22 Mar 2009
Posts
5,765
Check this out both : http://html5test.com and http://acid3.acidtests.org on your IE9, Firefox 4 and Google Chrome!

Google Chrome came out the best higher mark!

IE9 Acid3 score 95 out of 100
FF4 Acid3 score 97 out of 100
GC Acid3 score 100 out of 100

IE9 score 130 and 5 bonus points out of a total of 400 points on html test
FF4 score 255 and 9 bonus points out of a total of 400 points on html test
GC score 288 and 13 bonus points out of a total of 400 points on html test
 
Last edited:
Only marginally and only then it was in the HTML5 test. Both FF4 and Chrome 10 (latest stable versions) get 97/100 on Acid 3 and FF4 gets 264 while Chrome 10 leads with 301.
 
Khaaan! said:
Only marginally and only then it was in the HTML5 test. Both FF4 and Chrome 10 (latest stable versions) get 97/100 on Acid 3 and FF4 gets 264 while Chrome 10 leads with 301.
Click to expand...

Did you tweak Chrome by using about:config settings, or did you use any add-ons or plug-ins? What is your Chrome's version number?

Mine is: 10.0.648.151

Cheers :D
 
Aye 288 with 13 bonus points, I just added the two together, figured why not since they're bonus points? :p

Seems the majority of Firefox's missing points are in the media elements, this was expected though I guess.
 
These kind of benchmarks only tell half a story at the best of times.

Example, I cant remeber which browser it was, but it was accused of simply optimising for the benchmark, rather then actually being standards compliant.

Also, I ran one of those benchmarks, and Firefox loses points for not having support for the AAC codec. But AAc is a proprietory codec, which is why there is no support.

Thats the whole point of the open web. Something Microsoft has been forced to realise, since Firefox and then Chrome, left it in the dust.

More importantly however which is something none of these benchmarks are measureing is security.

Microsoft simply cannot compete in these reagrd with open source methodologies.
 
I think all the browsers got accused of optimising for benchmarks they created (or helped create) :p

The article itself was posted on a Mozilla blog somewhere, the link was reposted here somewhere.

That wasn't very helpful was it lol :(
 
bulldog147 said:
How about this security test: http://bcheck.scanit.be/bcheck
Click to expand...

Im talking about exploits in the wild.

ALL browser are buggy and can be exploited, its just that the information or the technologies/knowledge to do so hasnt been uncovered.

The difference here lies in the fact that Mozilla and Google are proactive with their security. Something, gets uncovered and is activily being exploued, it gets patch pronto.

Microsoft, umm and ahh for a while, say ok well we will patch it in the upcoming patch Tuesday (3-4 weeks away), Patch Tuesday rolls around, and research uncover the fact that Microsoft have intentionally omited a patch for a vulnerability, for god knows what reason.

An exaple of which there are 100's down the years, can be found in the last Patch Tuesday, where an MHTML bug being activly exploited in the wild didnt get patched, and security researchers where asking why?

If this was Firefox or Chrome, the respective companies would be on the case pronto, to patch it up and job done.... not compromise.

Also just look at the last pawn2own. Both Firefox and Chrome stood unbroken, where as IE, was trashed I think in seconds. Literally (10 secs I think)

Reported in January still unfixed:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/zd/20110313/tc_zd/261766

Solution? Chrome or Firefox.
 
Last edited:
306 :p Shows you how frenetic Chrome development is.

293.png


These tests aren't the be-all-and-end-all - a lot of the features tested are bleeding-edge stuff which actual websites don't use. Plus, implementing a feature doesn't necessarily mean you've implemented it correctly.

Having said that, the test does show up how patchy IE9's HTML5 support is once you move away from the Microsoft-curated batch of tests. (I know that a lot of the technologies tested aren't strictly HTML5, but... no HTML5 form types? No drag and drop? Those are going to be important features.)
 
Last edited:
opethdisciple said:
These kind of benchmarks only tell half a story at the best of times.

Example, I cant remeber which browser it was, but it was accused of simply optimising for the benchmark, rather then actually being standards compliant.

Also, I ran one of those benchmarks, and Firefoxr4 loses points for not having support for the AAC codec. But AAc is a proprietory codec, which is why there is no support.

Thats the whole point of the open web. Something Microsoft has been forced to realise, since Firefox and then Chrome, left it in the dust.
.
Click to expand...

Yes, You are right. I have similar opinion. I am working on it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom