One main reason that could be is that one browser (Waterfox) was compiled using Intel’s C++ compiler instead of Visual C++ (tho, they’ve switched to Clang compiler).

With that being said, I do find that the Memory usage (RAM) is very similar to the test, however for me, the overall performance has increased. While Marin did test the vanilla version of Firefox, I’ve been using several other Firefox derivative 64-browsers before Mozilla fully implemented it. Now You: Do you prefer 32-bit or 64-bit versions of browsers? Most differences are marginal and not visible to the user sitting in front of the device. Results are quite surprising, not only because of the hangs and freezes experienced during benchmarks, but also because of the performance parity between 32-bit and 64-bit versions of the same browser. As far as 32-bit and 64-bit version performance is concerned, it is close and unlikely that anyone will notice differences while using the browser. Performance was on-pair with Google Chrome with only marginal differences between the two.

The 64-bit version on the other hand used the second highest RAM count of all browsers in the test. Vivaldi's RAM usage was quite good on start and acceptable with ten websites open in the 32-bit version of the browser. The 64-bit version did not perform as well as the 32-bit version in most benchmarks, and both versions froze during the JetStream benchmark. RAM use was higher both on start and after loading the ten sample sites in the Pale Moon browser. It is somewhat surprising that the 64-bit version of Chrome uses nearly the same amount of RAM as the 32-bit version once all 10 sample websites were loaded.Īs far as tests are concerned, the 64-bit version performed better in benchmarks, but both Chrome versions froze during the RoboHornet and Dromaeo benchmarks. The difference in RAM on start can be attributed to the loading of additional pages on start in the 32-bit version. RAM use was nearly identical in both versions of the Google Chrome web browser. That's to be expected but something one should consider especially on devices where RAM is scarce.īenchmarks on the other hand show only marginal differences which means that users won't see a performance boost in either version when compared to the other. RAM usage is nearly the same on start but once all ten websites were fully loaded it was apparent that the 64-bit version of Firefox used way more RAM than the 32-bit version. In addition, it did not freeze while running the RoboHornet benchmark while Google Chrome did. Every other browser experienced at least one freeze while running the benchmarks.Īnother interesting observation is that Vivaldi outperforms Google Chrome in some benchmarks and with RAM usage even though it is still a beta release. The only two browsers that ran all tests without freezes or hangs were Mozilla Firefox and Microsoft Edge. Google Chrome did not completeÂ the RoboHornet and Dromaeo benchmarks, Pale Moon froze while running the JetStream benchmark, and Vivaldi froze running the Dromaeo benchmark. One surprising result of the tests that I ran was that hangs were experienced quite frequently. The benchmarks test the browser's JavaScript performance. While RAM usage is not that much of an issue anymore on modern systems that come equipped with 4 Gigabyte of RAM or more, it needs to be considered that the browser is just one of the programs run on a system and that a high RAM usage may result in performance drops if other demanding applications are run. The first two tests highlight the browser's RAM usage.

Pale moon 64 bits