Pale Moon x64 vs Waterfox

[satrow]

I hadn't noticed that I'd not updated Waterfox recently, so i just did and ran some different benchmarks.

I've discovered that the Waterfox developer doesn't like Peacekeeper and he seems prefer Browsermark; here's PM 9.2 and WX 10.2, both from clean profiles with interfaces tweaked to my preference:

[jaycelou]

@ Ryrynz:

I didn't bite the first time that 'test' was linked so I reckon I will this time:- that syndicated 'browser test' is poorly done by someone who has a negligible understanding of modern Mozilla-based browsers and/or basic comparison techniques. Don't believe me - read it carefully.

This is something like sport car test, does it really matter when Ferrari beat Porsche by 1.1 second? Aston Martin say you have to look at the design, the material used...

[Moonchild]

Well this browsermark (whichever tests they do under the hood) puts them pretty much at the same score. 345k vs 325k isn't exactly a big difference
It's also not exactly made for testing desktop browsers (it's made for phones) so in the higher end it's most likely extremely inaccurate and/or biased.

To tally it all up:

• The syndicated test checks load times, which depends on a lot of different factors and is irrelevant for actual browser operation; especially since we're talking about every browser being loaded (from cold start) in mere seconds
• The syndicated test checks Kraken, which is pure JavaScript, which doesn't test the speed of the browser but rather the speed of the JIT library only (how fast can one library spit out machine code?)
• Peacekeeper, an overall test supplying details, puts Pale Moon with a clear lead ahead of Waterfox
• Browsermark puts them real close, and is a test not designed for testing browsers on fast machines - it also doesn't give details about what exactly is tested

Missing from this list is Dromaeo, which I personally think is a good indication of Javascript performance, especially when looking at the DOM tests.

Overall, and I've said this many times, synthetic tests only give a partial picture since they tend to test one specific part of the browser and not overall function as it would normally be used (UI speed, networking speed, page composition speed, image decoding and painting, etc.); the tests focus very heavily on JavaScript and not on actual rendering speed, let alone the (just as important) networking back-end for page loading, as well as most tests using very tight loops to test speed which is not necessarily the best (or realistic) way of testing.

[Moonchild]

Checking some benchmark results with the new version 11, it seems that Waterfox is now falling behind the official Mozilla Firefox builds.
Dromaeo seems to agree with Peacekeeper mentioned above, and the results (as kindly submitted by a tester) can be seen here for the default Dromaeo test set:
http://dromaeo.com/?id=166535,166530,166540,166542
Lineup from left to right: Firefox 11 (32-bit), Pale Moon 11 (32-bit), Pale Moon 11-x64 (64-bit), Waterfox 11 (64-bit)

[Lance1965]

The Pale Moon x64 is far superior to Waterfox in my opinion. Tried both ended up going back to the standard Pale Moon. I don't know why but it just seems faster to me.

[ranger72]

HI! I have Win7 x64 and use PaleMoon x32, but I'm interested on PaleMoon x64. I find that there is also another port of Firefox x64 that is called Waterfox. So here is my 3 questions:
- what is the difference of Palemoon x64 and Waterfox?
- how is the actual x64 plugins compatibility with x64 browsers? I know that there is 64 bit version of java and flash, but don't know if it was buggy and if work ok. And other plugins/addons? Are some ported to x64?
- I read that there is a wrapper for use of 32 bit plugins with x64 browser in linux. Is on windows something like this?

Thank you!

This is my first post in these forums.

I am running "WIN 7 Ultimate 64 Bit" for an OS on a Multi-Core Processor with 12 GiGs DDR3 ram and all kinds of other Hi-test crap. (I will show my full spec's later) I only recently heard of "PaleMoon" recently so I came to Moonchild's website and lurked around for a while and then downloaded Palemoon 64 bit to try it.

Its magnificent! It seems to run faster than the latest "Firefox version" I don't seem to have any glitches going on..It seems to work well with the version of FF that I am using as a base and I was able to migrate all my FF settings very easily.

Just download it and try it. If you have fairly modern hardware it works like a charm; For me anyway

Great Work,

I am on the very verge of making it my Default Browser.

Thanks,
Moonchild,
ranger72